ESPN/Jon Pessah Article

[diesel]

We’ve closed the lacrosse board and it was not my intention to reopen it. My point about the Pessah piece was simply that he is in a position to write with authority about the indisputable role ESPN itself played in propagating the lacrosse hoax—as I documented. It seemed to me that such introspection on his part might be more rewarding than impugning the actions of those outside his circle. Charity begins at home, as they say.

And forgive me if I’m not impressed if Pessah’s prior pieces cite as authorities Duke faculty such as Starns and Lubiano. The only time I’ve ever felt ashamed to be a Duke alum was when the lawyers for the three lacrosse accused put forward their motion to have a potential trial moved on the grounds that the jury pool in Durham had been poisoned, in part by the presumption of their guilt in statements by their teachers—the principal such statement being organized by Lubiano.

Some things are going to be hard to forget, although I want to get back to basketball

[Duvall]

It isn't a conspiracy for lots of people to want to see the downfall of a powerful sports program. It is just human nature.

Exactly. There is a great deal of anti-Duke resentment and sentiment out there, and there are quite a few sportswriters and editors that have realized that pandering to that sentiment is a good way to make money. It's not a conspiracy, it's just business.

I don't think that it's worth getting worked up over, partly because it doesn't have any much real world impact, and partly because there isn't much we can do about it. But I don't see any reason not to acknowledge this pattern for what it is.

[JG Nothing]

In the Pessah article, K claims “Being great means being lonely...You are constantly being watched and envied." Scrutiny and hatred come with the territory. If you don't like being scrutinized and hated, then stop being great.

[feldspar]

You know, I re-read Pessah's article this morning while waiting at the car shop and, while I still disagree with many of Pessah's smaller points, I think his overall message from the article has some merit to those examining Duke basketball from the outside.

One of Pessah's main points is that Duke basketball in the Coach K era has been defined by individual players putting aside their individuality for the sake of the team. We saw this time and again as Duke went on its amazing run through the late '80s and early '90s. We saw it again as the Duke resurgence happened in the late '90s and early '00s. It was manifested in a huge way with the '01 championship and the Boozer-Sanders saga.

This is how Coach K has been able to build championships. He gets guys who buy into the "team above all else" mentality.

Pessah's main point, though, is that it is growing increasingly difficult in today's college basketball environment to create that kind of mentality with players. More and more players are jumping earlier and earlier, notwithstanding the new draft-eligibility rules. Duke used to be immune from this, but not anymore. We now have to deal with the Sean Livingstons and Mike Dunleavys and Corey Maggettes - players who were expected to be around at least one year longer than they were, and resulted in glaring holes in our lineups. Then there are the players we didn't get, like the Greg Monroes, the Patrick Pattersons - players who didn't seem to want to subscribe to Coach K's strict "team first, me second" mentality. This opened up even more holes. As Pessah says, it creates a Catch-22 for Coach K. Do you stockpile talent, knowing that they are "one-and-dones" and likely aren't going to buy into your proven system of winning (team first) but provide a year or maybe two of spark and in so doing, essentially become a sell-out, or do you take what you can get in terms of talent who (like Singler) seem willing to buy into the system, and sacrifice top recruits, and as a result, have to work with what you have in terms of a lineup?

It's an interesting argument, and one that I think is deserving of some discussion and much observation. Duke's first early jump to the NBA didn't happen until 1999. That puts us at least 5-10 years ahead of any other major college basketball program in terms of having to adjust recruiting, lineups, etc, which means that Coach K is really only in his infancy when it comes to learning about this aspect of college basketball in the "modern era."

In my opinion, we're now rounding out the middle of his learning curve. The next few years, in my opinion, will tell a lot about Coach K's ability to adapt to this new era in Duke basketball. Pessah seems pessimistic about K's ability to adapt well. I, of course, am much more optimistic, but I still feel that his larger arguments are worth examining.

[JG Nothing]

One of Pessah's main points is that Duke basketball in the Coach K era has been defined by individual players putting aside their individuality for the sake of the team. We saw this time and again as Duke went on its amazing run through the late '80s and early '90s. We saw it again as the Duke resurgence happened in the late '90s and early '00s. It was manifested in a huge way with the '01 championship and the Boozer-Sanders saga.

