If Duke was in UVA's Shoes

[Rich]

Ok, since we have a break before the Championship game, I pose this question with a major assumption. Let's assume that UVA beats Texas Tech and wins the championship, just one year after their epic and historic loss in the first round as a one seed against a 16 seed.

If you replace UVA with Duke, and put Duke in UVA's shoes, would you accept those circumstances? In other words, would you accept this year's championship (which would obviously be Duke's 6th), but you would also have to accept last year's historic first round loss? I imagine our friends at UVA would have no trouble accepting this "prisoner's dilemma" since it gets them their first championship, regardless of (in spite of and perhaps as motivation from) last year's historic defeat.

But as a Duke fan would you accept a 6th championship on the condition that last year's loss to a 16 seed would be talked about forever, particularly at tourney time, as an epic and historic, first of its kind, event?

[sagegrouse]

Ok, since we have a break before the Championship game, I pose this question with a major assumption. Let's assume that UVA beats Texas Tech and wins the championship, just one year after their epic and historic loss in the first round as a one seed against a 16 seed.

If you replace UVA with Duke, and put Duke in UVA's shoes, would you accept those circumstances? In other words, would you accept this year's championship (which would obviously be Duke's 6th), but you would also have to accept last year's historic first round loss? I imagine our friends at UVA would have no trouble accepting this "prisoner's dilemma" since it gets them their first championship, regardless of (in spite of and perhaps as motivation from) last year's historic defeat.

But as a Duke fan would you accept a 6th championship on the condition that last year's loss to a 16 seed would be talked about forever, particularly at tourney time, as an epic and historic, first of its kind, event?

Gimme #6!

[wavedukefan70s]

Considering we hear about Lehigh and Mercer anyway I'll take 6.

[Reddevil]

It is easy to lose one in a row and INCREDIBLY difficult to win six in a row, so take the championship every time. This is a no brainer.

I thought this post was going to be about the national outrage if Duke won the way UVA did last night. You can bet the hatred would be directed squarely at Duke, not the officials. Everyone else gets a pass.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Considering we hear about Lehigh and Mercer anyway I'll take 6.

I was trying to figure out why I was instantly saying yes, take the Natty #6....and you sir have nailed it.....great point.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Zion wouldn't have missed a month. ;p

[COYS]

Ok, since we have a break before the Championship game, I pose this question with a major assumption. Let's assume that UVA beats Texas Tech and wins the championship, just one year after their epic and historic loss in the first round as a one seed against a 16 seed.

If you replace UVA with Duke, and put Duke in UVA's shoes, would you accept those circumstances? In other words, would you accept this year's championship (which would obviously be Duke's 6th), but you would also have to accept last year's historic first round loss? I imagine our friends at UVA would have no trouble accepting this "prisoner's dilemma" since it gets them their first championship, regardless of (in spite of and perhaps as motivation from) last year's historic defeat.


But as a Duke fan would you accept a 6th championship on the condition that last year's loss to a 16 seed would be talked about forever, particularly at tourney time, as an epic and historic, first of its kind, event?

Losing to Mercer stunk but winning the title in 15 was glorious. So yes, I’d take that, for sure, assuming that a title is guaranteed the following year.

[AGDukesky]

I thought this thread was going to be about the backlash if Duke won under the circumstances UVA just won over Auburn.

[22JumpShots]

What a great set up and question that definitely in my opinion deserve some good thought.

I think in the end I am gonna say no. Especially in the specific case that Duke would be the FIRST 1 seed to go down to a 16. As another poster on here touched on the fact that history typically remembers Wins/Losses and something like that will be with UVA and Bennett forever. The FIRST 1 seed to go down to a 16. May not happen again for 50 years. Might happen again next year. Who knows? I wouldn't want that for Coach K, to have that type of blemish.

Do I not want #6 enough you ask? Of course I want it, .... and after these last two years ... BAD. I think we all even want it more after watching the cheats skate like Tonya...then FF (even though Duke Hero Kris Jenkins became a household name in my house that year)...and then Natty. I am sick of the cheats being able to say that "ohh gee, when was the last time Duke even made a FF?" crap. It was only 4 years ago but since then they have had two FF .... def. makes me want #6 more than if they hadn't had those two. At least I think.

Mercer is one thing ... Lehigh is another .... but 1 Seed going down to 16 Seed .... and specifically being the FIRST and only one to do it ... not for Duke. Not for K.

We are getting number 6 one way or the other .. and hopefully with K at the helm, but wouldn't want to have to have a horrible blemish in college basketball history to get it.

__________________________________________________ _____

But then again after re-reading all of that ^^^^ in the end history would most likely see 6 banners and ignore the HORRIBLE loss from before. Or would it? On the other side.... the cheats fans would be so annoying and brutal with the trash-talk surrounding the #1 losing #16 subject. They still think they have "7 banners" smh. 1924...

