Sportsguy podcast on Duke

[gethlives]

Bill Simmons and Chuck Klosterman have a very interesting conversation about Duke and race. I think it starts about 11 minutes in. I think Klosterman makes some interesting points about reverse racism.

http://tinyurl.com/yhhbf3t

[superdave]

Definitely worth listening to.

[NashvilleDevil]

Agreed. Klosterman brings up some good points and it was surprising to hear Bill agree and show some love for Jon.

[Billy Dat]

It's great. Klosterman is always a great foil for Simmons. He asks Simmons why he and others hate certain Duke players and calls him out for his stated reasons. A lot of it is based on race and the history of Duke having lots of white players. It's really interesting...the discussion starts at the 11:30 mark.

[Chard]

My head hurts after listening to that guy.

[UrinalCake]

Great discussion. I would like to have heard Klosterman ask Simmons what he thought would happen if a guy like Vasquez or Hansbrough had played for Duke.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Agreed. Simmons's blog posts are sometimes interesting, but his podcast is so awful. He needs time to put thoughts on paper rather than just blurting them out.

Also agree with most people on this thread about Klosterman - great insight. One of the best I've heard about Duke.

[superdave]

Great discussion. I would like to have heard Klosterman ask Simmons what he thought would happen if a guy like Vasquez or Hansbrough had played for Duke.

JJ Redick to the power of 3

Hansborough was inherently unlikable. Vasquez is not hated because people do not take Maryland very seriously. Too many NIT's lately.

[CDu]

I'm not sure I would say that it's mostly due to race. Was Duke hated back in 1991 before we beat UNLV for our first title? If I recall correctly, we were more of the media darlings then. Do people hate Gonzaga? They're predominantly white. What about Creighton? BYU?

I think a small part of it is race, but I think it's a combination of a lot of factors. I think some of it comes back to the Laettner incident, which (right or wrong) helped in part to change our reputation to the evil empire. But I think the biggest part of it comes down to the fact that Duke has been really good for a really long time and is always on TV (people tend to turn sour on perpetual favorites after a while).

If you're good long enough, the bandwagon fans will eventually jump ship and cheer for the underdogs, and the true opposition will get even more angst. People like to see the elite suffer as well. And since we have a smaller core fanbase (as a small private university), it's easier to build a core of anti-Duke sentiment.

[HaveFunExpectToWin]

I'm not sure I would say that it's mostly due to race. Was Duke hated back in 1991 before we beat UNLV for our first title? If I recall correctly, we were more of the media darlings then. Do people hate Gonzaga? They're predominantly white. What about Creighton? BYU?

I think a small part of it is race, but I think it's a combination of a lot of factors. I think some of it comes back to the Laettner incident, which (right or wrong) helped in part to change our reputation to the evil empire. But I think the biggest part of it comes down to the fact that Duke has been really good for a really long time and is always on TV (people tend to turn sour on perpetual favorites after a while).

Exactly, many people forget that we were the Buffalo Bills in the late 80s and first years of the 90s. Always getting close but never winning it all. No one hated us on a national level.

[RoyalBlue08]

I'm not sure I would say that it's mostly due to race. Was Duke hated back in 1991 before we beat UNLV for our first title? If I recall correctly, we were more of the media darlings then. Do people hate Gonzaga? They're predominantly white. What about Creighton? BYU?

I think a small part of it is race, but I think it's a combination of a lot of factors. I think some of it comes back to the Laettner incident, which (right or wrong) helped in part to change our reputation to the evil empire. But I think the biggest part of it comes down to the fact that Duke has been really good for a really long time and is always on TV (people tend to turn sour on perpetual favorites after a while).

If you're good long enough, the bandwagon fans will eventually jump ship and cheer for the underdogs, and the true opposition will get even more angst. People like to see the elite suffer as well. And since we have a smaller core fanbase (as a small private university), it's easier to build a core of anti-Duke sentiment.

I agree that Duke hatred in general has little to do with race (or said in another way has nothing to do with race for most people). But the Duke players that basketball fans decide to single out and hate are always going to be white. Not quite sure I understand why. But can you imagine the entire crowd at Maryland chanting "F--- you Nolan". No chance. Even if Kyle leaves next year and Nolan is our leader and leading scorer, he won't be treated that way. Does anyone disagree with this?

