PDA

View Full Version : UNC Helms "championship"



tombrady
12-03-2007, 02:33 PM
You all are obviously familiar with the whole "UNC thinking they have 5 national championships" thing, and I know that first one is not really widely recognized except by UNC. What are the reasons, exactly? Something about it being regional, or the level of competition, or something? Any good website on this?

barely
12-03-2007, 02:36 PM
I understand that the first one (circa 1923) was prior the the NCAA championship tournament.

jimsumner
12-03-2007, 02:39 PM
In the early 1940s the Los Angeles-based Helms Athletic Association decided to retroactively award "national championships" and player of the year awards. They awarded UNC the 1924 title. A very mythical title. Helms eventually went back to the beginning of the 20th century, so lots of schools have Helms titles on their resumes. Few, if any, take theirs as seriously as does UNC.

snowdenscold
12-03-2007, 02:42 PM
In the early 1940s the Los Angeles-based Helms Athletic Association decided to retroactively award "national championships" and player of the year awards. They awarded UNC the 1924 title. A very mythical title. Helms eventually went back to the beginning of the 20th century, so lots of schools have Helms titles on their resumes. Few, if any, take theirs as seriously as does UNC.

I think when ESPN did that rivalry commercial where the Duke guy made the pinata out of newspaper clippings, he should have put a big strikethrough on the "UNC 5, DUKE 3" headline and wrote in 4.

rthomas
12-03-2007, 02:44 PM
My buddy who is a GB Packer fan keeps telling me that the Packers have more championships than is normally recognized. BS.

hurleyfor3
12-03-2007, 02:45 PM
In terms you can understand, tombrady, it would be similar to a bunch of arbitrary baseball fans getting together today and awarding the Red Sox the 1978 championship because the Sox had, in these fans' own opinions, the most impressive regular season.

Duvall
12-03-2007, 02:45 PM
My buddy who is a GB Packer fan keeps telling me that the Packers have more championships than is normally recognized. BS.

Is he referring to pre-Super Bowl NFL championships? That's completely different.

hurleyfor3
12-03-2007, 02:45 PM
My buddy who is a GB Packer fan keeps telling me that the Packers have more championships than is normally recognized. BS.

Results of NFL Championship games from the pre-Super Bowl area are completely legit.

rockymtn devil
12-03-2007, 03:04 PM
Michigan football also claims every national title that any organization on earth ever granted it. They claim 11, but 5 of those are before 1920, and 10 of them are before 1950. If Ohio State claimed the types of titles that Michigan does, it would have 14 instead of 7.

sandinmyshoes
12-03-2007, 03:13 PM
I think Dean Smith had an absolute fetish for rewarding players and teams. He was probably the driving force behind the emphasis on that 1924 Championship stuff, although it was no doubt a nice accolade.

My wife is a UNC fan and she says she only mentions it because she knows it irritates me. :rolleyes:

Duvall
12-03-2007, 03:21 PM
Al Featherston's take: (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=19923)


Time out for a brief discussion about UNC’s so-called 1924 ‘Helms Foundation’ national title. UNC fans would have you believe that’s a pre-NCAA poll that’s similar to the championships awarded in college football today.

It’s not.

The Helms Foundation titles were awarded starting in the early 1940s. A committee of so-called experts went back and determined champions from the 1920s and 1930s.

I have no idea who was on the committee, but I know their knowledge of basketball history is not very good. While UNC did go 26-0 and win the Southern Conference championship in Atlanta that season, the White Phantoms (as they were known) were strictly a regional phenomenon. They played nobody outside the South.

The problem is that Southern basketball just wasn’t very good in that era. UNC found that out a year later when they repeated as Southern Conference champions, but ventured north and lost three straight — two by lopsided margins — to Eastern teams.