__________________________________________________ _____

Best case scenario would be #1 seeded cheats go down to #16 seeded NC State (sorry for having them at #16 Pack-Man, but for rivalry sake would be the coolest!), and then Duke win #6 the same year. <--- I am gonna go with this one. :cool:

[JBDuke]

I think in hindsight, it is relatively easy to say "Yes, I'd take a 6th banner at the expense of having to live with being the first #1 to lose to a #16." But the year between the loss and the championship would have been a very painful one. It's hard to say how I'd feel before the championship year had started.

I said this after last year's UVA loss - there's a certain special notoriety that the Hoos will always have, given that they now own the bad side of perhaps the worst regular season upset in NCAA history (#1 UVA losing to Division 2 Chaminade) and the worst NCAA Tournament upset in NCAA history. That's always going to sting...

[proelitedota]

No we can always get another title but we can't erase a loss.

[dukelifer]

Ok, since we have a break before the Championship game, I pose this question with a major assumption. Let's assume that UVA beats Texas Tech and wins the championship, just one year after their epic and historic loss in the first round as a one seed against a 16 seed.

If you replace UVA with Duke, and put Duke in UVA's shoes, would you accept those circumstances? In other words, would you accept this year's championship (which would obviously be Duke's 6th), but you would also have to accept last year's historic first round loss? I imagine our friends at UVA would have no trouble accepting this "prisoner's dilemma" since it gets them their first championship, regardless of (in spite of and perhaps as motivation from) last year's historic defeat.

But as a Duke fan would you accept a 6th championship on the condition that last year's loss to a 16 seed would be talked about forever, particularly at tourney time, as an epic and historic, first of its kind, event?
6 for sure. Duke was better prepared to be the first as the 5 championships are there - also there have been several first year exits. And of course winning it the year after the loss with the same team is also a plus. UVA will long forget the first round loss if they win on Monday.

[Steven43]

I thought this thread was going to be about the backlash if Duke won under the circumstances UVA just won over Auburn.

What circumstances?

[DarkstarWahoo]

I think in the end I am gonna say no. Especially in the specific case that Duke would be the FIRST 1 seed to go down to a 16. As another poster on here touched on the fact that history typically remembers Wins/Losses and something like that will be with UVA and Bennett forever. The FIRST 1 seed to go down to a 16. May not happen again for 50 years. Might happen again next year. Who knows? I wouldn't want that for Coach K, to have that type of blemish.

You make valid points here, and yet...if UVA can pull this off tomorrow night, I really think the loss adds a layer to Bennett’s legacy because of the way he handled it. I think the coaches I would say that about are few and far between, and the list honestly might be Bennett and Bennett alone. He’s just so temperamentally well suited to bouncing back from something like that - he’s prone to waxing philosophical in even the most mundane circumstances, let alone a loss like that.

God, what a story a UVA win tomorrow would be. I have a sinking feeling that they’re going to lose big. Texas Tech is hitting on all cylinders right now.

[Steven43]

No we can always get another title but we can't erase a loss.

Why does it particularly matter to lose to a #16 seed? Is that really any worse than losing to a #15 seed or a #14 seed? They seem roughly equivalent to me.

[proelitedota]

Why does it particularly matter to lose to a #16 seed? Is that really any worse than losing to a #15 seed or a #14 seed? They seem roughly equivalent to me.

Now that it's happened it doesn't matter much anymore. But going down as the 1st 1 seed is going to make the first round game of March Madness hell for me every single time going forward.

[Steven43]

You make valid points here, and yet...if UVA can pull this off tomorrow night, I really think the loss adds a layer to Bennett’s legacy because of the way he handled it. I think the coaches I would say that about are few and far between, and the list honestly might be Bennett and Bennett alone. He’s just so temperamentally well suited to bouncing back from something like that - he’s prone to waxing philosophical in even the most mundane circumstances, let alone a loss like that.

God, what a story a UVA win tomorrow would be. I have a sinking feeling that they’re going to lose big. Texas Tech is hitting on all cylinders right now.

After UVA’s back-to-back astonishjng last-second victories against Purdue and Auburn I don’t see them being stopped now. They seem like a team of destiny.

[devildeac]

You make valid points here, and yet...if UVA can pull this off tomorrow night, I really think the loss adds a layer to Bennett’s legacy because of the way he handled it. I think the coaches I would say that about are few and far between, and the list honestly might be Bennett and Bennett alone. He’s just so temperamentally well suited to bouncing back from something like that - he’s prone to waxing philosophical in even the most mundane circumstances, let alone a loss like that.

God, what a story a UVA win tomorrow would be. I have a sinking feeling that they’re going to lose big. Texas Tech is hitting on all cylinders right now.

You've been posting here a while, but, apparently not long enough to know/realize that reverse jinxes/weaufs don't work.

;)

[devildeac]

After UVA’s back-to-back astonishjng last-second victories against Purdue and Auburn I don’t see them being stopped now. They seem like a team of destiny.

I thought we were the "team of destiny" with our last-second escapes?

:rolleyes:, :( and :mad:.

[AGDukesky]

What circumstances?

The missed double dribble and drawing a foul in the last second to win the game. Essentially, the refs playing a major role in the outcome- right or wrong...