[flyingdutchdevil]

I'm not sure I would say that it's mostly due to race. Was Duke hated back in 1991 before we beat UNLV for our first title? If I recall correctly, we were more of the media darlings then. Do people hate Gonzaga? They're predominantly white. What about Creighton? BYU?

I think a small part of it is race, but I think it's a combination of a lot of factors. I think some of it comes back to the Laettner incident, which (right or wrong) helped in part to change our reputation to the evil empire. But I think the biggest part of it comes down to the fact that Duke has been really good for a really long time and is always on TV (people tend to turn sour on perpetual favorites after a while).

If you're good long enough, the bandwagon fans will eventually jump ship and cheer for the underdogs, and the true opposition will get even more angst. People like to see the elite suffer as well. And since we have a smaller core fanbase (as a small private university), it's easier to build a core of anti-Duke sentiment.

Would like to respectfully disagree.

For your first point, if Duke was a predominantly black team that had a lot of success in the last 20 years, like Kansas, UCLA, Zona, UNC, Kentucky, would they still be hated as much? Even successful private schools that have had decent success, like GTown, Stanford, etc haven't been hated as much. And their key players are minorities as well (had to include the Lopez brothers in there, who are minorities). The schools you mentioned - Gonzaga, Creighton, BYU - may have had success in their own conferences, but aren't national powerhouses like Duke. I agree with you that being white isn't the only factor - continuous success and national attention are also needed, but being white is what predominantly makes people hate Duke, IMO.

Secondly, with regards to your Laettner situation, I think a lot of people who are semi-college basketball fans don't really know of the incident. A lot of my friends who hate Duke don't even know of the stomping incident. They hate Duke because we are successful and white.

Anyway, to sum up, I personal feel that success + race perception = hatred.

[CDu]

Would like to respectfully disagree.

For your first point, if Duke was a predominantly black team that had a lot of success in the last 20 years, like Kansas, UCLA, Zona, UNC, Kentucky, would they still be hated as much? Even successful private schools that have had decent success, like GTown, Stanford, etc haven't been hated as much. And their key players are minorities as well (had to include the Lopez brothers in there, who are minorities). The schools you mentioned - Gonzaga, Creighton, BYU - may have had success in their own conferences, but aren't national powerhouses like Duke. I agree with you that being white isn't the only factor - continuous success and national attention are also needed, but being white is what predominantly makes people hate Duke, IMO.

None of these examples are good, because none of these teams have had nearly the level of prolonged success (and not least important the amount of prolonged success in this media-driven era). If they'd gone to anywhere near 10 final fours and won three championships in the last 25 years and were on TV all the time, I think they'd be hated too. The examples you listed haven't even combined to have that much success in the last 25 years.

Secondly, with regards to your Laettner situation, I think a lot of people who are semi-college basketball fans don't really know of the incident. A lot of my friends who hate Duke don't even know of the stomping incident. They hate Duke because we are successful and white.

Anyway, to sum up, I personal feel that success + race perception = hatred.

I didn't say race was irrelevant. I just said it wasn't the primary driver, in my opinion. Also, I said the Laettner stomp was just a part of it. Maybe a very small part.

I think the amount of success combined with the fact that we have a fairly small natural fanbase is the primary driver. There are other factors, and I'd include race in it. But I don't think it's the primary component.

[jv001]

The New York Yankees. Some people hate winners and Duke has been one of the 2 or 3 most successful men's college basketball programs for two decades. Throw in the academic rating of Duke and you have the two biggest reasons for Duke hatred. Number three could very well be race but having some TV commentators bad mouthing(Duke gets all the calls) has not helped. I had rather be a winner and hated than a likeable loser. Go Duke!

[Billy Dat]

Their discussion around JJ was interesting. Klosterman asked Simmons why people hate JJ Redick. Simmons basically said it is the perceived arrogance with which he carries himself on the floor. Klosterman said that those comments are similar to the same kinds of justifications people make when they dislike someone based on race...he called them code words/codified language. He pointed out that those same traits are celebrated in many black players.