The best basketball in 1924 was played in the East and Midwest. And what the Helms researchers ignored is that there was a national tournament that season, sponsored by the AAU. Butler, which beat the teams that were perceived as the best in the country, won that event and also claims a 1924 national title.

snowdenscold
12-03-2007, 03:50 PM
Al Featherston's take: (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=19923)

And that's what makes it so frustrating. Oh well if it helps those heels fans sleep better at night, then so be it. I don't really care if they think they have 5 - what annoys me is when national sports articles/commentators give them credit for it as well cause they haven't really looked into it. They have 4 in my book.

killerleft
12-03-2007, 03:57 PM
I think I read somewhere (maybe an Al Featherston article?) that in '23, the White Phantoms had lost twice to the Durham YMCA, so they didn't play them in '24.

Olympic Fan
12-03-2007, 04:02 PM
Just to add to Featherston's comments up above ... the "Committee" that selected UNC as the 1924 national championship was one man, an executive in the Helms bakery named Bill Schroeder. He never played, coached or wrote about basketball.

Helms, BTW, does have a sports connection, before Helms and Schroeder started their Helms Foundation in 1936 (originally formed to name a national football champion). Helms was a small, local bakery until it earned the contract to supply bread for the Los Angeles Olympics. The deal allowed them to expand and become the largest bakery on the West Coast.

And when you start claiming spurious national championships, I'm surprised that Duke does lay claim to its two national titles in football.

In 1936, James Howell (who published a football magazine and IMO had more credibility than an LA bakery executive) picked Duke as his 1936 national champs. Duke was one of seven one-loss teams that won one national title in or another in 1936 -- along with Minnesota, LSU, Alabama, Northwestern, Pittsburgh and Santa Clara.

Duke was 9-1 that season and its only loss was a 15-13 loss at Tennessee when a guy named Red Harp (combining the first and last names of two future Duke coaches) returned a punt 82 yards for the game-winning touchdown with just minutes left. The Blue Devils outscored oppponents 209-28 -- the defense gave up just three touchdowns all season.

Surprisingly, I can't find anybody that gave Duke a national title in 1938, even though Duke was unbeaten, untied, unscored on and beat the defending national champion (Pittsburgh). I know people have written that Duke missed the national title when Southern Cal scored a late touchdown in the Rose Bowl, but the fact is that most of the people who awarded national titles in those days made their decisions before the bowls, so that wasn't the reason.

That plays into 1941, when 9-0 Duke (which would lose the Rose Bowl to Oregon State) was awarded the national title by Ray Bryne, who also published a college football magazine. Other title winners than year were Minnesota, Alabama, Duquesne, Georgia and Texas.

Now, both of Duke's national titles were obscure awards -- but when I look at Notre Dame, Michigan, Georgia and Georgia Tech, they are quick to claim any title they can find.

I actually don't think Duke ought to make a big deal about it's two national titles (although the school should acknowledge them), but I also don't think UNC ought to hang a banner -- as large and in the same place as their four legit titles -- for the Helms awards.

At least Duke's two titles were awarded by football experts at the time they were won and not 18 years later by a bakery executive.

Indoor66
12-03-2007, 04:04 PM
I think Dean Smith had an absolute fetish for rewarding players and teams. He was probably the driving force behind the emphasis on that 1924 Championship stuff, although it was no doubt a nice accolade.

My wife is a UNC fan and she says she only mentions it because she knows it irritates me. :rolleyes:

Divorce her. :D

JasonEvans
12-03-2007, 04:15 PM
If you ever encounter a Carolina fan who says they have 5 national titles... just ask them what their record is in championship games. Ask them how many national championship games they have won. After all, in college basketball the national champion is crowned in a game, not in a poll. Everyone knows that.

-Jason "I only very rarely see anyone in the national media recognize Carolina's 5th title" Evans

snowdenscold
12-03-2007, 04:56 PM
-Jason "I only very rarely see anyone in the national media recognize Carolina's 5th title" Evans

Good - make sure you correct them when they do =)

That ESPN rivalry commercial still bugs me for prominently showing the headline w/ UNC having 5. Oh well, can't expect too much from them.