[Rich]

Ok, sounds like most people here would take the 16 over 1 loss last year if it comes with a guaranteed #6 championship this year. What about putting Duke in the position that UVA is in right now? In other words, accept the 16 over 1 historic loss last year with this year's championship game tomorrow night. So, guaranteed a Final Four after the historic defeat, but the championship to be determined. Would you accept that proposition if you had the choice?

[wavedukefan70s]

Ok, sounds like most people here would take the 16 over 1 loss last year if it comes with a guaranteed #6 championship this year. What about putting Duke in the position that UVA is in right now? In other words, accept the 16 over 1 historic loss last year with this year's championship game tomorrow night. So, guaranteed a Final Four after the historic defeat, but the championship to be determined. Would you accept that proposition if you had the choice?

Yes.

[Reilly]

... UVA losing to Division 2 Chaminade ...

Chaminade was actually NAIA at the time, not even NCAA Division II.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1982_Virginia_vs._Chaminade_men%27s_basketball_gam e

[WillJ]

The missed double dribble and drawing a foul in the last second to win the game. Essentially, the refs playing a major role in the outcome- right or wrong...

The press has already emphasized the drama around the calls to an absurd extent....if Duke were Virginia, the absurdity would go to 11.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

The missed double dribble and drawing a foul in the last second to win the game. Essentially, the refs playing a major role in the outcome- right or wrong...

that foul is called 99.9% of the time during the course of a game, and was the right call. Cleary the Auburn player was sticking his torso into Guys legs, while Guy was going straight up.

And even the double dribble was kind of a screwy play that wasn't the classic double dribble.

[Reddevil]

Ok, sounds like most people here would take the 16 over 1 loss last year if it comes with a guaranteed #6 championship this year. What about putting Duke in the position that UVA is in right now? In other words, accept the 16 over 1 historic loss last year with this year's championship game tomorrow night. So, guaranteed a Final Four after the historic defeat, but the championship to be determined. Would you accept that proposition if you had the choice?

No, that would risk another heartbreak.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Ok, sounds like most people here would take the 16 over 1 loss last year if it comes with a guaranteed #6 championship this year. What about putting Duke in the position that UVA is in right now? In other words, accept the 16 over 1 historic loss last year with this year's championship game tomorrow night. So, guaranteed a Final Four after the historic defeat, but the championship to be determined. Would you accept that proposition if you had the choice?

Don't think so......much closer calculation......but nah....

[Saratoga2]

that foul is called 99.9% of the time during the course of a game, and was the right call. Cleary the Auburn player was sticking his torso into Guys legs, while Guy was going straight up.

And even the double dribble was kind of a screwy play that wasn't the classic double dribble.

UVA was given the game on the double dribble call. Yes, they did hit the three earlier and the foul at the end was legitimate. If Duke had been in this position, there would be no end of talk about how Duke gets all the calls.

UVA has excellent coaching and gets the most out of the talent they bring in. Lot of development of that talent, so if they win it all, it will be no fluke, but they certainly have been lucky.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

UVA was given the game on the double dribble call. Yes, they did hit the three earlier and the foul at the end was legitimate. If Duke had been in this position, there would be no end of talk about how Duke gets all the calls.
.

I agree if Duke had been "in Virginia's shoes" that all hell would be breaking loose about Duke getting all the calls. That said, the foul was indeed a foul, and called by two of the three officials. However, what Jerome did was a funny looking play, but it does not seem to be described by the rule in this definition:

"In basketball, an illegal dribble (colloquially called a dribbling violation), occurs when a player ends his/her dribble by catching or causing the ball to come to rest in one or both hands and then dribbles it again with one hand or when a player touches it twice before the ball hits the ground, without an opposing player having an intervening touch of the ball."

There are other written descriptions of the rule....perhaps one will define what Jerome did.

[jimmymax]

I thought this thread was going to be about the backlash if Duke won under the circumstances UVA just won over Auburn.

Duke, win a game by making three free throws in a row? Never happen.

[rsvman]

Duke, win a game by making three free throws in a row? Never happen.

Ha! If only we could've made two...

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Duke, win a game by making three free throws in a row? Never happen.

Only if RJ tried to miss all three.....(yeah, I know, WAAAAAY too soon....)

[uh_no]

Only if RJ tried to miss all three....(yeah, I know, WAAAAAY too soon...)

Ogwumbike could give them both a run for their money. not many people will know what it feels like to both win and lose your team a natty.

[FerryFor50]

If Duke was in UVA's shoes, we'd be hearing nonstop that Duke was lucky and undeserving, while simultaneously hearing how easy their draw was and how they *should* have won because they have all those McD's All Americans and the Player/co-player of the year.

Instead, we're hearing how UVA is:

- redeemed from last year's 16 seed loss
- how Tony Bennett can become the greatest coach that ever lived
- how UVA is a "team of destiny" rather than "lucky"

We're also hearing nothing about their draw, nothing about how they somehow aren't getting into too much foul trouble despite their grabby/handsy "pack line" defense, etc.