What was interesting was that they discuss the impact of national Duke hatred on recruiting posing the question, does it make a difference? Simmons thought that it would because recruits now have grown up in a world that hates Duke. Klosterman agreed, but said that the Duke name and K himself still carry such weight that upon being contacted by the coaches and, if you are heavily recruited, having K lavish attention on you, would make any anti-Duke bias fall by the wayside..a good point that I agree with. Then, they started in with the Duke basketball/Notre Dame football comparisons and Kolsterman was quick to point out that Duke is still a top program while ND has slipped much further.

[RoyalBlue08]

Their discussion around JJ was interesting. Klosterman asked Simmons why people hate JJ Redick. Simmons basically said it is the perceived arrogance with which he carries himself on the floor. Klosterman said that those comments are similar to the same kinds of justifications people make when they dislike someone based on race...he called them code words/codified language. He pointed out that those same traits are celebrated in many black players.

.

I don't buy the "JJ is arrogant" argument for a second. Was he any more arrogant than Gerald Henderson? I don't see it. (BTW, I don't believe either of them to be arrogant, but I do believe they played the game with a high level of confidence. For Gerald I am referring mostly to last season.) G didn't get any of the crap last year that Scheyer gets now or JJ or Paulus got in their career. Was Greg arrogant too? I don't know what this comes from, as a majority of the fans are white, but I think it is hard to swallow that all of Duke's most hated players being white is some sort of strange coincidence.

[WillJ]

I actually just read and enjoyed his Book of Basketball, but his comments on Duke here come off as exceptionally lacking in self-awareness.

[superdave]

But he backed it up (except for NCAA tourney performances unfortunately).

So I googled "JJ Redick arrogant" and clicked on Images. Here you go -http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/spor.../jj_redick.jpg

I think that explains a lot. Also, Wojo's hug off Coach K after beating unc in Cameron in 1998 is pointed out by a lot of people as annoying. Then the video of Paulus flopping without contact stick out too.

White Duke players have certainly added to the images of Duke as annoying white guys, whether that's fair or not. But take solace in the fact that if duke sucked no one would care.

[Bluedog]

I found the discussion quite interesting. While I do think there are a variety of reasons fans hate Duke, I do think race is a factor, although it's certainly not the only factor. What is the largest demographic of college basketball fans? White males. When they see somebody like JJ or Scheyer, it's like looking at themselves. Typical looking white guys that aren't especially athletic or ripped or anything. So, honestly, I think there's an element of jealousy. "Why do those players get so much attention?! They look just like me!"

Of the top teams in the nation, we have by far the most white players that actually get minutes. Compare the UK roster and ours and from a "look" standpoint, they couldn't be more different. I certainly don't think our recruiting is racist or anything; our recruits for next year are all black. But I do think Duke doesn't have as much street cred in recruiting circles as we'd like in order to get the inner-city black player. Certainly, there are exceptions like Dockery, but I'm sure all of Wall's peers were thinking "Duke?! Are you kidding? The academic school with a bunch of rich, white nerds?" And I think that despite our best efforts, that is the perception amongst a certain contingent, whether fair or not. (I realize Duke is only about 1/2 white and 40% on financial aid, but perception is reality).

I think bringing in somebody like Nate James was a great idea; not only for his abilities as a coach, but to establish some more credibility to attract certain types of players. I think we're kidding ourselves if we think it doesn't matter and people don't see it. We have and will continue to get great players from nice prep and private schools such as Kyrie, but Duke is a tough sell for a certain demographic that traditionally has a lot of top players.

Can you imagine if Scheyer had swatted Hansblahblah and made him bleed profusely? Yeah, G took some heat from UNC fans, but it wasn't a nationwide hate. If Scheyer did it, while Hansblahblah was also disliked, people would talk about it forever how he's a dirty player etc. Some still said that about G, but it was over by the next season. Yeah, Reddick did have a certain swagger that some saw as arrogant, but I don't think it was different than G or any number of players. Battier and JWill were leaders of our team and carried themselves with great confidence and seemed pretty well liked. In any event, can debate this for ever and never truly "know," but I do find it an interesting conversation. And of course our success on the court has a lot to do with it. Go Duke!

[Spret42]

I think Blue Dog nailed it.

It is race and perception.

Duke is, fairly or unfairly viewed as the "country club" of college basketball.