Kdogg
12-03-2007, 05:23 PM
Good - make sure you correct them when they do =)

That ESPN rivalry commercial still bugs me for prominently showing the headline w/ UNC having 5. Oh well, can't expect too much from them.

I blame that more on the UNC school of Journalism. During the UNC - UK game, Vital said UNC had four titles so someone at ESPN has it right.

jimsumner
12-03-2007, 05:43 PM
Helms eventually went all the way back to 1901.

Wisconsin won Helms titles in 1912, 1914, and 1916. They actually won an NCAA title in 1941 but I'm pretty sure nobody promoted last week's game as a matchup between three-time national titleists Duke and four-time national titleist Wisconsin.

The University of Chicago and Columbia each "won" three titles. Sort of puts Duke's win over Columbia last season in a different light.

Kansas has a pair of titles, as do Notre Dame, Minnesota, Penn, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Yale. Kentucky and St. John's have single titles.

And that's only the pre-NCAA-Tournament era. Helms continued awarding titles through 1982. Four times they gave their award to a school other than the NCAA Tournament champions; 1939 (LIU), 1940 (Southern Cal), 1944 (Army), and 1954 (Kentucky).

FWIW, Schroeder did consult with self-selected experts, although he made the final decision himself. But in the 1920s (and earlier) there was virtually no intersectional competition. Most people thought that the urban northeast and midwest produced the highest-quality college basketball but who really knows?

hondoheel
12-03-2007, 06:29 PM
Helms=BCS. Thank goodness we have a tournament now.

jimsumner
12-03-2007, 06:58 PM
Sorry, Helms doesn't equal BCS. The salient point in all of this is that the Helms Awards were given years, in some cases decades, after the fact.

DevilWolf
12-03-2007, 09:45 PM
I once asked a certain assistant coach at UNC who used to be at Kansas if the Jayhawks ever celebrated their Helms national championship. He said "No, why would we?".

jlear
12-03-2007, 10:30 PM
The best basketball in 1924 was played in the East and Midwest. And what the Helms researchers ignored is that there was a national tournament that season, sponsored by the AAU. Butler, which beat the teams that were perceived as the best in the country, won that event and also claims a 1924 national title.

I need a Butler 1924 national champ shirt and I need a banner for my office. Maybe a website and in honor of that team as well.

77devil
12-03-2007, 10:32 PM
And that's what makes it so frustrating. Oh well if it helps those heels fans sleep better at night, then so be it. I don't really care if they think they have 5 - what annoys me is when national sports articles/commentators give them credit for it as well cause they haven't really looked into it. They have 4 in my book.

ESPN only acknowledged 4 for UNC in a graphic ranking schools with the most championships.

Heelofaguy
12-04-2007, 09:54 AM
I'm a UNC alum and diehard fan. When I speak of championships I say we have won 4, not 5.

To compare that Helms title to say one of Dukes 90s' titles is absurd. I can admit that regardless of my hate for Duke. :D

Uncle Drew
12-04-2007, 10:49 AM
I remember UNC bumper stickers saying "The Streets Were Blue In 82" after Deans first title. I remember ragging a UNC fan about this Helms Championship (Syracuse also lays claim to one so it's not just UNC.) and saying UNC needs to make up tee shirts celebrating the championship that read "1924 Does Anyone Remember The Score?". The fact is this title was rarely if EVER brought up until Duke tied UNC for NCAA titles in 2001. THEN the UNC grad media dusted this Helms Championship off and put some perfume on it to hide the smell of moth balls just to technically keep them ahead in championships. UNC athletics would deny this of course. But it's along the line of a Cherokee Indian tribe (I'm part Cherokee I can say things like this!) claiming a lacrosse / field hockey championship from 1598.