[W&LHoo]

If Duke was in UVA's shoes, we'd be hearing nonstop that Duke was lucky and undeserving, while simultaneously hearing how easy their draw was and how they *should* have won because they have all those McD's All Americans and the Player/co-player of the year.

Instead, we're hearing how UVA is:

- redeemed from last year's 16 seed loss
- how Tony Bennett can become the greatest coach that ever lived
- how UVA is a "team of destiny" rather than "lucky"

We're also hearing nothing about their draw, nothing about how they somehow aren't getting into too much foul trouble despite their grabby/handsy "pack line" defense, etc.

I may be hyper sensitive to it given my wahoo fandom, but I've got to disagree. It seems like there has been wall-to-wall coverage of the foul on Guy and the missed double dribble call. There has been some discussion of redemption, but I dont think I've seen a single column premised on the idea that UVA was simply a deserving team that won tough games.

[DukeFanSince1990]

The missed double dribble and drawing a foul in the last second to win the game. Essentially, the refs playing a major role in the outcome- right or wrong...

The refs missed the foul before the double dribble. So that's a wash.

And it was a foul on the last shot. Guy got bumped in the air.

That being said, I would take the loss to get 6.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I may be hyper sensitive to it given my wahoo fandom, but I've got to disagree. It seems like there has been wall-to-wall coverage of the foul on Guy and the missed double dribble call. There has been some discussion of redemption, but I dont think I've seen a single column premised on the idea that UVA was simply a deserving team that won tough games.

Well as Duke fans, we've been hearing this crapola for almost 30 years now straight......as for Saturday, Guy was fouled by any definition of a jump shooter and contact, and Jerome's little fumble may have been a violation, but it does not fit the strict definition of double dribble. And it certainly wasn't palming, or traveling. So I have no problem with the Hoos being in the Finals .

[WillJ]

I may be hyper sensitive to it given my wahoo fandom, but I've got to disagree. It seems like there has been wall-to-wall coverage of the foul on Guy and the missed double dribble call. There has been some discussion of redemption, but I dont think I've seen a single column premised on the idea that UVA was simply a deserving team that won tough games.

I agree with you....and welcome to our world:).

[Rich]

The refs missed the foul before the double dribble. So that's a wash.

I don't see how that's a wash. If they call the foul then UVA gets the ball in the back court, not the front court with the "second" foul the refs called, which would have likely forced them into a tougher shot. If they called the travel then it's Auburn's ball. In either case Auburn benefits. By allowing UVA to get the ball over center court before calling the foul it put them in a position to set up a much easier play.


it does not fit the strict definition of double dribble.

I know you posted something from the rule book earlier, but every official I've read admitted it was a double dribble violation. I've seen tweats from high school and middle school officials during the game that it's a violation and that's one of the first calls they learned in officiating school. While usually the ball bounces off of a players foot to another player, and admittedly this one was not a normal situation, but it was, without a doubt, a double dribble violation missed by two officials who are supposed to be good enough to officiate a Final Four game. Pathetic.

[kako]

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Give me a natty or FF any year after losing any game, even as a #1 seed.

#16s will beat #1s in the future, and all will be forgotten. For a while, Syracuse got major grief for losing to Richmond in the tourney. Why? Because they were the first #2 seed to lose to a #15. Is that talked about now? No. But a FF or natty will count forever.

9F

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I don't see how that's a wash. If they call the foul then UVA gets the ball in the back court, not the front court with the "second" foul the refs called, which would have likely forced them into a tougher shot. If they called the travel then it's Auburn's ball. In either case Auburn benefits. By allowing UVA to get the ball over center court before calling the foul it put them in a position to set up a much easier play.



I know you posted something from the rule book earlier, but every official I've read admitted it was a double dribble violation. I've seen tweats from high school and middle school officials during the game that it's a violation and that's one of the first calls they learned in officiating school. While usually the ball bounces off of a players foot to another player, and admittedly this one was not a normal situation, but it was, without a doubt, a double dribble violation missed by two officials who are supposed to be good enough to officiate a Final Four game. Pathetic.


To clarify a few things: I don't doubt that it was a double dribble, but it was also one of those plays that was very strange looking - and it wasn't the "classic" normal double dribble. The ball barely glanced off his shoe....and came almost straight back up - now how often does a ball doink a shoe and not bounce to the side? There were three officials and three TV announcers who did NOT call it at the time. The ball also bounced either 4 or 5 times on the floor before Jerome picked it back up. That made it look like a change of possession almost.

As for the first foul, I agree with you that it was not a wash, for the reasons you posted. However, it happened simultaneously with the ball hitting the shoe.....and therefore could have been the reason for the double dribble. In that case, it was a "play on" situation, infraction each way, but nothing called. Again, not saying that was the right call, but this happened fast, looked very unusual, and was missed by many many people.

[KandG]

Ogwumbike could give them both a run for their money. not many people will know what it feels like to both win and lose your team a natty.

Amazing thing about the end of the women's championship game is how it was an almost *exact* replica of the end of our Elite Eight game vs MSU.