This is how Coach K has been able to build championships. He gets guys who buy into the "team above all else" mentality.

Pessah's main point, though, is that it is growing increasingly difficult in today's college basketball environment to create that kind of mentality with players. More and more players are jumping earlier and earlier, notwithstanding the new draft-eligibility rules. Duke used to be immune from this, but not anymore. We now have to deal with the Sean Livingstons and Mike Dunleavys and Corey Maggettes - players who were expected to be around at least one year longer than they were, and resulted in glaring holes in our lineups. Then there are the players we didn't get, like the Greg Monroes, the Patrick Pattersons - players who didn't seem to want to subscribe to Coach K's strict "team first, me second" mentality. This opened up even more holes. As Pessah says, it creates a Catch-22 for Coach K. Do you stockpile talent, knowing that they are "one-and-dones" and likely aren't going to buy into your proven system of winning (team first) but provide a year or maybe two of spark and in so doing, essentially become a sell-out, or do you take what you can get in terms of talent who (like Singler) seem willing to buy into the system, and sacrifice top recruits, and as a result, have to work with what you have in terms of a lineup?

It's an interesting argument, and one that I think is deserving of some discussion and much observation. Duke's first early jump to the NBA didn't happen until 1999. That puts us at least 5-10 years ahead of any other major college basketball program in terms of having to adjust recruiting, lineups, etc, which means that Coach K is really only in his infancy when it comes to learning about this aspect of college basketball in the "modern era."

In my opinion, we're now rounding out the middle of his learning curve. The next few years, in my opinion, will tell a lot about Coach K's ability to adapt to this new era in Duke basketball. Pessah seems pessimistic about K's ability to adapt well. I, of course, am much more optimistic, but I still feel that his larger arguments are worth examining.

I agree that the topic is worth examining. It probably deserves its own thread.

[Duvall]

Pessah's main point, though, is that it is growing increasingly difficult in today's college basketball environment to create that kind of mentality with players. More and more players are jumping earlier and earlier, notwithstanding the new draft-eligibility rules. Duke used to be immune from this, but not anymore. We now have to deal with the Sean Livingstons and Mike Dunleavys and Corey Maggettes - players who were expected to be around at least one year longer than they were, and resulted in glaring holes in our lineups. Then there are the players we didn't get, like the Greg Monroes, the Patrick Pattersons - players who didn't seem to want to subscribe to Coach K's strict "team first, me second" mentality.

That's a cheap shot. Neither Georgetown nor the Princeton offense seem particularly consistent with a "me-first" attitude.

[throatybeard]

Ah, what ESPN used to be...

http://www.theonion.com/content/news...lborn_shows_up

[feldspar]

That's a cheap shot. Neither Georgetown nor the Princeton offense seem particularly consistent with a "me-first" attitude.

It's less about the type of offense run and more about the type of basketball program overall.

[Duvall]

It's less about the type of offense run and more about the type of basketball program overall.

What does that even mean? You're casting aspersions on Greg Monroe and John Thompson III's program without the slightest hint that you know anything about either.

[SDfan]

I have been a fan of Duke basketball for years. When I started following Duke basketball closely, I remember thinking how much positive coverage the program recieves via ESPN. It wasn't until I started reading the posts on this site that I started to think of the possibility that there was some ominous Duke hating conspiracy out there. It's obvious that many posters fall on either side of the coin here. Personally, I think the amount of negative coverage has increased significantly over the past few years. Having said that, I feel the best way to handle this is with a sense of humor, wit and good old fashion caddiness on the part of the fans. This is best handled by the Cameron Crazies. I look forward to seeing some creativity by the Crazies during some future big game broadcasts. I think the time is now to let ESPN know how much Duke fans love ESPN the network for broadcasting Duke basketball to the nation and how much Duke fans love the magazine by writing about the program. I would like to see the Crazies say something with their tongues firmly planted in their cheeks. Cheers.

[dukeENG2003]

I know everyone has been piling on ESPN these days, but theres a reason why.

Digger, Clemson doesn't have a player named John Mays. . .

[wiscodevil]

Is GWB really one of K's heroes?

It was not nearly as negative as I was led to believe, but did contain some unnecccessary cheap shots and speculation.

The line about how "only the failures stay" at Duke for four years is absurd.