I think the two things that irritate me most about this quote unquote title is that UNC was one of three undefeated teams from that year but the powers that be decided to award a championship to UNC in 1939. Not a co-championship with the two other schools (if a championship was shared between three schools would that be co-champions or some other term?) and fifteen years after the fact. To put this in perspective it would be similar to awarding UNLV the 1992 title because they had a undefeated regular season in 1991 if we had no NCAA tournament. Greg Anthony would be getting his ring doing commentary for ESPN and Larry Johnson would get his championship........well doing whatever Larry Johnson is doing now! But we all know how that championship turned out.


Additionally if I'm not mistaken calling what was played in 1924 basketball is like calling an iron lung a "breathing treatment". I read an article once on the rules of the game back in the day, and while they weren't still using a peach basket, the action seems alien to the game we know today. I know for a fact after every made basket a jump ball was held at center court to determine possession. And an offensive player had to be given 360 degrees to pivot in a circle or a foul was called for guarding to closely. 1924 basketball was kind of like football in leather helmets with no forward pass. But if UNC wants to lay claim to a title in 1924 I say we go back and award George Washington the 1780 Olympic medal for silver dollar throwing.

oli-p
12-04-2007, 01:43 PM
I graduated from UNC in 1995 and although I knew about the Helms championship I have never heard anyone claim it as anything but what it is. I never heard it lumped in with our NCAA championships until a few years ago by ESPN. I don't have problem with it not being counted. Four is still more than three and more importantly, if we are going to talk about mythical championships let's talk about Duke's over UNLV. Ever noticed how that game is never replayed on ESPN classic? The fix was in and UNLV players got rich.

Duvall
12-04-2007, 01:48 PM
I graduated from UNC in 1995 and although I knew about the Helms championship I have never heard anyone claim it as anything but what it is. I never heard it lumped in with our NCAA championships until a few years ago by ESPN. I don't have problem with it not being counted. Four is still more than three and more importantly, if we are going to talk about mythical championships let's talk about Duke's over UNLV. Ever noticed how that game is never replayed on ESPN classic? The fix was in and UNLV players got rich.

There's a much simpler reason why no one has ever shown Duke's championship win over UNLV.

juise
12-04-2007, 01:53 PM
I graduated from UNC in 1995 and although I knew about the Helms championship I have never heard anyone claim it as anything but what it is. I never heard it lumped in with our NCAA championships until a few years ago by ESPN. I don't have problem with it not being counted. Four is still more than three and more importantly, if we are going to talk about mythical championships let's talk about Duke's over UNLV. Ever noticed how that game is never replayed on ESPN classic? The fix was in and UNLV players got rich.

The first part of this post was a valiant effort to make UNC fans sound more rational and level-headed. The last few sentences were completely antithetical to that effort.

Sir Stealth
12-04-2007, 02:00 PM
An old one but still good:
How many UNC fans does it take to screw in a light bulb?
1 to screw it in, 10 to hang the banner, and the rest to celebrate it forever.

snowdenscold
12-04-2007, 02:24 PM
There's a much simpler reason why no one has ever shown Duke's championship win over UNLV.

Indeed. But don't confuse the poor man with facts.

devildeac
12-04-2007, 02:51 PM
I graduated from UNC in 1995 and although I knew about the Helms championship I have never heard anyone claim it as anything but what it is. I never heard it lumped in with our NCAA championships until a few years ago by ESPN. I don't have problem with it not being counted. Four is still more than three and more importantly, if we are going to talk about mythical championships let's talk about Duke's over UNLV. Ever noticed how that game is never replayed on ESPN classic? The fix was in and UNLV players got rich.

ya gotta be kidding me, right? How did the last sentence/flame/troll make it by the mods? I'll take the irrationality a step farther, in fact I'll see you one AND raise you one. #1 Freddie Brown(I think I have the errrant passers name correct). #2. Chris Webber, Mr. TO himself. We'll subtract 1 'bogus' NC and carowhina can subtract 2. Fair enuf?