Arike, Notre Dame's best isolation scorer, plows into the lane and draws a foul to get free throws with an opportunity to tie. ND is a few fouls away from the bonus, so if Arike misses a FT, the game is basically over because ND can't foul to extend the game and get another chance.

Arike misses the first FT, then makes the second after trying to miss it intentionally. (Shades of RJ!) Game over. It was uncomfortable to watch for those who had the end of the Elite Eight game fresh in their mind.

(apologies if someone already posted about this in another thread)

[elvis14]

For those of you talking about how crazy the hype would be if Duke had been gifted a victory like UVa was on Saturday....I have to tell you, we would NEVER get that call at the end of the game. Just ask Boozer. UVa gets that call (perhaps that'll stop now) but not us, not on your life.

[Phredd3]

"In basketball, an illegal dribble (colloquially called a dribbling violation), occurs when a player ends his/her dribble by catching or causing the ball to come to rest in one or both hands and then dribbles it again with one hand or when a player touches it twice before the ball hits the ground, without an opposing player having an intervening touch of the ball."

There are other written descriptions of the rule...perhaps one will define what Jerome did.


...every official I've read admitted it was a double dribble violation.

Every official admits it because it meets the definition very clearly. It's arguable whether or not the ball off the leg itself would count as "touching it twice before the ball hits the ground", and it would be very difficult to call that in real time. But watch the replay. The ball hits off his leg, then he goes to retrieve it and picks it up with BOTH hands to control the ball, then dribbles again. It is clear the opponent did not touch the ball. If he could have regained control of the ball with just one hand, that would give you something to debate. But by picking it up as he did with both hands, he clearly committed the rule book definition of an illegal dribble. It's unusual, true, but every official on the floor had a clear view. One of them should have called it.

Mind you, I'm actually happy that Virginia won the game. But there's no question that a) the double-dribble should have been called, and b) so should the foul on Kyle Guy.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Every official admits it because it meets the definition very clearly. .... One of them should have called it.

Mind you, I'm actually happy that Virginia won the game. But there's no question that a) the double-dribble should have been called, and b) so should the foul on Kyle Guy.

Here's what your analysis is missing: it was a very odd looking play...most double dribbles are the obvious calls...and nobody, Grant Hill, not Clark Kellogg, not Jim Nance, not one of them picked up on it at the time....they did an in depth deep dive on the play after the game, and the analysis was it looked so unusual, that when a ball hits a shoe, it normally bounces a long way away... and that to Ty Jerome's credit, he just nonchalantly picked it up like it was a loose ball. And in fact, it had bounced 4 or 5 times since it hit his shoe on the way down.

0 for 3 on the refs and 0 for 5 or 6 on the analysts in real time. A double dribble was the right call, but it was not obvious in real time.

[devilirium]

Jerome was fouled before picking up the ball, though. He was fouled twice--Auburn was incredibly handsy throughout. And hey when Brown makes the choke sign ( for the 2nd time in the tourney, no less) prior to the free throws...well I was happy for the Hoos and for Guy. Brown's jackassery was rewarded in Redick-like fashion.

[Phredd3]

0 for 3 on the refs and 0 for 5 or 6 on the analysts in real time. A double dribble was the right call, but it was not obvious in real time.

It sounds self-aggrandizing now, but I must say that in real time, I wondered why it wasn't called. When play went on with no commentary, I assumed I must be the one who didn't know the rule. I understand that it was unusual, and the officials have a hard job. Officials really get very little credit for getting 99% of the calls correct. But their job is to be able to call even the unusual plays correctly, and that play happened in the open floor. At least two, if not all three, officials should have had an open look at that play, and IMO at least one of them should have called it correctly.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

It sounds self-aggrandizing now, but I must say that in real time, I wondered why it wasn't called. When play went on with no commentary, I assumed I must be the one who didn't know the rule. I understand that it was unusual, and the officials have a hard job. Officials really get very little credit for getting 99% of the calls correct. But their job is to be able to call even the unusual plays correctly, and that play happened in the open floor. At least two, if not all three, officials should have had an open look at that play, and IMO at least one of them should have called it correctly.

No, not self-aggrandizing at all......sometimes a knowledgable fan can, in the comfort of a living room, can in fact perceive something that a ref or announcer under pressure cannot. So I believe you when you say you caught it then. Full disclosure, I did not watch in real time, as I boycott FF's when Duke is not in them, but I did see the replays online when all hell broke loose. To me, it kind of happened so quick, and was so unusual, I missed it the first time. Jerome didn't think it was double dribble, as he would have done something besides dribble if he had. Jerome sold it....unintentionally, because he was so natural about scooping it up and proceeding.

To me, it's not about three officials missing an oddball play.....not really....it's about a badly blown block/charge or missed mugging that is so obvious and so normal. Grant, Kellogg and Nance are good....and while I love to give refs hell, and I think college ball is generally poorly officiated......if that crew didn't think anything of it, I will give the refs a pass on that. The CBS rules guru did the same....

