PDA

View Full Version : FB: Duke vs. Wake (Sat Sep 10, 330 pm, ESPNU) Pre-Game and In-Game Thread



Bob Green
09-05-2016, 07:29 AM
Duke opened as a 8.5 points favorite over Wake Forest. The Demon Deacons defense represents an uptick in quality but their offense looked horrible in Week 1 managing to score only 7 points. However, Coach Cutcliffe and staff will have to prepare for two quarterbacks with very different styles of play in John Wolford and Kendall Hinton.

My Wish List:

1. No injuries
2. Clean play - too many fumbles and penalties in Week 1
3. Daniel Jones demonstrates consistency at quarterback
4. Strong play at the line of scrimmage (defense and offense)
5. Special teams are special

*Prediction: Duke 27, Wake Forest 10

*Yes, I know predictions are absolutely useless but they are fun.

OZZIE4DUKE
09-05-2016, 08:56 AM
My prediction: Duke more - Wake less! LGD GTHc!

devildeac
09-05-2016, 12:53 PM
I'll stick with my 24-14 prognostication. But, then again, that could be just crazietalk :o :rolleyes: .

I was close for the NCCU final as I guessed 42-7.

fuse
09-05-2016, 03:21 PM
Duke 21, Wake Forest 7.

Looking to see us correct mistakes from last week and keep improving.

Troublemaker
09-05-2016, 04:07 PM
Duke opened as a 8.5 points favorite over Wake Forest.

Interesting that the line has fallen to 5 points (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-football/odds/offshore/) at the time of this post, despite Wake's relatively putrid performance Week 1 against Tulane.

Jarhead
09-05-2016, 06:24 PM
Interesting that the line has fallen to 5 points (http://www.vegasinsider.com/college-football/odds/offshore/) at the time of this post, despite Wake's relatively putrid performance Week 1 against Tulane.
Maybe I'm wrong, but aren't these betting lines based on the betting experience leading up to a game? How are the bookies going to earn a living if the spreads are based on the greater abilities of the best team. Somebody's gotta' be betting on the expected loser.

Troublemaker
09-05-2016, 07:54 PM
Maybe I'm wrong, but aren't these betting lines based on the betting experience leading up to a game? How are the bookies going to earn a living if the spreads are based on the greater abilities of the best team. Somebody's gotta' be betting on the expected loser.

Not sure I quite understand your question but will attempt an answer anyway.

(1) When sportsbooks set a line, their goal is to put out a line that gives them the best chance of making money. Nothing more. So yes, it would be incorrect to say, "Vegas thinks Duke is 5 points better than Wake." They may not think that at all.

(2) People can bet on the underdog in various ways. One way is through the point spread. So, if someone bets on Wake +5, and Duke ends up winning 24-20, then the Wake bettor has won his/her bet despite Wake losing the game.

Reilly
09-05-2016, 09:08 PM
... When sportsbooks set a line, their goal is to put out a line that gives them the best chance of making money. Nothing more. ...

Relatedly, I often see it stated on this and other sports message boards that sportsbooks want to make sure that there is equal money bet on each team. As I saw it explained one time, that is not necessarily so -- maybe the sportsbook wants a whole lot more money bet on one team -- that is, the sportsbook does not want money to be wagered equally -- because, as you note, the goal is to make money, and maybe the sportsbook knows something or thinks it knows something.

Strone03
09-05-2016, 09:13 PM
Not sure I quite understand your question but will attempt an answer anyway.

(1) When sportsbooks set a line, their goal is to put out a line that gives them the best chance of making money. Nothing more. So yes, it would be incorrect to say, "Vegas thinks Duke is 5 points better than Wake." They may not think that at all.

(2) People can bet on the underdog in various ways. One way is through the point spread. So, if someone bets on Wake +5, and Duke ends up winning 24-20, then the Wake bettor has won his/her bet despite Wake losing the game.

Building off this response a little, Vegas' real objective is to get equal money on both sides of the spread (collecting definite money from the juice). So if you see a line move like this, you yourself need to decide why.

First could be an injury or other news. Second major factor, more money is coming in on the Wake side forcing Vegas to adjust to promote equal money.

duke79
09-06-2016, 05:02 PM
Building off this response a little, Vegas' real objective is to get equal money on both sides of the spread (collecting definite money from the juice). So if you see a line move like this, you yourself need to decide why.