Uncle Drew
12-04-2007, 03:03 PM
I graduated from UNC in 1995 and although I knew about the Helms championship I have never heard anyone claim it as anything but what it is. I never heard it lumped in with our NCAA championships until a few years ago by ESPN. I don't have problem with it not being counted. Four is still more than three and more importantly, if we are going to talk about mythical championships let's talk about Duke's over UNLV. Ever noticed how that game is never replayed on ESPN classic? The fix was in and UNLV players got rich.


Though I had heard of the Helms title before Duke ever won any national title in any sport I never heard any grad or media outlet make note of it. It was simply a note in the early years of UNC sports, much like Duke adding the stats for Trinity College. However the first time I ever heard / saw any media outlet use 1924 as a true national championship was while watching a UNC game on CBS in 2002. Billy Packer (a well known Duke and UNC hater) pointed it out when the list came up saying it shouldn't be listed. Jim Nance asked if it aught to be listed perhaps with a * beside it. And Mr. Packer said listing it as a national championship along with their other true NCAA titles devalued the accomplishment of their true titles. Granted I'm no Billy Packer fan, and I have no problem with UNC noting it in their media guide to show the rich history and how far it goes back. But to list 1924 on a tee shirt or banner like their other titles as at Wikipedia for example is idiotic.

rockymtn devil
12-04-2007, 03:13 PM
There's a much simpler reason why no one has ever shown Duke's championship win over UNLV.

Classic.

snowdenscold
12-04-2007, 03:16 PM
ya gotta be kidding me, right? How did the last sentence/flame/troll make it by the mods? I'll take the irrationality a step farther, in fact I'll see you one AND raise you one. #1 Freddie Brown(I think I have the errrant passers name correct). #2. Chris Webber, Mr. TO himself. We'll subtract 1 'bogus' NC and carowhina can subtract 2. Fair enuf?

To be fair, I think Carolina deserves the '93 one. They were gonna win that w/ or w/o C-Webb's blunder.

Uncle Drew
12-04-2007, 03:54 PM
I think I read somewhere (maybe an Al Featherston article?) that in '23, the White Phantoms had lost twice to the Durham YMCA, so they didn't play them in '24.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong because it's been a while since I looked at the record books and it may have changed since their 8-20 season a few years back. But isn't UNC's worst ever loss in basketball to the "Lynchburg Elks" in the early 1900's? Who in the (insert your own curse word) were / are the Lynchburg Elks, and why can't they play UNC every year? :eek:

Uncle Drew
12-04-2007, 04:08 PM
I don't know where this information came from but it's what popped up when I typed Lynchburg Elks into my search engine. I guess unacceptable.com but there were no links or directions to the home page.

There was an interesting thread on unacceptable.com several days ago that I would like to share with you. The thread was begun by a poster who asked about the Lynchburg Elks and the statement made by one of the announcers during the Maryland game that Carolina's worst ever basketball defeat had come at the hands of the Lynchburg Elks in 1915. The poster apparently was not familiar with the fact that YMCA, industrial league and yes, Elks club teams in the early days of college basketball frequently played college teams. Carolina's last game against one of these teams during the regular season was in 1951 against Hanes Hosiery.

The statement about the Lynchburg Elks loss being the worst in UNC history is not correct. The record book shows that UNC has only played the Lynchburg Elks one time and that was in 1920 when the Heels beat the Lynchburg team 38-15. The worst loss in history was in 1915 but it was to the Lynchburg YMCA 63-20. Not that it makes much difference but it must have been some solace to the original poster because he seemed disturbed over the fact we had lost to a Elks club which he likened to losing to the Kiwanis Club.