[devilirium]

No, not self-aggrandizing at all...sometimes a knowledgable fan can, in the comfort of a living room, can in fact perceive something that a ref or announcer under pressure cannot. So I believe you when you say you caught it then. Full disclosure, I did not watch in real time, as I boycott FF's when Duke is not in them, but I did see the replays online when all hell broke loose. To me, it kind of happened so quick, and was so unusual, I missed it the first time. Jerome didn't think it was double dribble, as he would have done something besides dribble if he had. Jerome sold it...unintentionally, because he was so natural about scooping it up and proceeding.

To me, it's not about three officials missing an oddball play...not really...it's about a badly blown block/charge or missed mugging that is so obvious and so normal. Grant, Kellogg and Nance are good...and while I love to give refs hell, and I think college ball is generally poorly officiated...if that crew didn't think anything of it, I will give the refs a pass on that. The CBS rules guru did the same...

Yep, the Auburn bench missed it as well. Very unusual play to be noticed and called in real time, and again particularly when the Auburn kid had a hold of Jerome's shirt prior to the ball going off the foot. Lot of nuance to that play. The ref could've called the grab. Clock stops and then side out of bounds. The aftermath felt like a moment in the golf tournament when a viewing audience member would call in a violation that upon further review wasn't as easily seen or distinguishable due to the foul prior.

[JetpackJesus]

So I am just going to copy my reply from the Would You Trade An NCAA Championship for One Year of Zion? thread:

Natty, always. I will trade whatever you name for a title. Unless you name the things uNC traded for their titles. I would never trade those things.

[DarkstarWahoo]

It’s like how traveling morphed from counting steps to “being awkward while holding a basketball.” It’s all about how the play looks and how the players react to it. Jerome picked it up and started dribbling like it was the most natural thing in the world and got away with it.

[bludevil_33]

But as a Duke fan would you accept a 6th championship on the condition that last year's loss to a 16 seed would be talked about forever, particularly at tourney time, as an epic and historic, first of its kind, event?

No, because Duke is Duke and Virginia is not Duke.

Even as much guff as people gave Virginia, Duke would get it infinity-fold. We'd never ever ever hear the end of it, even with a championship the next year. In fact, people would probably put an asterisk next to it.

I'm grateful beyond grateful Virginia was the first Goliath to fall. I always worried it would be us.

[akg4y]

I agree if Duke had been "in Virginia's shoes" that all hell would be breaking loose about Duke getting all the calls. That said, the foul was indeed a foul, and called by two of the three officials. However, what Jerome did was a funny looking play, but it does not seem to be described by the rule in this definition:


We (Hoos) are getting hell for each of the three cardiac wins. Just check out the college basketball sub on Reddit.

[akg4y]

We're also hearing nothing about their draw, nothing about how they somehow aren't getting into too much foul trouble despite their grabby/handsy "pack line" defense, etc.

If you're not hearing those things then it's just because you're not listening for them. As UVA fans that is what we are hearing left and right, your post as an example.

[akg4y]

I think in hindsight, it is relatively easy to say "Yes, I'd take a 6th banner at the expense of having to live with being the first #1 to lose to a #16." But the year between the loss and the championship would have been a very painful one. It's hard to say how I'd feel before the championship year had started.

I said this after last year's UVA loss - there's a certain special notoriety that the Hoos will always have, given that they now own the bad side of perhaps the worst regular season upset in NCAA history (#1 UVA losing to Division 2 Chaminade) and the worst NCAA Tournament upset in NCAA history. That's always going to sting...


As a Hoo I have to say I feel the exact opposite. The loss last year makes this year's win, with essentially the same team, that much more special. The two are forever linked. Any time I see a UMBC highlight I'll get that feeling of the first time we won a national championship and I got to watch it at JPJ with my family. It's like the feeling you get when you hear a song that brings back an amazing memory from your childhood. UMBC just became one of my favorite memories of all time.

[fuse]

First, let me congratulate UVa (nothing but respect for the current coach and program).

My observation on the original question is if you were a program seeking a first national championship, like UVa, you take the loss as the precursor to the national championship.

In some regards, this is similar to Duke 1991.
No, Duke did not lose to a 16 seed.
Yes, Duke holds the dubious honour of worst championship beatdown in NCAA history. That loss was a key component in beating UNLV in 1991.

Where I have a bit of cognitive dissonance is UVa is now the greatest story over two seasons in a single season sport. It is a story of redemption, focus, ownership of outcomes, and hard work.

I fully expect (as one UVa poster noted above) that the UVa fanbase is at peace with the UMBC loss now that there is an offsetting national championship. It is the ultimate neighborhood bar conversation stopper.

Tangentially, this is why I never want to see a Duke UNC national championship game. A loss would be basketball armageddon for me. A win and I would likely transform from a fairly polite Duke fan into insufferable around UNC fans 🔵😈😎

[AGDukesky]

We (Hoos) are getting hell for each of the three cardiac wins. Just check out the college basketball sub on Reddit.

