PDA

View Full Version : Is this the end for Coach K?



dukeisawesome
11-21-2007, 12:18 PM
Don't get too angry - that is a headline on the cover of the newest ESPN the Magazine! http://www.espnmag.com

From what I gathered watching 1st Take this morning, the article is going to be critical of Coach K for not being a leader during the lacrosse scandal and also is going to say our program is declining.

Methinks, it's a nice headline to sell magazines to the anti-Duke crowd.

Olympic Fan
11-21-2007, 12:37 PM
Actually, I thought the story would be about the rumor that K will be stepping down after leading Team USA to the Gold Medal in Beijing ...

Not saying there's anything to it, but that rumor is widespread in national basketball cicles.

As for the idea that he's in decline, I wonder if anybody saw the graphic during last night's Duke-Illnois game, listing the top winning coaches over the last five years -- Coach K was No. 1 (with Roy Williams No. 2 and Bruce Weber No. 3).

Yeah, that's a real decline -- he's only won more games in the last five years than any other coach in college basketball.

Yes, last year was a disappointment -- although K's "down" year was better than recent down years by Hall of Fame coaches Jim Calhoun, Jim Boeheim (who both missed the NCAA tournament last year), Lute Olson -- and about the same as the 2006 season by Roy Williams (it was better than his 2004 season, but I give him a pass on that one, since it was his first year at UNC).

But in the 10 years before last season, Duke was on the most dominant run by any team in ACC history -- between 1997 and 2006, Duke won either the ACC regular season and tournament title every year (usually both). Between 1998 and 2006, Duke reached the NCAA Sweet 16 every year -- the second longest such streak in NCAA history. In the eight years between 1999 and 2006, Duke finished No. 1 in the final AP poll five times, third once and sixth and seventh the other two times.

And, by the way, K's winning percertage in the 2000s (83.6 going into this season), is better than his percentage in the 1990s or 1980s.

So other than one subpar year -- which everybody has -- I wonder what evidence the magazine will offer to suggest the program is in decline?

PS As much as I like and admire Coach K, I was disappointed that he didn't speak louder and more often during the lacrosse scandal, especially to defend his friend Mike Pressler from some of the more outrageous slanders.

But I don't see how that somehow indicates that Coach K is finished at Duke.

jimsumner
11-21-2007, 12:50 PM
FWIW, the people closest to the program expect Krzyzewski to be coaching for a while yet, maybe a long while.

EarlJam
11-21-2007, 12:53 PM
Just stupid on all fronts. Lame.

And for Duke's enemies: Want to know a sure-fire formula for keeping K and Duke on the leading edge? Tell them they are in decline.

Bring it.

-EarlJam

SilkyJ
11-21-2007, 12:57 PM
PS As much as I like and admire Coach K, I was disappointed that he didn't speak louder and more often during the lacrosse scandal, especially to defend his friend Mike Pressler from some of the more outrageous slanders.


He did the right thing, by letting the president handle it. He offered his counsel to Dick, who turned it down, which was a big mistake.

The school needs to present a unified front so if the President is going to take a position or make a statement, it would be completely out of line for coach K to come out and say anything except to reiterate exactly what Dick said or to say no comment. Anything else, and the media would quickly spin it to mean that Dick and Coach K don't see eye to eye.

Coach K knows what the media are capable of and so he kept his mouth shut to the press. Dick should have listened to him though.


FWIW, the people closest to the program expect Krzyzewski to be coaching for a while yet, maybe a long while.

coming from you, its worth quite a bit, jim. I grew up with Coach K, and I want to grow old with Coach K.

YOU CAN'T SPELL DUKE WITHOUT A 'K' <CLAP CLAP>

Olympic Fan
11-21-2007, 01:14 PM
FWIW, the people closest to the program expect Krzyzewski to be coaching for a while yet, maybe a long while.

I should have added that I don't believe the rumor ... I hear the same thing that Jim does.

But I just wanted to capture my original reaction to the "End for K" header -- I thought the story would be about the rumor of his leaving (which is out there). Can't believe even ESPN would suggest that his program is in decline. Who wrote the story -- Bomani Jones? Stuart Scott? Doug Gottlieb (who was so angry that Duke won so impressively Monday night that he ripped Princeton as being unworthy to play in the Maui Classic).

Billy Dat
11-21-2007, 01:29 PM
I just read the piece....it was written by Jon Pessah. His conclusions are based on the following arguments:
-K's message of team over individual doesn't resonate with the new generation of players who are looking at college as a stepping stone to the pros
-K is an egomaniac whose relationship with former players and colleagues can be marred by any minor slight (read - lack of agreement) which he sees as being disloyal
-He never spoke up during the lacrosse scandal - what that has to do with anything I don't know. The author says he "lost some of his credibility, and maybe some of his soul"

There was not one quote from anyone on record as part of the piece save for Tom Butters commenting on K not speaking up during the scandal. It looks like this reporter might have attended the K Academy because there is a lot about it in there. Bottom line, it feels like something that might have been written for "The Truth About Duke".

Interesting tidbits:
-The reporter claims that during the World Championship tournament in 2006, K never connected with Lebron and, as a result, the young guys on the team didn't really dig him. This was described as "an open secret".
-He describes the feelings that his ex-players have for him as a mix of "respect, love and loathing"
-He says that W Bush is one of K's heroes and thinks their unerring belief in themselves is a commonality.

Really...there is not much to this piece...it was definitely done to sell magazines.

VaDukie
11-21-2007, 01:41 PM
I have Insider so I read the article. It doesn't say anything we haven't heard before.
1. K didn't speak up during the lax case
2. K can be stubborn, something former players don't always appreciate
3. We were - gasp - not great last year.
4. The game has changed with players leaving early.
5. We did not sign Wright, Patterson, or Monroe. Of course we did sign Henderson, Scheyer, Thomas, Singler, Smith, etc. but why talk about that?
6. We aren't considered national contenders this year.

Reminds me a lot of an article written after the 1999 season, which basically ripped K for how he handled some guys leaving and included some words of wisdom from the prophet known as Ken Burgess. The writer could have written an article about K taking re-inventing how the team plays, how last year's team had more injuries than anyone in the public knew, about how no one should count out us this year - but that wouldn't sell magazines. Taking pot shots does.

jipops
11-21-2007, 01:46 PM
ESPN The FishWrap is a horribly written publication so there is no point in giving this rag any creedence. Actually, it's barely even written, page layouts are mostly reserved for pictures. Call it a Real Simple for guys.

I'll take my SI which tends to be written by actual writers. Atleast when they bash one of my teams, they do it somewhat intelligently.

throatybeard
11-21-2007, 02:25 PM
Is this the end of Zombie Shakespeare?

Bluedawg
11-21-2007, 04:43 PM
Don't get too angry - that is a headline on the cover of the newest ESPN the Magazine! http://www.espnmag.com

From what I gathered watching 1st Take this morning, the article is going to be critical of Coach K for not being a leader during the lacrosse scandal and also is going to say our program is declining.

Methinks, it's a nice headline to sell magazines to the anti-Duke crowd.

Actually, he handled it properly...allowing the legal issues to play themselves out before stepping into it. People could learn from his example.

Bluedawg
11-21-2007, 04:46 PM
I have Insider so I read the article. It doesn't say anything we haven't heard before.
1. K didn't speak up during the lax case
2. K can be stubborn, something former players don't always appreciate
3. We were - gasp - not great last year.
4. The game has changed with players leaving early.
5. We did not sign Wright, Patterson, or Monroe. Of course we did sign Henderson, Scheyer, Thomas, Singler, Smith, etc. but why talk about that?
6. We aren't considered national contenders this year.

Reminds me a lot of an article written after the 1999 season, which basically ripped K for how he handled some guys leaving and included some words of wisdom from the prophet known as Ken Burgess. The writer could have written an article about K taking re-inventing how the team plays, how last year's team had more injuries than anyone in the public knew, about how no one should count out us this year - but that wouldn't sell magazines. Taking pot shots does.


Everyone assumes that every team will want certain players. Granted Duke may be on their list but that does not always mean that they are on Duke's.

Does anyone know if he wanted Wright, Patterson, or Monroe and went after them agressively?


I just read the piece....it was written by Jon Pessah. His conclusions are based on the following arguments:
-K's message of team over individual doesn't resonate with the new generation of players who are looking at college as a stepping stone to the pros


Then one can take from this that he will not actively go after players who do not fit his paramiters.

monkey
11-21-2007, 07:34 PM
Everyone assumes that every team will want certain players. Granted Duke may be on their list but that does not always mean that they are on Duke's.

Does anyone know if he wanted Wright, Patterson, or Monroe and went after them agressively?



Then one can take from this that he will not actively go after players who do not fit his paramiters.

we wanted all three of those players

Bluedawg
11-22-2007, 12:40 AM
we wanted all three of those players

"we" as fans or "we" as coaching staff?

Lord Ash
11-22-2007, 12:42 AM
Both. Let's not play games, we missed on those guys. The article is still a piece'o'nonsense