At any rate, after clearing up the discrepancy about UNC's worst loss, a post was made that the unbeaten '57 team had actually lost a preseason game to another non-college opponent, the McCrary Eagles. Old timers remember the McCrary Eagles well but it came as a shock for me to learn that McCrary had beaten what I thought were the undefeated Tar Heels of 1957. Not to demean the McCrary Eagles because they were very good and always had former several local former college stars on their rosters. UNC even had a future member of its team, Ray Stanley, play for the Eagles before he played for Carolina. Now for those of you who are wondering how in the world did a future college player play for a semi-pro basketball team without incurring the wrath and punitive powers of the NCAA, let me explain. In addition to the NCAA not being as powerful a force in collegiate athletics as it is today, the semi-pro teams such as McCrary ( Acme McCrary Hosiery Mill of Asheboro N.C. and

Haynes Hosiery (Winston Salem, N.C.) employed the players as regular employees and they played on the team that represented the organization. You and I both know this was a ruse and that the average person could never have been employed to do the work these athletes did during the day if they did anything at all. Different time, different set of rules.

While I find all this interesting I can't help but think this type of information skews the record books from way back when even more. UNC lists it's worst loss ever in basketball to a NON-college opponent. I guess back in those days if you played St. Mary's school for the blind it counted in the record books. By this logic Duke could play the Patriots in football next week and list our worst football loss ever to Tom Brady and company in 2007. By 2107 no one would be the wiser because college athletes in the future will be paid huge salaries and the Patriots and Red Sox will form one team that plays both sports year round called the Red Parts in 2047.

sandinmyshoes
12-04-2007, 04:42 PM
The Lynchburg Elks story reminds me of how UNC and UK went after it for awhile digging through dusty records in an effort to find the most wins. Evidently back in the early years, long before the NCAA was formed, the college teams played an interesting assortment of non college teams.

As for the Helms thing, again, the UNC fans I know will all admit that the only reason they bring it up is because it irritates non-UNC fans. Of course it is a two way street as I always refer to UNC as UNC and South Carolina as Carolina to irritate them.

I would imagine knowing that there was a two or three page thread on DBR complaining about the Helms award would only encourage them to keep bringing it up. Such is rivalry, I suppose. :o

snowdenscold
12-04-2007, 04:56 PM
I guess back in those days if you played St. Mary's school for the blind it counted in the record books. By this logic Duke could play the Patriots in football next week and list our worst football loss ever to Tom Brady and company in 2007.

For some reason I found this a hilarious concept and was laughing out loud for a bit here.

devildeac
12-04-2007, 11:29 PM
To be fair, I think Carolina deserves the '93 one. They were gonna win that w/ or w/o C-Webb's blunder.

My memory is fuzzy, but IIRC, unc was up 1 or 2 very late in the game and michigan had the ball with a chance to tie/lead and the TO doomed them. Historians out there or folks with better memories than mine(I REALLY try not to watch the heels play)? (the only thing they really deserve is a fiery day in hell)

juise
12-04-2007, 11:39 PM
My memory is fuzzy, but IIRC, unc was up 1 or 2 very late in the game and michigan had the ball with a chance to tie/lead and the TO doomed them. Historians out there or folks with better memories than mine(I REALLY try not to watch the heels play)? (the only thing they really deserve is a fiery day in hell)

UNC was up two (http://youtube.com/watch?v=NH1ujxNwrkA). The video shows the score (73-71 with 13 seconds left).

Johnboy
12-04-2007, 11:53 PM
My memory is fuzzy, but IIRC, unc was up 1 or 2 very late in the game and michigan had the ball with a chance to tie/lead and the TO doomed them. Historians out there or folks with better memories than mine(I REALLY try not to watch the heels play)? (the only thing they really deserve is a fiery day in hell)

UNC-CH was up by 2, and they trapped Webber on the side/in the corner when he called the timeout they didn't have. UNC-CH probably would have won anyway, as they were ahead and had Webber pretty well trapped, IIRC.

Similarly, in 1982, UNC-CH was up by 2, thanks to Jordan's bucket with ~16 seconds left, when Freddie Brown threw the ball directly to James Worthy.

As for the UNLV game, they showed it just the other day on ESPN. If a case were to be made that a fix was in, it would be easier (from watching the games) to think that about Dean Smith's titles and their improbable endings than to think it of Duke's amazing comeback and Laettner's perfect game. I don't believe any such thing.

devildeac
12-05-2007, 12:09 AM
UNC-CH was up by 2, and they trapped Webber on the side/in the corner when he called the timeout they didn't have. UNC-CH probably would have won anyway, as they were ahead and had Webber pretty well trapped, IIRC.

Similarly, in 1982, UNC-CH was up by 2, thanks to Jordan's bucket with ~16 seconds left, when Freddie Brown threw the ball directly to James Worthy.

As for the UNLV game, they showed it just the other day on ESPN. If a case were to be made that a fix was in, it would be easier (from watching the games) to think that about Dean Smith's titles and their improbable endings than to think it of Duke's amazing comeback and Laettner's perfect game. I don't believe any such thing.

Thanks for the memory refreshers johnboy and juise. The details were a bit fuzzy, after all it was unc, but the sentiment is still there(GTHCGTH).

Johnboy
12-05-2007, 12:16 AM
In 1982, UNC-CH was only up by 1 when Freddie Brown threw the errant pass to an out-of position James Worthy.

devildeac
12-05-2007, 12:25 AM
In 1982, UNC-CH was only up by 1 when Freddie Brown threw the errant pass to an out-of position James Worthy.

sounds even more suspicious to me now...

oli-p
12-05-2007, 01:16 AM
Hilarious. Just got home. Knew it would spark something. As for the hints that Dean's are more likely a fix, come on. Game fixing scandals don't occur on important plays. Didn't you see Blue Chips? Can't wait for the ACC to start. Duke looks solid on D and is much more fun to watch than in the past. We'll see if the pressure on D and the excellent outside shooting can save the weakness in the middle. It is Carolina and Duke down the stretch all the way.

throatybeard
12-05-2007, 09:44 AM
http://www.duke.edu/~bct1/images/3rdplaceNIT.jpg

:D

Johnboy
12-05-2007, 10:29 AM
Hilarious. Just got home. Knew it would spark something. As for the hints that Dean's are more likely a fix, come on. Game fixing scandals don't occur on important plays. Didn't you see Blue Chips? Can't wait for the ACC to start. Duke looks solid on D and is much more fun to watch than in the past. We'll see if the pressure on D and the excellent outside shooting can save the weakness in the middle. It is Carolina and Duke down the stretch all the way.

We took the bait. Nice response from throatybeard,though.

captmojo
12-05-2007, 10:50 AM
Four corners?
Point shaving?
Stall ball? (not by Duke, rather by the creator of the old 7-0 halftime coach)
3rd place NIT?

And now it looks like Ol' Roy remembers his lessons from the Dean Smith School of Drama, claiming Lawson was not likely for the Kentucky game.
I see how he'd want to try and fool Billy G's game plan. They've been so tricky so far this year.:rolleyes:

Letch
01-28-2008, 10:10 AM
I remember reading that some other organization similar to the Helms Foundation had "awarded" the 1924 title to another school from the north. I have googled this but can't seem to find the other school that has a claim to the 1924 national title. Does anyone know the other school and know whether they claim it? Thanks, I need this for an upcoming argument with a Hole fan!

Duvall
01-28-2008, 10:12 AM
I remember reading that some other organization similar to the Helms Foundation had "awarded" the 1924 title to another school from the north. I have googled this but can't seem to find the other school that has a claim to the 1924 national title. Does anyone know the other school and know whether they claim it? Thanks, I need this for an upcoming argument with a Hole fan!

Not aware of any other Helms-type fake championship from that year, but Butler claims a national title for winning the AAU championship, the only national tournament held that year.

Bluedog
01-28-2008, 10:22 AM
See http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=7738 Al Featherston explains it.

wilko
01-28-2008, 10:30 AM
they can claim the Helms trophy thingy I dont have an issue with it.

However, for truth in advertising they should attribute it to the "White Phantoms" (as their mascot/namesake which they were known at the time) not the Tarheels in any of their media guides and recruiting collateral.

I think thats fair.