I’m sure you’re getting some grief but nothing like it would be with Duke. Literally every sports talk show and website would be talking about it. No one is saying UVA gets all the calls. Duke wins a NC by 10 and everyone complains how JWill should have gotten his 3rd foul in the first half on a marginal bump 45 feet from the basket. It is just different...

[HereBeforeCoachK]

If you're not hearing those things then it's just because you're not listening for them. As UVA fans that is what we are hearing left and right, your post as an example.

Dude, we love UVa fans here...respect the Hoos program immensely....but man, sorry, UVa is not and never will be in the same universe with online I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.ing as Duke has been since 92. I mean, you have no idea, and BTW, many of your Hoo brethren are part of the cacophony we have heard for multiple decades.

[akg4y]

Dude, we love UVa fans here...respect the Hoos program immensely...but man, sorry, UVa is not and never will be in the same universe with online I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.ing as Duke has been since 92. I mean, you have no idea, and BTW, many of your Hoo brethren are part of the cacophony we have heard for multiple decades.

I agree and understand that, but that's what comes with 30 years of success, 5 championships and however many Final Fours Duke has achieved... I think Kentucky gets the same treatment, Kansas maybe also but they havent had the same level of recent tournament success so that may be part of the difference. UNC on the other hand doesnt seem to get the same level of scrutiny which is somewhat surprising.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I agree and understand that, but that's what comes with 30 years of success, 5 championships and however many Final Fours Duke has achieved... I think Kentucky gets the same treatment, Kansas maybe also but they havent had the same level of recent tournament success so that may be part of the difference. UNC on the other hand doesnt seem to get the same level of scrutiny which is somewhat surprising.

With due respect, you still don't get it...if you think that about Kentucky. Christian Laettner and the stomp, the shot, changed all that. It hasn't changed back either. Think about this...there has only been one time in history when Kentucky was the beloved lovable little fuzz-ball underdog adored by the nation as they faced Goliath. That was 92. And Kansas isn't even close.

[duke4ever19]

I agree and understand that, but that's what comes with 30 years of success, 5 championships and however many Final Fours Duke has achieved... I think Kentucky gets the same treatment, Kansas maybe also but they havent had the same level of recent tournament success so that may be part of the difference. UNC on the other hand doesnt seem to get the same level of scrutiny which is somewhat surprising.

Duke is the Augusta National Golf Club of D-I basketball. The university itself is private, exclusive, elite, not easy to get into, and has a drop-dead gorgeous campus. The basketball program shares all these characteristics. Cameron Indoor is our sacred ground, full of history and unique among other basketball arenas.

People are always skeptical of private clubs and institutions, especially if there is money, success and power involved. You know all the far-fetched conspiracy stories people bandy about, like the Masons, Rothschilds, Rockefeller's etc.? Duke men's basketball receives the brunt of that kind of paranoia.

If you gather together all the well-worn rumors and nicknames about Coach K, Duke, the players, and the basketball program as a whole, it looks strikingly similar to the conspiracies you see about secret societies.

[-jk]

If you're not hearing those things then it's just because you're not listening for them. As UVA fans that is what we are hearing left and right, your post as an example.

C'mon y'all just want - really hope - to get the media hate Duke has. Bennett is still too fresh, though. (K was still fresh back in the early 90's. Doing it the "right way" much as Tony does it...)

It sucks - but, well no - it really doesn't; it's just really difficult year in and year out having that target on your back.

I'll really miss that hate one day. (And all too soon, I'm afraid: C'mon little Savarino, keep him engaged! C'mon Boeheim, keep chasing him - 'cause he can't quit just a little ahead, he wants to own it forever!)

-jk

[BLPOG]

9321

and to answer the question...

Two-hands, baby!

[DukeSince8]

I’ve been lurking here since suffering through unc’s 2017 championship. Duke fan and alumna in Charlotte, NC. Don’t mind UVA winning, they were indeed extremely lucky but it does take a degree of luck to win a single game elimination tourney. Of course agree that if it were Duke the narrative would be more so “the fix was on” rather than good fortune. Great season still though, I was fortunate to see us win the ACC tourney-magical! Zion simply incredible to see live.

[DUKIE V(A)]

I would absolutely endure a historic loss for Title #6. To me a loss and is a loss. A loss to a 16 seed in the opening game would no doubt be painful, but so was losing to Michigan State. Plus, I have never bought into UVA's loss last year being as earth shattering as people have made it out to be. If UVA had lost to an 8 seed or 4 seed last year, it still would have been a great upset. If you have played or coached sports, you realize winning is never as easy or automatic as people make it out to be. UMBC players aren't paying for college either and on any given day anything can happen. No embarrassment to UVA in my mind. They still had a great season last year (despite the UMBC loss) and it likely fueled them to work even harder in the off season. Congrats to UVA! Whatever people want to say about some of their good fortune, they made big plays and big shots when they needed them. I hope next year I have to hear about Duke getting all the calls and being lucky on the way to #6.