First could be an injury or other news. Second major factor, more money is coming in on the Wake side forcing Vegas to adjust to promote equal money.

I'm not a gambler but this is my understanding as well. Most "bookies" want there to be an equal amount (roughly) wagered on EACH team, so they cannot lose money with one team or the other beating (or not covering) the "spread". Instead, the bookie makes a guaranteed amount, with what they charge for taking the bet (10% or so). The bookie adjusts the spread over time, as the game approaches, depending on which side most of the bets are placed, to try to even off the betting. Otherwise, a bookie could get slaughtered financially IF most of the betting is on one team. Especially because most studies have shown that no one, not even the bookies, can successfully predict over time who will cover or beat the spread. My guess is that any bookie who attempted to do that would not be in business for very long.

Bob Green
09-06-2016, 05:09 PM
Steering the conversation back to discussing the game, Wake Forest Coach Dave Clawson has announced he will continue to play both John Wolford and Kendall Hinton at quarterback.

http://www.journalnow.com/sports/wfu/my_take_on_wake/clawson-will-stick-with-plan-a-for-now/article_08c8a198-745c-11e6-a713-7bc43b4f1e1b.html


"We’re going to play both guys,'' Clawson said at today's weekly gathering to eat something good (today it was barbeque and cowboy beans) and talk football. "Obviously I’m not going to give you more details than that because we’re not going to share with Duke how we’re going to do it.

"But we went into the year with a plan and we’re going to stick with the plan, and if, at a certain point we have to re-evaluate it we will. But we’re not going to blow it up after one week.

"John will start but Kendall will play.''

Troublemaker
09-06-2016, 11:29 PM
I'm not a gambler but this is my understanding as well. Most "bookies" want there to be an equal amount (roughly) wagered on EACH team, so they cannot lose money with one team or the other beating (or not covering) the "spread". Instead, the bookie makes a guaranteed amount, with what they charge for taking the bet (10% or so). The bookie adjusts the spread over time, as the game approaches, depending on which side most of the bets are placed, to try to even off the betting. Otherwise, a bookie could get slaughtered financially IF most of the betting is on one team. Especially because most studies have shown that no one, not even the bookies, can successfully predict over time who will cover or beat the spread. My guess is that any bookie who attempted to do that would not be in business for very long.

That is oversimplified and therefore mostly wrong. Anyone who has played a fantasy pick'em game against the spread through Yahoo or another site knows that most games don't have close to a 50/50 split of people picking each side. Duke being favored by only 5 vs Wake, for example, is basically inviting people to bet on Duke, and people are obliging. At the time of this post, 78% of bets coming in are on Duke, a stat you can check here: http://www.espn.com/espn/chalk/liveOdds . If you believe this is because a huge amount of money came in on Wake when Vegas opened the line at 8.5, and now they are trying to balance that out by getting a huge amount of money placed on Duke at 5, think about the obvious flaw in that strategy. (Hint: what happens if Duke wins by 6, 7, or 8? A margin of 7 occurs pretty frequently in football!) The real story is much more complex.

In any case, we can discuss this further by PM if you remain interested. Bob Green has tried to steer the convo to football, and I'd feel bad if I don't oblige. To that end, I just discovered that Wake's SBNation site is pretty impressive. Here's a roundtable review of their game against Tulane (http://www.bloggersodear.com/2016/9/6/12817636/bsd-roundtable-tulane-review-wake-forest-duke-acc-football-blogger-so-dear). Here's their mini-preview of the Duke game (http://www.bloggersodear.com/2016/9/6/12814928/wf-football-preview-fast-facts-and-info-about-week-2-opponent-duke). I'm sure they'll have a long-form article and analysis later on in the week.

duke79
09-07-2016, 10:20 AM
That is oversimplified and therefore mostly wrong. Anyone who has played a fantasy pick'em game against the spread through Yahoo or another site knows that most games don't have close to a 50/50 split of people picking each side. Duke being favored by only 5 vs Wake, for example, is basically inviting people to bet on Duke, and people are obliging. At the time of this post, 78% of bets coming in are on Duke, a stat you can check here: http://www.espn.com/espn/chalk/liveOdds . If you believe this is because a huge amount of money came in on Wake when Vegas opened the line at 8.5, and now they are trying to balance that out by getting a huge amount of money placed on Duke at 5, think about the obvious flaw in that strategy. (Hint: what happens if Duke wins by 6, 7, or 8? A margin of 7 occurs pretty frequently in football!) The real story is much more complex.

In any case, we can discuss this further by PM if you remain interested. Bob Green has tried to steer the convo to football, and I'd feel bad if I don't oblige. To that end, I just discovered that Wake's SBNation site is pretty impressive. Here's a roundtable review of their game against Tulane (http://www.bloggersodear.com/2016/9/6/12817636/bsd-roundtable-tulane-review-wake-forest-duke-acc-football-blogger-so-dear). Here's their mini-preview of the Duke game (http://www.bloggersodear.com/2016/9/6/12814928/wf-football-preview-fast-facts-and-info-about-week-2-opponent-duke). I'm sure they'll have a long-form article and analysis later on in the week.

As I said above, I am NOT a gambler but I know a little about how bookies work. My explanation is (admittedly) somewhat simple but basically correct. Most smart bookies try to balance the bets on either side of a contest and they make their money off of the "vigorish" (the 10% or so premium they charge all bettors). The bookies do change the odds or point spreads before contests to try to balance off the bets on either side, which is why you may see a point spread change as you get closer to the actual game.

See the explanation below of how a bookie usually operates!

http://www.gamblingsites.org/sports-betting/beginners-guide/how-bookmakers-make-money/

Troublemaker
09-07-2016, 12:32 PM
As I said above, I am NOT a gambler but I know a little about how bookies work. My explanation is (admittedly) somewhat simple but basically correct. Most smart bookies try to balance the bets on either side of a contest and they make their money off of the "vigorish" (the 10% or so premium they charge all bettors). The bookies do change the odds or point spreads before contests to try to balance off the bets on either side, which is why you may see a point spread change as you get closer to the actual game.

See the explanation below of how a bookie usually operates!

http://www.gamblingsites.org/sports-betting/beginners-guide/how-bookmakers-make-money/

Just let google be your friend. If you search for it, you'll find tons of articles about sportsbooks having losing days or even weeks. In 2012, the books took a loss on an entire NFL regular season (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/31/sports/la-sp-nfl-betting-20130101)! According to you, this could not happen because they balance every game, much less a slate of games, much less an entire season of games.

The reality is that on the majority of games, the books are rooting for one side or the other, usually the underdog. If they encounter a particularly bad run of luck (usually, lots of favorites winning), they can have losing days or even weeks. Don't feel sorry for them, though. Over the long run, they have the house edge in the vig and will come out on top.

ipatent
09-07-2016, 06:38 PM
A near must win if they want to bowl this year.

Isaac Sours
09-07-2016, 07:01 PM
A near must win if they want to bowl this year.

Central, Wake, Army, an UVa are the clearly inferior teams we play this year. Everyone else on our schedule is essentially a toss-up, from what I've seen. So you're right, we must beat the teams we have clear advantages over if we want to get to 6 wins again.

Olympic Fan
09-07-2016, 08:56 PM
Central, Wake, Army, an UVa are the clearly inferior teams we play this year. Everyone else on our schedule is essentially a toss-up, from what I've seen. So you're right, we must beat the teams we have clear advantages over if we want to get to 6 wins again.

I agree with this analysis -- you named the four teams that Duke is (IMHO) clearly better than -- although I don't think the Wake, Army and Virginia games are locks. To get a bowl, we have to take care of business in those four and win two of Northwestern, Miami, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech and/or Pitt -- teams that we are roughly equal to or slightly superior to us. As optimistic as I am, I can't see beating Notre Dame or Louisville on the road.

North Carolina is a special case -- they KILLED us a year ago and they have superior talent at most positions. But that was the case a three and four years ago, when we beat them. I have downgraded them a bit in my mind because of how disappointing the highly touted Mitch Tubinsky was against Georgia. If he's not a stud -- then they are still good, but vulnerable. Of course, a long way to go and I'm not about to write Tubinsky off due to one subpar performance. Hey, we don't even know what we've got in Daniel Jones -- he looked great against NCCU, but that was not quality competition.

Wake will tell us a lot more. They have major offensive issues, but their defense is legit. They have most of the unit back from the one that held Louisville to 20 points last November and held Notre Dame to 28 and Clemson to just 33 points late in the season. We only scored 27 against them (and they outgained us -- we had a 3-0 edge in turnovers, which made all the difference).

If Jones can carve the Deacons up, it's an awful good sign moving forward. If he struggles, well, it could be a long season.

FWIW -- Saturday's weather forecast is daunting. Little chance for rain (10 percent), but 93 degrees at kickoff with 60 percent humidity. Bring the sunscreen and water, if you can get them past security.

Bob Green
09-08-2016, 09:07 AM
If Jones can carve the Deacons up, it's an awful good sign moving forward. If he struggles, well, it could be a long season.



The offensive numbers from last year were:

431 total yards
280 passing yards
151 running yards

Duke was up 24-7 at the end of the 3rd quarter before Wake outscored us 14-3 in the 4th. My expectation is Wake's strong defense will make us work for everything we get so I agree with you a strong performance from Daniel Jones will be a good sign of things to come. Solid performances from the offensive line, Jela Duncan and Shaun Wilson running the football will go a long way toward setting Jones up for success with the pass.

Achieving balance running and passing the ball is something I desire to see week in and week out. Duke's offense must force Wake's defense to cover the whole field.

Bob Green
09-08-2016, 10:54 AM
Uniform combo:

https://twitter.com/DukeFBEquipment/status/773882577778270209

duke79
09-08-2016, 11:25 AM
Uniform combo:

https://twitter.com/DukeFBEquipment/status/773882577778270209

Like the uniform.......the helmet not so much. Why is the stripe on the helmet such a light blue?

PDDuke85
09-08-2016, 11:45 AM
Like the uniform....the helmet not so much. Why is the stripe on the helmet such a light blue?

agree with the random light blue stripe, don't like it but.....
if the Devils win and perform at a high level for the entire game, I'll take a chartreuse stripe.

alteran
09-08-2016, 11:53 AM
agree with the random light blue stripe, don't like it but...
if the Devils win and perform at a high level for the entire game, I'll take a chartreuse stripe.

Is it light blue, or metallic and reflecting light? The color seems to shift a bit in the photo, which suggests to me that it has a metallic finish.

sagegrouse
09-08-2016, 12:42 PM
agree with the random light blue stripe, don't like it but...
if the Devils win and perform at a high level for the entire game, I'll take a chartreuse stripe.

My great-great uncle, Claude Monet, told me that color is very magical. The color depends on both the surface and the light. (Ca depend a la surface et la lumiere, etc.). We have a woven jersey and a hard plastic helmet. The blue may look the same in daylight to the naked eye, but different on TV and very different under the lights.

budwom
09-08-2016, 12:51 PM
It will be interesting to see how our wide receivers do...lots of youth, we sure could use Bracey. I think Wake's defense
will be pretty tough, given our inexperience at QB and (to some extent) WR...I see good opportunities for our flock of tight ends, though.

Isaac Sours
09-08-2016, 01:07 PM
Is it light blue, or metallic and reflecting light? The color seems to shift a bit in the photo, which suggests to me that it has a metallic finish.

From what I can tell, it's a metallic Duke blue. Same shade, but always looks lighter because it's shiny.

I like it, personally, as I've said before, because the blue helmets -- my picture above -- always look darker than the blue jersey.

Maybe the shiny helmets are a recruiting thing, or the players like them.

What I really can't wait for is the throwback helmets.

Jarhead
09-08-2016, 02:22 PM
From what I can tell, it's a metallic Duke blue. Same shade, but always looks lighter because it's shiny.

I like it, personally, as I've said before, because the blue helmets -- my picture above -- always look darker than the blue jersey.

Maybe the shiny helmets are a recruiting thing, or the players like them.

What I really can't wait for is the throwback helmets.
To me the stripe looks as if the ceiling lights are messing with the real color.

JNort
09-08-2016, 02:26 PM
I think yall are giving Wake to much credit. Duke runs away 47 to 10.

BandAlum83
09-08-2016, 02:27 PM
Central, Wake, Army, an UVa are the clearly inferior teams we play this year. Everyone else on our schedule is essentially a toss-up, from what I've seen. So you're right, we must beat the teams we have clear advantages over if we want to get to 6 wins again.

@Notre Dame, @Lousville, UNC as tossups? wow, you do walk on the sunny side of the street, huh?

Isaac Sours
09-08-2016, 02:52 PM
@Notre Dame, @Lousville, UNC as tossups? wow, you do walk on the sunny side of the street, huh?

There is precedent for Duke turning expected blowouts into close losses or wins. See the 2013 Miami game, previous UNC games, and the 2013 bowl game.

Notre Dame literally just lost to an unranked team. Obviously they're still favored, as are Louisville and UNC. But to pretend that Duke can't beat superior teams is to disregard an obvious pattern that states otherwise. Moreover, ranked teams have been showing weakness across college football.

Is it optimistic to view those matchups as toss-ups? perhaps. it's also unrealistic to expect a blowout. maybe we're disagreeing on what a toss-up is. I view a toss-up as single digit margins of victory/loss, which are fairly reasonable expectations for those three games. Now, Duke could go on a slide before those games, or we could improve by leaps and bounds. So my outlook on those games could change wildly. But I think it's fair to expect Duke to compete and push those three teams, and winning those games is by no means out of the question. I don't think that's unrealistic.

If I was to predict anything, which I try to avoid, I would expect about 10-point losses in those three games, but would not be shocked and amazed by wins either. I'd only be surprised if Duke really got beat badly by all three. My expectation is three respectable losses.

BandAlum83
09-08-2016, 03:06 PM
There is precedent for Duke turning expected blowouts into close losses or wins. See the 2013 Miami game, previous UNC games, and the 2013 bowl game.

Notre Dame literally just lost to an unranked team. Obviously they're still favored, as are Louisville and UNC. But to pretend that Duke can't beat superior teams is to disregard an obvious pattern that states otherwise. Moreover, ranked teams have been showing weakness across college football.

Is it optimistic to view those matchups as toss-ups? perhaps. it's also unrealistic to expect a blowout. maybe we're disagreeing on what a toss-up is. I view a toss-up as single digit margins of victory/loss, which are fairly reasonable expectations for those three games. Now, Duke could go on a slide before those games, or we could improve by leaps and bounds. So my outlook on those games could change wildly. But I think it's fair to expect Duke to compete and push those three teams, and winning those games is by no means out of the question. I don't think that's unrealistic.

If I was to predict anything, which I try to avoid, I would expect about 10-point losses in those three games, but would not be shocked and amazed by wins either. I'd only be surprised if Duke really got beat badly by all three. My expectation is three respectable losses.

In a game where one play can change the outcome, I consider the matchup to be a tossup. The games above may take two plays to change the outcome, so we are underdogs. Candidates for Blowouts? Sure, but not as likely.

I would not be surprised to beat any one of those teams (well, not really true - At ND is one of those games that I hope Coach Cut can get them ready for. One of those special atmosphere games that can be intimidating. Like when lesser schools visit Cameron for the first time).

In any case, to win any one of those games would certainly make me happy and elated!

Isaac Sours
09-08-2016, 03:08 PM
In a game where one play can change the outcome, I consider the matchup to be a tossup. The games above may take two plays to change the outcome, so we are underdogs. Candidates for Blowouts? Sure, but not as likely.

I would not be surprised to beat any one of those teams (well, not really true - At ND is one of those games that I hope Coach Cut can get them ready for. One of those special atmosphere games that can be intimidating. Like when lesser schools visit Cameron for the first time).

In any case, to win any one of those games would certainly make me happy and elated!

Oh, well by your definition I'd definitely agree those aren't tossups. That's very fair.

Olympic Fan
09-08-2016, 03:24 PM
The injury report was just released and it's EXACTLY the same as the pre-NCCU injury report:

WR Keyston Fuller out; DB Javon Jackson, DT Zach Morris and QB Thomas Sirk out for the season.

No probable, no doubtfuls, no questionables.

Interesting that Scott Bracey does not show up anywhere ... I would take that as a sign that he's planning to play.

Isaac Sours
09-08-2016, 03:32 PM
The injury report was just released and it's EXACTLY the same as the pre-NCCU injury report:

WR Keyston Fuller out; DB Javon Jackson, DT Zach Morris and QB Thomas Sirk out for the season.

No probable, no doubtfuls, no questionables.

Interesting that Scott Bracey does not show up anywhere ... I would take that as a sign that he's planning to play.

Wasn't he missing from the NCCU IR? I don't remember him playing.

loran16
09-08-2016, 03:55 PM
The injury report was just released and it's EXACTLY the same as the pre-NCCU injury report:

WR Keyston Fuller out; DB Javon Jackson, DT Zach Morris and QB Thomas Sirk out for the season.

No probable, no doubtfuls, no questionables.

Interesting that Scott Bracey does not show up anywhere ... I would take that as a sign that he's planning to play.

Steve wiseman reported that cut had ruled him out.....I don't get it

budwom
09-08-2016, 04:04 PM
Duke's injury reports have often been......interesting (perhaps that's the word).

Bob Green
09-08-2016, 04:49 PM
Steve wiseman reported that cut had ruled him out....I don't get it


The injury report was just released and it's EXACTLY the same as the pre-NCCU injury report:

WR Keyston Fuller out; DB Javon Jackson, DT Zach Morris and QB Thomas Sirk out for the season.

No probable, no doubtfuls, no questionables.

Interesting that Scott Bracey does not show up anywhere ... I would take that as a sign that he's planning to play.

I am a big fan of not playing Scott Bracey until he is 100 percent healthy as I do not desire to see his hamstring troubles linger. We are going to need him as the season progresses and the schedule toughens so no need to push the issue early.

nocilla
09-09-2016, 10:30 AM
Duke's injury reports have often been...interesting (perhaps that's the word).

I don't know the general guidelines but maybe because he is a freshman and potential redshirt (however unlikely) he may not be required to be on the injury report. Just a thought.

sagegrouse
09-09-2016, 10:55 AM
I don't know the general guidelines but maybe because he is a freshman and potential redshirt (however unlikely) he may not be required to be on the injury report. Just a thought.

Without having any information whatsoever, I have always assumed that the coaches can talk to the ACC office about the particulars of anyone potentially on the injury list -- and do so.

DukeSean
09-09-2016, 11:12 AM
Ruling Bracey out because of injury and ruling Bracey out because of lack of practice and reps are different, with the former requiring disclosure on the injury report and the latter just being a coach's decision. I'm guessing he's not on the injury report now that we are in conference play because he is healthy, but will not play because of lack of practice.

devildeac
09-09-2016, 11:50 AM
Nooner forecast for tomorrow in Derm: 86 degrees and 0% chance of rain :eek:


1500/1600 forecast for game day: 90 degrees and 0% chance of rain :eek:

budwom
09-09-2016, 01:41 PM
Nooner forecast for tomorrow in Derm: 86 degrees and 0% chance of rain :eek:


1500/1600 forecast for game day: 90 degrees and 0% chance of rain :eek:

The over/under on people hitting the deck on the fashionable East side is 10. Woe to those
who enter poorly hydrated, with no hats, etc (and over-lickered)...there are always some, you can count on it.

The National Weather Service has the high at 94, which would certainly include the first half of the game...

Bob Green
09-09-2016, 01:51 PM
Woe to those who enter poorly hydrated, with no hats, etc (and over-lickered)...there are always some, you can count on it.

I'll be wearing my fashionable Myrtle Beach floppy hat or as I refer to it my "Cool Guy" hat. I'm thinking an ample application of sun screen will be in order.

alteran
09-09-2016, 04:39 PM
I'll be wearing my fashionable Myrtle Beach floppy hat or as I refer to it my "Cool Guy" hat. I'm thinking an ample application of sun screen will be in order.

If history is any guide, I will forget my sunscreen and hat.

Bob Green
09-10-2016, 05:43 AM
Dan Collins article from the Winston-Salem Journal:

http://www.journalnow.com/sports/wfu/football/wake-forest-needs-no-reminder-of-duke-s-recent-success/article_50e566b9-f8ed-5312-a765-6f664bb8c144.html

Wake is motivated to beat Duke:


It doesn’t take a historian to recall Wake Forest beat Duke 12 straight times from 2000-11. Serigne said the Deacons’ will look to start another winning streak today, but most of all they want to prove they’re better than they showed in the opener.

“Going into this game, it’s something to get us back on track,” Serigne said. “It’s a huge momentum game for us, establishing that we’re not the same old Wake Forest.

“In establishing that, it’s the biggest week for us to do that — to win against Duke on the road. So I think all of us are chomping at the bit to get after this game.”

Breon Borders providing the bulletin board material:


“We don’t necessarily like Wake Forest,” Borders said. “We don’t want to lose to nobody, but it’s always something a little extra with Wake.

“We’ve dominated them since I’ve been here as a team, and we plan on keeping it that way.”

devildeac
09-10-2016, 07:47 AM
Dan Collins article from the Winston-Salem Journal:

http://www.journalnow.com/sports/wfu/football/wake-forest-needs-no-reminder-of-duke-s-recent-success/article_50e566b9-f8ed-5312-a765-6f664bb8c144.html

Wake is motivated to beat Duke:



Breon Borders providing the bulletin board material:

Hope Borders is ready to back that stuff up.

devildeac
09-10-2016, 11:34 AM
Here's to hoping we make several more PATs today than beers consumed by our tailgate tasters. ;)

(wrong thread :confused: :o )

Olympic Fan
09-10-2016, 12:06 PM
FWIW: The ESPN GameDay crew just picked Wake to upset Dike -- twice!

They have a producer they promote as "The Bear" who picks 4-5 upsets each week. He picked Wake to upset Duke.

Then their main announcers each make an upset pick -- and Kent Herbstreit picked Wake too.

Not a well informed pick IMHO -- he cited Wake's offensive talent and suggested they would out-score Duke.

That could happen (anything COULD happen), but going into the game, Wake's biggest problem is lack of demonstrated skill on offense. They have a fine TE, but an OL that couldn't block Tulane, the worst set of RBs in the ACC and two QBs that they have to juggle because neither can consistently get the job done.

Now, if Herbstreit has picked Wake because he thought their defense would baffle a very young Duke QB, that I could understand. Not that I would agree, but at least it would have made sense -- Wake does appear to have a very solid defense.

arnie
09-10-2016, 01:56 PM
FWIW: The ESPN GameDay crew just picked Wake to upset Dike -- twice!

They have a producer they promote as "The Bear" who picks 4-5 upsets each week. He picked Wake to upset Duke.

Then their main announcers each make an upset pick -- and Kent Herbstreit picked Wake too.

Not a well informed pick IMHO -- he cited Wake's offensive talent and suggested they would out-score Duke.

That could happen (anything COULD happen), but going into the game, Wake's biggest problem is lack of demonstrated skill on offense. They have a fine TE, but an OL that couldn't block Tulane, the worst set of RBs in the ACC and two QBs that they have to juggle because neither can consistently get the job done.

Now, if Herbstreit has picked Wake because he thought their defense would baffle a very young Duke QB, that I could understand. Not that I would agree, but at least it would have made sense -- Wake does appear to have a very solid defense.
I doubt Herbstreit could name a single WF player; from your summary he obviously did no research before making the pick.

-jk
09-10-2016, 02:57 PM
DBR Chat (http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/misc.php?do=cchatbox) is open!

If it gets a bit slow, refresh the page. If you're on a mobile device, you may need to select "Blue" at the bottom.

As always - please follow the DBR Posting Guidelines.

Let's Go Duke!

-jk

Henderson
09-10-2016, 03:11 PM
Is there a free online radio stream available?

Troublemaker
09-10-2016, 03:48 PM
Is there a free online radio stream available?

try this: http://tunein.com/radio/Blue-Devil-IMG-Sports-Network-(Duke)-s230308/

Faison1
09-10-2016, 04:08 PM
How is attendance?

Faison1
09-10-2016, 04:10 PM
I'm listening to streaming radio....they seem to be calling Ben Humphreys name a lot...

Faison1
09-10-2016, 04:27 PM
Our linebackers are sounding awesome!!!

Anyone out there????

Faison1
09-10-2016, 04:46 PM
Sounds like a lot of miscues now....clock violations, illegal procedures, bad tackling...come on guys!!!!

loran16
09-10-2016, 05:05 PM
Putting aside the Offense not looking good, this season is gonna be very long if short Field Goals are beyond reach.

Faison1
09-10-2016, 05:08 PM
Putting aside the Offense not looking good, this season is gonna be very long if short Field Goals are beyond reach.

Holy smokes, what a bummer!! He's a true frosh, correct?

loran16
09-10-2016, 05:08 PM
Holy smokes, what a bummer!! He's a true frosh, correct?

He is, yes.

nyesq83
09-10-2016, 05:09 PM
Putting aside the Offense not looking good, this season is gonna be very long if short Field Goals are beyond reach.

Playing like a young team. It's 2010 all over again. Why is Wake always such a dogfight?

dukelifer
09-10-2016, 05:10 PM
How is attendance?

1/2 full or empty depending on your view of the world

6th Man
09-10-2016, 05:23 PM
I would definitely say Duke's youth is showing. Duke seems much more talented than Wake, but not making winning plays. I'm hoping for some good second half adjustments. Shaping up to be a dogfight.

Faison1
09-10-2016, 05:44 PM
Our kicker is supposed to be good, correct? Just some serious nerves going on?

Tripping William
09-10-2016, 05:46 PM
Our kicker is supposed to be good, correct? Just some serious nerves going on?

That one is on the holder, who completely let go of the ball, with both hands.

6th Man
09-10-2016, 05:49 PM
Humphreys is a beast! Going to be a special player.

nyesq83
09-10-2016, 06:16 PM
We are behind, but our vaunted running game is non-existent in the second half.

ChrisP
09-10-2016, 06:20 PM
We got a LOT of stuff to work on in all phases of the game. Wake is good. But not THAT good.

ipatent
09-10-2016, 06:25 PM
Not a very good showing so far. If they don't pull this one out a winning season is in question.

WakeDevil
09-10-2016, 06:35 PM
Four wins max.

nyesq83
09-10-2016, 06:39 PM
Truly a rebuilding year. Have only played one good half so far this year.

fuse
09-10-2016, 06:43 PM
Long season ahead. Still proud of our Devils.

nyesq83
09-10-2016, 06:43 PM
Can't stand it any more. Good luck. I am going to South Bend in two weeks for the spectacle.

richmclean
09-10-2016, 07:46 PM
Wake just seemed bigger overall than Duke. We were pushed around on D and didn't push them around on O. Running stats show it. Their DBs, RBs and LBs were bigger too. Keep hearing how fast we are but their QB and RB made us look slow.

Nothing that a few Hopiums and a good nights sleep can't fix.

dukelifer
09-10-2016, 08:25 PM
We got a LOT of stuff to work on in all phases of the game. Wake is good. But not THAT good.

Going be a long year but I expect the team to get better. Jones has talent but the O is pretty predictable. The team needs to play with a lot more emotion. It feels like some of Cut's early teams- you can see potential but too many mistakes at critical times.

devildeac
09-10-2016, 08:25 PM
FWIW: The ESPN GameDay crew just picked Wake to upset Dike -- twice!

They have a producer they promote as "The Bear" who picks 4-5 upsets each week. He picked Wake to upset Duke.

Then their main announcers each make an upset pick -- and Kent Herbstreit picked Wake too.

Not a well informed pick IMHO -- he cited Wake's offensive talent and suggested they would out-score Duke.

That could happen (anything COULD happen), but going into the game, Wake's biggest problem is lack of demonstrated skill on offense. They have a fine TE, but an OL that couldn't block Tulane, the worst set of RBs in the ACC and two QBs that they have to juggle because neither can consistently get the job done.

Now, if Herbstreit has picked Wake because he thought their defense would baffle a very young Duke QB, that I could understand. Not that I would agree, but at least it would have made sense -- Wake does appear to have a very solid defense.

Just got home. Well, well...

:mad:

tteettimes
09-10-2016, 08:30 PM
Don't see a bowl game now.....sad
But it's not long til November.......happy