[sagegrouse]

Duke is the Augusta National Golf Club of D-I basketball. The university itself is private, exclusive, elite, not easy to get into, and has a drop-dead gorgeous campus. The basketball program shares all these characteristics. Cameron Indoor is our sacred ground, full of history and unique among other basketball arenas.

People are always skeptical of private clubs and institutions, especially if there is money, success and power involved. You know all the far-fetched conspiracy stories people bandy about, like the Masons, Rothschilds, Rockefeller's etc.? Duke men's basketball receives the brunt of that kind of paranoia.

If you gather together all the well-worn rumors and nicknames about Coach K, Duke, the players, and the basketball program as a whole, it looks strikingly similar to the conspiracies you see about secret societies.

Duke is the perfect setting for a Dan Brown thriller. And there's that basement crypt under the Chapel, which has been used for many secret inductions.

[RPS]

With due respect, you still don't get it...if you think that about Kentucky. Christian Laettner and the stomp, the shot, changed all that. It hasn't changed back either.
Absolutely.

I returned to my hotel after the game Monday evening and had my picture taken with three UK fans -- a grandfather, father, and son -- who had also been at the game, all wearing "I Still Hate Laettner" shirts.

[Indoor66]

Duke is the perfect setting for a Dan Brown thriller. And there's that basement crypt under the Chapel, which has been used for many secret inductions.

I have heard that there is also an alter in the 5th sub-basement of Cameron for sacrifices to the basketball gods to control all officiating.

[devildeac]

I have heard that there is also an alter in the 5th sub-basement of Cameron for sacrifices to the basketball gods to control all officiating.

I've got a sheep or three I'm willing to contribute...

[Indoor66]

I've got a sheep or three I'm willing to contribute...

That would be Ramses CCCXXXVIII.

[devildeac]

That would be Ramses CCCXXXVIII.

They don't necessarily have to be quadrupedal, even-toed ungulates...

[bullettoothtony]

Of course I'd have taken that loss for another title. There's no substitute for that kind of hardware.

[Indoor66]

There's no substitute for that kind of hardware.

Happiness is wanting what you have, not necessarily having what you want.

[bullettoothtony]

^ I see your platitude and raise you:

"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing."

I win.

[uh_no]

no hard words for OP, as it's somewhat tricky, but as this is consistently at the top of our board the last couple of days, can a mod have mercy on my poor mental state and fix the error in the subjunctive mood?

"If Duke were in UVA's shoes"

(or alternatively, if duke had been in UVA's shoes)

If this were fixed, I would be eternally grateful.

[Rich]

no hard words for OP, as it's somewhat tricky, but as this is consistently at the top of our board the last couple of days, can a mod have mercy on my poor mental state and fix the error in the subjunctive mood?

"If Duke were in UVA's shoes"

(or alternatively, if duke had been in UVA's shoes)

If this were fixed, I would be eternally grateful.

Are you calling me Tricky Dick? In my defense, I've never heard of a subjunctive mood.

[BLPOG]

no hard words for OP, as it's somewhat tricky, but as this is consistently at the top of our board the last couple of days, can a mod have mercy on my poor mental state and fix the error in the subjunctive mood?

"If Duke were in UVA's shoes"

(or alternatively, if duke had been in UVA's shoes)

If this were fixed, I would be eternally grateful.

Count me in agreement. I don't know why this particular error always bothers me so much, as it's really much more forgivable than other common ones. It just sticks out like a sore thumb to me.

(my angst was probably already clear from the Stannis image I posted earlier in the thread)


Are you calling me Tricky Dick? In my defense, I've never heard of a subjunctive mood.

I think many native English speakers that haven't studied enough language are unaware of it because the verb conjugations are similar to the normal ones. In other languages it can be more apparent. I don't think I realized it existed or actually understood the rule until I learned Spanish.

[rsvman]

"oh I wish I were an Oscar Meyer wiener,
That is what I'd truly like to be;
'cause if I were an Oscar Meyer wiener,
Everyone would be in love with me."
😊

[devildeac]

"oh I wish I were an Oscar Meyer wiener,
That is what I'd truly like to be;
'cause if I were an Oscar Meyer wiener,
Everyone would be in love with me."
😊

9322

I hate you. ;)

(We actually saw this one time on a vacation while we were hiking around Multnomah Falls in the Columbia River Gorge area. :D)

[JetpackJesus]

Count me in agreement. I don't know why this particular error always bothers me so much, as it's really much more forgivable than other common ones. It just sticks out like a sore thumb to me.

(my angst was probably already clear from the Stannis image I posted earlier in the thread)



I think many native English speakers that haven't studied enough language are unaware of it because the verb conjugations are similar to the normal ones. In other languages it can be more apparent. I don't think I realized it existed or actually understood the rule until I learned Spanish.

Or fourthed?
https://s3.amazonaws.com/seedandsparkstatic/uploads/158578/1504677092-ezgif.com-resize%20(1).gif

[Indoor66]

Are you calling me Tricky Dick? In my defense, I've never heard of a subjunctive mood.

If you are like me, you have demonstrated every other mood...:p:o:rolleyes::cool: