27 Feb 2005 20:54:01
Larry R Harrison Jr
UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Another great road win for the Tar Heels. I have again been proven so
dead-wrong in my earlier post last November (or whenever) when UNC lost the
season-opener to Santa Clara and I declared that UNC had now gone the way of
UCLA--that is, they were just never ever going to be a national power again.

It didn't take me long to realize how very wrong I was, and it was proven
again today--in spades.

I was worried when I heard that yet again Rashad McCants was going to miss
the game, and I do want him back quickly for obvious reasons and in
particular because chemistry can be a delicate thing; sometimes the star
player's comeback upsets everything after they had become accustomed to
playing without him. But it's nonetheless been great to see the Tar Heels
win 2 road games without him, demonstrating toughness and maturity way
beyond last year.

Mr S&M 'er Sean May continues to play totally like a man, and Marvin--whom
for some reason I love to call "Messy Marvin," and I don't know why because
his play is anything but messy (then again, it does mess up the opposition
pretty good, I guess you could look at it that way) anyway Mr Marvin
continues to be so impressive it's just unreal.

Can we say "JamesOn WHO?!"

I think most of all I liked Raymond taking the winning shot. One could
almost imagine such a possibility, you know he had been itching to make up
for not doing likewise against Duke in Durham. This time he went for it, and
the result was a win.

It's looking more & more like we're going to win our 1st outright regular
season title since 1993 (shared it in 1995 & 2001) and you know what else
happened that year too. I don't want us to lose the ACC tournament, but if
we do win the regular season that's better as far as I'm concerned.

LRH




28 Feb 2005 04:45:02
Diamondback
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Congrats to the Heels. Nice win. Not to level a downer on you, but a
regular season victory means less now that there's not a true
home-and-home regular season format. That little novelty was given
away so that we could all enjoy a football championship game. Given
that, the ACC tourney is probably a better barometer of who's best in
the league, something I didn't believe previously (even through last
year). But I guess it's the best we got now. But hey, we'll be able
to enjoy that Miami-VT football championship game next year, huh?



28 Feb 2005 13:34:39
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, Diamondback wrote:
> Congrats to the Heels. Nice win. Not to level a downer on you, but a
> regular season victory means less now that there's not a true
> home-and-home regular season format. That little novelty was given
> away so that we could all enjoy a football championship game. Given
> that, the ACC tourney is probably a better barometer of who's best in
> the league, something I didn't believe previously (even through last
> year). But I guess it's the best we got now. But hey, we'll be able
> to enjoy that Miami-VT football championship game next year, huh?

Oh come on. While the ACC tournament *may* help decide who was better
between teams that finished neck-and-neck in the conference but had
different schedules, it won't say much more than that. I mean, if Maryland
gets hot and wins it, that won't mean the regular season was moot and
Maryland was the best team in the conference. Looking at performances,
it's quite obvious that title can *only* go to UNC, Wake, or Duke. Sure,
it could be the ACC tourney that defines *that*, but that's all.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 06:09:42
Diamondback
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Sorry, didn't mean to minimize a great UNC season; I'm just waxing
nostalgic over the home-and-home that wuz. FWIW, I don't think the
title eludes any of the top three this year. I'd put odds on the
Tarheels in the tourney, but that depends on whether they decide to
play defense against Wake (and assumes Wake will play defense against
anyone to get to that matchup).

But wouldn't it be weird if Miami or VT managed to run the table? I
wonder where BC would fare in this group?



28 Feb 2005 09:37:39
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:
> Oh come on. While the ACC tournament *may* help decide who was better
> between teams that finished neck-and-neck in the conference but had
> different schedules, it won't say much more than that. I mean, if Maryland
> gets hot and wins it, that won't mean the regular season was moot and
> Maryland was the best team in the conference. Looking at performances,
> it's quite obvious that title can *only* go to UNC, Wake, or Duke. Sure,
> it could be the ACC tourney that defines *that*, but that's all.
> Donnie

When the AD's get together - they decide what counts and what doesn't.
And right now the AD's decided that the ACC Champion Crown goes to the
winner of the ACC Tournament. As usual - UNC fans want another fake
"regular season champion banner" now that they are winning a bit.

I am also tired of people crying about not playing home and home anymore
with all the teams. The ACC can still do that. With 12 teams - that
would be 22 games for everyone to play everyone twice. They could still
do that and play six cupcakes. So it seems that ACC basketball teams and
fans would rather cry about the football championship than give up a few
more cupcakes at the beginning of the season. That ACC football game
will bring tons of money to the conference. I do not see any "basketball
powers" like UNC - Duke - Wake - UMD - willing to give back their share.
Harry


28 Feb 2005 17:13:44
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, Harry Everhart wrote:
> Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com> wrote:
>> Oh come on. While the ACC tournament *may* help decide who was better
>> between teams that finished neck-and-neck in the conference but had
>> different schedules, it won't say much more than that. I mean, if Maryland
>> gets hot and wins it, that won't mean the regular season was moot and
>> Maryland was the best team in the conference. Looking at performances,
>> it's quite obvious that title can *only* go to UNC, Wake, or Duke. Sure,
>> it could be the ACC tourney that defines *that*, but that's all.
>
> When the AD's get together - they decide what counts and what doesn't.
> And right now the AD's decided that the ACC Champion Crown goes to the
> winner of the ACC Tournament. As usual - UNC fans want another fake
> "regular season champion banner" now that they are winning a bit.

Oh shut up, you silly twit. I'd be saying the same thing if UNC *wasn't*
in that top tier.

At least it's nice to be winning again so Duke fans can all go back to
complaining about stupid shit like what banners we hang. I remember back
when I first started reading RSBC we were still good and this was the kind
of stuff we heard about all the time. That kind of stuff did seem to go
away for the most part through the lean years. I guess I should be glad
it's back.

> I am also tired of people crying about not playing home and home anymore
> with all the teams. The ACC can still do that. With 12 teams - that
> would be 22 games for everyone to play everyone twice. They could still
> do that and play six cupcakes. So it seems that ACC basketball teams and
> fans would rather cry about the football championship than give up a few
> more cupcakes at the beginning of the season. That ACC football game
> will bring tons of money to the conference. I do not see any "basketball
> powers" like UNC - Duke - Wake - UMD - willing to give back their share.

Tell it to the league office and the coaches. Until they decide to *do*
that (and they won't), we still have a right to complain.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 09:44:56
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


Diamondback wrote:
> Congrats to the Heels. Nice win. Not to level a downer on you, but
a
> regular season victory means less now that there's not a true
> home-and-home regular season format. That little novelty was given
> away so that we could all enjoy a football championship game. Given
> that, the ACC tourney is probably a better barometer of who's best in
> the league, something I didn't believe previously (even through last
> year). But I guess it's the best we got now. But hey, we'll be able
> to enjoy that Miami-VT football championship game next year, huh?

The ACC tourney just determines who can win 3 games in a row, not
necessarily the 'best' in the league. I'm with Dean on this one. He
always believed the better team was the won that could win the most
during the regular season; not the one that could get hot on a given
weekend. But I agree with you about the football stuff. I hate that.



28 Feb 2005 09:49:23
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


Harry Everhart wrote:
> Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com> wrote:
> > Oh come on. While the ACC tournament *may* help decide who was
better
> > between teams that finished neck-and-neck in the conference but had
> > different schedules, it won't say much more than that. I mean, if
Maryland
> > gets hot and wins it, that won't mean the regular season was moot
and
> > Maryland was the best team in the conference. Looking at
performances,
> > it's quite obvious that title can *only* go to UNC, Wake, or Duke.
Sure,
> > it could be the ACC tourney that defines *that*, but that's all.
> > Donnie
>
> When the AD's get together - they decide what counts and what
doesn't.
> And right now the AD's decided that the ACC Champion Crown goes to
the
> winner of the ACC Tournament. As usual - UNC fans want another fake
> "regular season champion banner" now that they are winning a bit.
>
> I am also tired of people crying about not playing home and home
anymore
> with all the teams. The ACC can still do that. With 12 teams - that
> would be 22 games for everyone to play everyone twice. They could
still
> do that and play six cupcakes. So it seems that ACC basketball teams
and
> fans would rather cry about the football championship than give up a
few
> more cupcakes at the beginning of the season. That ACC football game
> will bring tons of money to the conference. I do not see any
"basketball
> powers" like UNC - Duke - Wake - UMD - willing to give back their
share.
> Harry

It seems that you are the one 'crying' over the regular season banners.
I remember Duke fans falling all over themselves when they went
undefeated through the regular season in conference. So who was better
last year? Duke, who went to the Final Four, or Maryland who needed a
miracle comeback to beat Duke in the ACC finals? Duke was a far better
team and the best team in the conference; regardless of who got hot
over a weekend. And I wouldn't call 24-3 just 'winning a bit'. Buckle
up Sunday... If the regular season in meaningless, let's just open the
season with the tourney and go right into the NCAA's. I think a 10
game season would be fun, no? No. It wouldn't be.



28 Feb 2005 13:30:22
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

kstarheel@cox.net wrote:
> It seems that you are the one 'crying' over the regular season banners.
> I remember Duke fans falling all over themselves when they went
> undefeated through the regular season in conference. So who was better
> last year? Duke, who went to the Final Four, or Maryland who needed a
> miracle comeback to beat Duke in the ACC finals? Duke was a far better
> team and the best team in the conference; regardless of who got hot
> over a weekend. And I wouldn't call 24-3 just 'winning a bit'. Buckle
> up Sunday... If the regular season in meaningless, let's just open the
> season with the tourney and go right into the NCAA's. I think a 10
> game season would be fun, no? No. It wouldn't be.

Hi Kansas Starheel -
No crying from me. Simply put - the schools voted - BEFORE THE SEASON -
that the champion is the school that wins the ACC Tournament. No crying.
Heck - I think Duke won both the "regular season championship" and the
real ACC Championship - like 5 of the last 6 years. No fun when one
school wins them all the time :-) Duke is nice and allows UNC to win one
of out 15 games they play :-)
I wish UNC the best both in a quest to the "regular season championship"
and the official ACC championship tournament coming up in DC.
Harry


28 Feb 2005 13:58:05
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

> The ACC tourney just determines who can win 3 games in a row, not
> necessarily the 'best' in the league. I'm with Dean on this one. He
> always believed the better team was the won that could win the most
> during the regular season; not the one that could get hot on a given
> weekend. But I agree with you about the football stuff. I hate that.

Dear KS Tarheel -

I am not arguing whether the champ should be regular season or
tournament. I am just a person that believes in democracy. When a group
gets together and votes one way or the other - the entire group is
supposed to abide by the decision - not whine because they didn't get
their way.

The ACC schools voted to make the tourney winner the official champ.
Dean Smith hanging silly banners up makes him look like a baby that
cries when it does not get its bottle. Same thing with the expansion
for the football game and championship (something that Duke and UNC will
never have to worry about :-)

Isn't it strange that you support two things that favor UNC this year?
The decisions were made for the good of the group - even though UNC may
never be a football champ - they will enjoy all the money it will
produce.

I live in an ACC town - Tallahassee. I was perfectly happy with FSU
rutsing through the cake walk schedule of the ACC and then playing a
couple big games with Miami and UF knowing we had the automatic bid for
a BCS bowl and the big check that came with it every year. That was fine
with me. FSU will regret the football expansion because simply - we
could end up playing Miami three times in one year - and they kick the
crap our of us very often.

But now that FSU voted to "join in any reindeer games" I will support it.
Heck - you guys didn't even give it a chance yet to see how it will be.

Harry


28 Feb 2005 14:05:52
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:
> Tell it to the league office and the coaches. Until they decide to *do*
> that (and they won't), we still have a right to complain.

Donnie -
The expansion for a 12 team football championship league game did not
cause the ACC to do away with the home on home basketball schedule - I
proved there is still room for that. You only need 22 games to play
everyone twice. What caused the change of the schedule was coaches et al
desiring to ruts through 10 non-conference games of cupcakes. UNC does
not have a monopoly on that - all coaches seem to think their job
depends on that.
By the way - of course you have the right to complain - just as some of
us will say you sound like whining babies when you do :-)
-Harry


28 Feb 2005 11:18:33
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


Harry Everhart wrote:
> kstarheel@cox.net wrote:
> > It seems that you are the one 'crying' over the regular season
banners.
> > I remember Duke fans falling all over themselves when they went
> > undefeated through the regular season in conference. So who was
better
> > last year? Duke, who went to the Final Four, or Maryland who
needed a
> > miracle comeback to beat Duke in the ACC finals? Duke was a far
better
> > team and the best team in the conference; regardless of who got hot
> > over a weekend. And I wouldn't call 24-3 just 'winning a bit'.
Buckle
> > up Sunday... If the regular season in meaningless, let's just open
the
> > season with the tourney and go right into the NCAA's. I think a 10
> > game season would be fun, no? No. It wouldn't be.
>
> Hi Kansas Starheel -
> No crying from me. Simply put - the schools voted - BEFORE THE SEASON
-
> that the champion is the school that wins the ACC Tournament. No
crying.
> Heck - I think Duke won both the "regular season championship" and
the
> real ACC Championship - like 5 of the last 6 years. No fun when one
> school wins them all the time :-) Duke is nice and allows UNC to win
one
> of out 15 games they play :-)
> I wish UNC the best both in a quest to the "regular season
championship"
> and the official ACC championship tournament coming up in DC.
> Harry


Of course you understand that the bottom line of a decision like that
is... the bottom line. It's about making more money, just like a
football title game is. It's never been about 'the best team' going to
the tourney. If they cared about the best team representing a
conference, the reg. season winner would also get an automatic bid.
But it's always been about money and that will never change.



28 Feb 2005 14:29:18
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

kstarheel@cox.net wrote:
> Of course you understand that the bottom line of a decision like that
> is... the bottom line. It's about making more money, just like a
> football title game is. It's never been about 'the best team' going to
> the tourney. If they cared about the best team representing a
> conference, the reg. season winner would also get an automatic bid.
> But it's always been about money and that will never change.

We agree that the football thingy was all about money. Also UNC and Duke
wanting to stop the expansion was about power. UNC can't get over the
times when it had the entire ACC in its back pocket - Dean Smith would
decide everything. Just like the south lost slavery and we still aren't
over it - UNC lost the power over the ACC - and they still can't get
over it.

But don't you think that a school would get bigger crowds by having 22
conference games instead of these 10 creampuffs liked up to ruts?

I think the decision to give the ACC Champ banner to the tourney winner
goes back to the days when only one team from the ACC got into the NCAA
brackets - back when Wooden won so many championships because there were
less teams to beat in the tourney.

They made that decision - to put some real teeth into the ACC tourney -
back when it meant something. Now that 5-6-7 go to the NCAA brackets -
it may benefit a team to lose in the ACC tourney early - aka UMD - aka
GT - I may be wrong on that one. The ACC tourney was a killer back when
only team went to the NCAA bracket. It is gone now too - because of
money.


28 Feb 2005 19:18:32
Kubez
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com > wrote in news:harry-
BE4B98.14055228022005@comcast.dca.giganews.com:

> 10 non-conference games of cupcakes. UNC does
> not have a monopoly on that

Kentucky, UConn, Vermont and the Maui are cupcakes?


28 Feb 2005 20:00:46
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, Harry Everhart wrote:
> The expansion for a 12 team football championship league game did not
> cause the ACC to do away with the home on home basketball schedule - I
> proved there is still room for that. You only need 22 games to play
> everyone twice. What caused the change of the schedule was coaches et al
> desiring to ruts through 10 non-conference games of cupcakes. UNC does
> not have a monopoly on that - all coaches seem to think their job
> depends on that.

I like how you imply UNC even *tries* to have a monopoly on that. At least
we'll go to Storrs and play UConn. At least we'll go to Rupp and play
Kentucky. Our OOC schedule this season *would* have been relatively tough
had a couple teams not been upset in Maui before we got to them.

Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road OOC.
Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22 game conference
schedule. Too many hard road games that way. This way he gets more
opportunities to schedule OOC games at home or neutral courts.

> By the way - of course you have the right to complain - just as some of
> us will say you sound like whining babies when you do :-)

And I have the right to call you a hypocrite since I've never heard you
complain about Duke's OOC scheduling.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 20:02:32
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, Harry Everhart wrote:
> I live in an ACC town - Tallahassee. I was perfectly happy with FSU
> rutsing through the cake walk schedule of the ACC and then playing a
> couple big games with Miami and UF knowing we had the automatic bid for
> a BCS bowl and the big check that came with it every year. That was fine
> with me. FSU will regret the football expansion because simply - we
> could end up playing Miami three times in one year - and they kick the
> crap our of us very often.

Err, it's not possible to have to play anyone in the conference three times
that I know of.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 13:08:36
Brian
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

I suppose 2 teams could meet three times if they met in the regular
season, then the championship game, and then, through come bizzare and
inexplicable twist were paired for a bowl. So, it's possible, but not
at all likely.

Also, to Harry, I can't believe you're trying to say that UNC plays a
cupcake OOC schedule. Last I checked, Kentucky, Indiana, and UConn had
a fair share of titles under their belt. Go ask coach K how many
national titles North Carolina Central and Tennesee-Martin have won.



28 Feb 2005 16:25:11
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <slrnd26u4n.m73.djbSPAMSUCKS@localhost.localdomain >,
Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:
> Err, it's not possible to have to play anyone in the conference three times
> that I know of.

Sure is possible - just suppose FSU plays Miami for the first game of
the season. FSU wins by 1.
Then Miami runs the table and wins their half of the ACC and FSU runs
the table and winds their half of the ACC. If Miami and FSU are not put
in the same division (then say VT instead of Miami.) So now - FSU goes
to the ACC champ game undefeated - and Miami goes in with a one point
loss to FSU.
In the ACC champ game - Miami beats FSU when FSU misses a wide right
kick.
The media is going nuts over the two one-point games and they want a
rematch. The rest of the nation has at least one or two losses. The
media pairs them up again.
So Miami and FSU are ranked number 1 and number 2 in the BCS poll.
Therefore Miami and FSU play for a third time in the BCS bowl in one
season.
If you think this is unlikely - in 1996 - FSU beat UF in the last game
of the year. They were then matched again in the Sugar Bowl just five
weeks later in New Orleans. FSU won the first one - UF won the second
one and the national championship.
Also - my memory is short but didn't FSU lose twice to Miami in 2003?
Maybe these two teams are just pushing your "round robin thingy" to an
extreme :-)
Since Miami and FSU are the cream of the ACC - it stands to reason they
will meet again in the ACC championship several times - and could be in
the BCS game also.
Three times in one season.
Harry


28 Feb 2005 21:25:55
George W. Harris
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Diamondback" <richard.forgo@cablespeed.com > wrote:

:Sorry, didn't mean to minimize a great UNC season; I'm just waxing
:nostalgic over the home-and-home that wuz. FWIW, I don't think the
:title eludes any of the top three this year. I'd put odds on the
:Tarheels in the tourney, but that depends on whether they decide to
:play defense against Wake (and assumes Wake will play defense against
:anyone to get to that matchup).
:
This year the tourney format really favors the top
five, and, to a lesser extent, the top three. Six through
eleven would have to win four games to win the tourney
(ain't gonna happen). On Friday, the top three seeds
play against teams that played the day before, while four
and five have to slug it out fresh, so the winner of the
four-five game is likely to be more tired for the match-up
against one.

--
/buddha@nirvana.net/h:k

George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'


28 Feb 2005 16:42:03
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:
> Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road OOC.
> Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22 game conference
> schedule. Too many hard road games that way. This way he gets more
> opportunities to schedule OOC games at home or neutral courts.

If my coach is leading the charge against a 22 game conference schedule
- I disagree with him. Funny thing though - I am just a retired dolt
pounding on the keyboard - K is considered the best coach in the land.
Maybe he knows something I do not know. Hard for me to say this - but -
it is hard to believe that a guy that turns down $30 million is smarter
than me :-)
Harry


28 Feb 2005 21:26:19
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, Brian wrote:
> I suppose 2 teams could meet three times if they met in the regular
> season, then the championship game, and then, through come bizzare and
> inexplicable twist were paired for a bowl. So, it's possible, but not
> at all likely.

Won't divisions mean that if Miami and FSU were in the same division that
there's no way they'd play in the championship game? And if they *aren't*
in the same division then they won't play each other in the regular season?

And given the current BCS situation, there's no way they could meet in the
conference championship game *and* in a bowl since the winner is going to a
BCS bowl against a foe from some other conference.

I'm pretty sure there's no way it can happen that they'd meet three times.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 16:55:04
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Funny story for Donnie Barnes -

When I moved to Tallahassee last year - I searched out a computer club
and went to the meeting. Everybody had name tags on. This one guy had a
"Donnie Barnes" name tag on and I went over to him and struck up a
conversation thinking that I knew him. He looked at me funny - but was
being polite and he treated me like a long lost friend. We talked about
20 minutes - then I said - I will "see" you later on the newsgroup. I
meant this newsgroup - he thought I meant the "computer club" newsgroup.
To my surprise - you two were not the same person - I had assumed way
too much.

Oh well - I guess it wasn't that funny after all.

Harry


28 Feb 2005 16:55:25
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Hi -

This is not a duke versus unc thing - all of the schools line up a
string of cupcakes in the beginning of the season to look good. UNC
plays other cupcakes. Duke does too. Duke also played Texas and a big 10
challenge team - but I am not defending Duke - I am saying "all" teams
line up cupcakes.
Even lower Division I cupcakes line up a string of even littler cupcakes
- cupcakettes.
Georgetown does - Clemson does - UMD does - name a school and just add
"does."

I am in favor of a "home and home" ACC schedule. You do not have to
change it "because of the football expansion." You would have 22 ACC
games plus 8 cupcakes to fill up the schedule - what is the maximum you
are allowed anyway?

So the football powers get their day in the ACC sun - and the basketball
powers get to keep their "round robin thingy" if they are willing to cut
down on the cupcakes.

As of now - the ACC gives their guaranteed seed in the NCAA to the
tourney champ - and in the tourney - everyone has a chance regardless
their schedule. Meanwhile UNC should take down those pretend banners :-)

Meanwhile UNC better not get too pompous too soon. They haven't won
anything yet - and they have lost 15 out of 17 to Duke - "you are not
our rival" - with a record like that. I truly hope they win the NCAA
championship - if duke or wake doesn't :-)

Harry


28 Feb 2005 21:45:27
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, Harry Everhart wrote:
> Sure is possible - just suppose FSU plays Miami for the first game of
> the season. FSU wins by 1.

Unlikely, though possible. They won't be scheduling each other any longer.
Not that they can't, but I don't think they will...

> Then Miami runs the table and wins their half of the ACC and FSU runs
> the table and winds their half of the ACC. If Miami and FSU are not put
> in the same division (then say VT instead of Miami.) So now - FSU goes
> to the ACC champ game undefeated - and Miami goes in with a one point
> loss to FSU.
> In the ACC champ game - Miami beats FSU when FSU misses a wide right
> kick.
> The media is going nuts over the two one-point games and they want a
> rematch. The rest of the nation has at least one or two losses. The
> media pairs them up again.
> So Miami and FSU are ranked number 1 and number 2 in the BCS poll.
> Therefore Miami and FSU play for a third time in the BCS bowl in one
> season.
> If you think this is unlikely - in 1996 - FSU beat UF in the last game
> of the year. They were then matched again in the Sugar Bowl just five
> weeks later in New Orleans. FSU won the first one - UF won the second
> one and the national championship.
> Also - my memory is short but didn't FSU lose twice to Miami in 2003?
> Maybe these two teams are just pushing your "round robin thingy" to an
> extreme :-)
> Since Miami and FSU are the cream of the ACC - it stands to reason they
> will meet again in the ACC championship several times - and could be in
> the BCS game also.
> Three times in one season.

It doesn't seem likely that the BCS system would have them 1 and 2 if one
of them just lost. They put more weight on later games *and* they still
let one poll be involved, if I'm not mistaken.

So while it may be *possible*, it's not very likely. Especially not if
predicated on schools scheduling each other OOC.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 22:08:56
George W. Harris
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:

:On Mon, 28 Feb, Brian wrote:
: > I suppose 2 teams could meet three times if they met in the regular
: > season, then the championship game, and then, through come bizzare and
: > inexplicable twist were paired for a bowl. So, it's possible, but not
: > at all likely.
:
:Won't divisions mean that if Miami and FSU were in the same division that
:there's no way they'd play in the championship game? And if they *aren't*
:in the same division then they won't play each other in the regular season?

No. Each team in the Swofford's Folly division
will play three teams in the Lowered Standards division
each year. In fact, each team in the Swofford's Folly
division will have one team in the Lowered Standards
division they'll play every year, and will play two of the
other five teams each year on a rotating basis.

Bets Miami and Florida State are in different
divisions but are each other's partners.

:--Donnie

--
e^(i*pi)+1=0

George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.


28 Feb 2005 21:54:44
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Mon, 28 Feb, George W Harris wrote:
> This year the tourney format really favors the top
> five, and, to a lesser extent, the top three. Six through
> eleven would have to win four games to win the tourney
> (ain't gonna happen). On Friday, the top three seeds
> play against teams that played the day before, while four
> and five have to slug it out fresh, so the winner of the
> four-five game is likely to be more tired for the match-up
> against one.

Damn, I hadn't even thought of that top three thing. That's getting too
biased, IMHO.

Have they said what the plan is for when we have twelve teams? Surely the
bottom eight teams don't play on day one? I guess then we don't have that
extra help for the top three like this year, though...all of the top four
will be playing "tired" teams.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


28 Feb 2005 22:45:15
George W. Harris
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:

:Have they said what the plan is for when we have twelve teams? Surely the
:bottom eight teams don't play on day one?

They surely do.

:I guess then we don't have that
:extra help for the top three like this year, though...all of the top four
:will be playing "tired" teams.

--
Want to help fund terrorism? Drive an SUV.

George W. Harris For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.


28 Feb 2005 18:21:36
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:
> Unlikely, though possible. They won't be scheduling each other any longer.
> Not that they can't, but I don't think they will...

Even though Miami and FSU will probably be in separate halves of the ACC
football thing - they will still play each other every year. Stopping
the Miami/FSU series would be the equivalent of stopping the Duke/UNC
hoops series. It will never happen - even though Miami beats us more
than we beat them. He is what it will say on Bobby Bowden's tombstone -
"He had to play Miami."


28 Feb 2005 18:24:13
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

> No. Each team in the Swofford's Folly division
> will play three teams in the Lowered Standards division
> each year. In fact, each team in the Swofford's Folly
> division will have one team in the Lowered Standards
> division they'll play every year, and will play two of the
> other five teams each year on a rotating basis.
>
> Bets Miami and Florida State are in different
> divisions but are each other's partners.

George is right - the way I read it - FSU and Miami will be in different
divisions - but still play each other in the regular season. So FSU gets
two chances to lose to Miami :-)
Harry


28 Feb 2005 23:24:43
Mark Foskey
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Harry Everhart wrote:
> Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com> wrote:
>
>>Oh come on. While the ACC tournament *may* help decide who was better
>>between teams that finished neck-and-neck in the conference but had
>>different schedules, it won't say much more than that. I mean, if Maryland
>>gets hot and wins it, that won't mean the regular season was moot and
>>Maryland was the best team in the conference. Looking at performances,
>>it's quite obvious that title can *only* go to UNC, Wake, or Duke. Sure,
>>it could be the ACC tourney that defines *that*, but that's all.
>>Donnie
>
>
> When the AD's get together - they decide what counts and what doesn't.
> And right now the AD's decided that the ACC Champion Crown goes to the
> winner of the ACC Tournament. As usual - UNC fans want another fake
> "regular season champion banner" now that they are winning a bit.

Donnie's point was that the regular season is a more reliable indicator
of which team is the best. The ADs could vote to give the championship
to the team with the best-looking uniforms, but that wouldn't make them
the best team.

> I am also tired of people crying about not playing home and home anymore
> with all the teams. The ACC can still do that. With 12 teams - that
> would be 22 games for everyone to play everyone twice. They could still
> do that and play six cupcakes.

A 22-game conference schedule would be bad for recruiting and bad for
fans. It's not the cupcakes that we'd miss, but the UNC-UK and
Wake-Illinois games.

> will bring tons of money to the conference. I do not see any "basketball
> powers" like UNC - Duke - Wake - UMD - willing to give back their share.

Well, UNC and Duke were eager to forgo their share when that was really
an option. But it would be silly to expect them to turn down the money
when they have to deal with the negative consequences of the new
arrangement anyway.


28 Feb 2005 22:34:14
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Donnie Barnes" <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote

> At least it's nice to be winning again so Duke fans can all go back to
> complaining about stupid shit like what banners we hang. I remember back
> when I first started reading RSBC we were still good and this was the kind
> of stuff we heard about all the time. That kind of stuff did seem to go
> away for the most part through the lean years. I guess I should be glad
> it's back.

YSB. AYB? $1 to the suckers.

Duke doesn't get any stupid crap. We are jealous of your
stupid crap. ABC exists, but not ABD.

I actually think the RSC banners are lame, and I argued so
10 or so years ago, but at this point your lame RSC banners
belong in a FAQ. The only thing lamer than those banners
is talking about them.

--Tedward

This post will self-destruct in a fit of hypocrisy in five seconds




01 Mar 2005 05:03:26
navin
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb, Harry Everhart wrote:
>
>>The expansion for a 12 team football championship league game did not
>>cause the ACC to do away with the home on home basketball schedule - I
>>proved there is still room for that. You only need 22 games to play
>>everyone twice. What caused the change of the schedule was coaches et al
>>desiring to ruts through 10 non-conference games of cupcakes. UNC does
>>not have a monopoly on that - all coaches seem to think their job
>>depends on that.
>
>
> I like how you imply UNC even *tries* to have a monopoly on that. At least
> we'll go to Storrs and play UConn. At least we'll go to Rupp and play
> Kentucky. Our OOC schedule this season *would* have been relatively tough
> had a couple teams not been upset in Maui before we got to them.
>
> Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road OOC.
> Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22 game conference
> schedule. Too many hard road games that way. This way he gets more
> opportunities to schedule OOC games at home or neutral courts.

I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the St. John's
game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I don't know how
far in advance the schedules are determined.

It seems like K probably prefers "neutral" games and preseason
tournaments to get the team ready for the ACCs and the NCAAs.

navin


01 Mar 2005 08:45:55
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"navin" <snivan@earthlink.net > wrote

> >>The expansion for a 12 team football championship league game did not
> >>cause the ACC to do away with the home on home basketball schedule - I
> >>proved there is still room for that. You only need 22 games to play
> >>everyone twice. What caused the change of the schedule was coaches et al
> >>desiring to ruts through 10 non-conference games of cupcakes. UNC does
> >>not have a monopoly on that - all coaches seem to think their job
> >>depends on that.

Um, no. A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.

> > I like how you imply UNC even *tries* to have a monopoly on that. At least
> > we'll go to Storrs and play UConn. At least we'll go to Rupp and play
> > Kentucky. Our OOC schedule this season *would* have been relatively tough
> > had a couple teams not been upset in Maui before we got to them.
> >
> > Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road OOC.
> > Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22 game conference
> > schedule. Too many hard road games that way. This way he gets more
> > opportunities to schedule OOC games at home or neutral courts.
>
> I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the St. John's
> game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I don't know how
> far in advance the schedules are determined.

We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will get back to us
after he checks the historical record. And mostly when those team were
worth playing, unlike this thread.

--Tedward




01 Mar 2005 13:46:49
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Edward M. Kennedy writes:

> A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.

On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?



01 Mar 2005 14:01:38
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-01, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:
> "navin" <snivan@earthlink.net> wrote
>
>> > Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road OOC.
>> > Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22 game conference
>> > schedule. Too many hard road games that way. This way he gets more
>> > opportunities to schedule OOC games at home or neutral courts.
>>
>> I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the St. John's
>> game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I don't know how
>> far in advance the schedules are determined.
>
> We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,

Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.

Illinois *has* come in to Duke -- broke a pretty darn long (70+ game, I
think) nonconfence Cameron winning streak, as I recall.

Of course you have owned us since then. Since it looks so likely that
Duke will be a 2 or 3 in Illinois region we may meet again this year...and
I will confess that while I think Illinois rates to beat Duke this year
we always have a little pitty-pat going in our heart at the thought of
playing you.

--

For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for Nature cannot be fooled. -- Dick Feynman


01 Mar 2005 09:04:25
Geoffrey F. Green
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <d01rol$r5j$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu >,
"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:

> > I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the St. John's
> > game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I don't know how
> > far in advance the schedules are determined.
>
> We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
> Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will get back to us
> after he checks the historical record. And mostly when those team were
> worth playing, unlike this thread.

No home-and-away with Kentucky; just a couple one-offers at neutral
sites. Also home-and-aways with UCLA, 'til they bagged on it, LSU
during the Shaq era, and maybe Oklahoma way back when.

- geoff


01 Mar 2005 09:14:20
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> Edward M. Kennedy writes:
> > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?

Agree - why is that absurd?
Duke could play a 22 game conference schedule - I am not sure what the
schedule limit is - but suppose you would have 8 other games. Duke could
book - UConn - Kentucky - Illinois - Arizona - you pick the other 4.
What am I missing that makes it absurd? It is simply the choice of the
coaches to line up a dozen patsies every year to fatten up their
schedule to get into the NCAA playoff. They also look for schools that
will only play them at home - teams that need the money and exposure -
to bend over and take the loss for money.
Harry


01 Mar 2005 06:15:42
Brian
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Another thing to keep in mind, when you're looking at the possibility
of a 22 game conference schedule, is that the coaches and AD's don't
get to pick all of the remaining opponents. You've got one game in the
ACC-Big Ten challenge that's scheduled for you, and then you play in at
least one tournament. So, really, you would only be left with
something like 5 games that you can schedule. Plus, most of the teams
in the league promise "home and homes" several years in advance, so
that would tighten up your schedule even more.



01 Mar 2005 09:27:26
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > wrote

> >> > Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road OOC.
> >> > Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22 game conference
> >> > schedule. Too many hard road games that way. This way he gets more
> >> > opportunities to schedule OOC games at home or neutral courts.
> >>
> >> I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the St. John's
> >> game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I don't know how
> >> far in advance the schedules are determined.
> >
> > We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>
> Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
> played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.

Semi-neutral? That's like a partial orchiectomy when you've only
got one nut.

> Illinois *has* come in to Duke -- broke a pretty darn long (70+ game, I
> think) nonconfence Cameron winning streak, as I recall.
>
> Of course you have owned us since then. Since it looks so likely that
> Duke will be a 2 or 3 in Illinois region we may meet again this year...and
> I will confess that while I think Illinois rates to beat Duke this year
> we always have a little pitty-pat going in our heart at the thought of
> playing you.

Final eight: Illinois 81, Duke 69.

--Tedward




01 Mar 2005 09:37:45
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Harry Everhart" <harry@everhart.com > wrote

> > > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> > On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?
>
> Agree - why is that absurd?
> Duke could play a 22 game conference schedule - I am not sure what the
> schedule limit is - but suppose you would have 8 other games. Duke could
> book - UConn - Kentucky - Illinois - Arizona - you pick the other 4.
> What am I missing that makes it absurd?

The usual early season warm-up which isn't just:

> It is simply the choice of the
> coaches to line up a dozen patsies every year to fatten up their
> schedule to get into the NCAA playoff.

Not to mention all the whining by mid-majors who never
get to play big team. With a stupid 22 game conference
schedule, there'd be so much less OOC play that it would
possibly ruin the sport.

If you reply to tholen again, I'll slap you.

--Tedward




01 Mar 2005 14:41:50
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"navin" <snivan@earthlink.net> wrote
[ ... ]
>> > Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road
>> > OOC. Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22
>> > game conference schedule. Too many hard road games that way.
>> > This way he gets more opportunities to schedule OOC games at home
>> > or neutral courts.
>>
>> I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the
>> St. John's game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I
>> don't know how far in advance the schedules are determined.
>
>We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will get back to us
>after he checks the historical record. And mostly when those team
>were worth playing, unlike this thread.

Get Illinois off that list. AFAIK (and I'm almost certain), Duke has
never been to Assembly Hall in Champaign-Urbana -- certainly not in
the last 15-20 years. And Illinois actually hurts your case, because
if there was a "home"-and-home (I'm not 100% sure there was) it was
the United Center in Chicago (good exposure for Duke/K) and Cameron in
Durham (where Illinois actually won). I say I'm not sure because my
recollection is that Illinois played Duke in the UC in the late 90's,
but in Cameron in the mid-90's. (I'm talking about games
outside/before the ACC/Big Ten Challenge.) I'll see if I can look
this up.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


01 Mar 2005 09:57:44
Geoffrey F. Green
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <d01uve$45h$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu >,
Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote:

> I say I'm not sure because my
> recollection is that Illinois played Duke in the UC in the late 90's,
> but in Cameron in the mid-90's. (I'm talking about games
> outside/before the ACC/Big Ten Challenge.) I'll see if I can look
> this up.

Illinois played at Duke in fall of 1995 or 1996, IIRC.

- geoff


01 Mar 2005 15:07:06
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
>
[ ... ]
>> > We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>>
>> Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
>> played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.
>
>Semi-neutral? That's like a partial orchiectomy when you've only
>got one nut.
[ ... ]

It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


01 Mar 2005 10:10:20
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >> > Get back to me when Duke will even play anyone tough on the road
> >> > OOC. Hell, it's probably *your* coach who is most against a 22
> >> > game conference schedule. Too many hard road games that way.
> >> > This way he gets more opportunities to schedule OOC games at home
> >> > or neutral courts.
> >>
> >> I believe we did play at Kentucky a few years ago. Also, the
> >> St. John's game used to be competitive a few years ago, however I
> >> don't know how far in advance the schedules are determined.
> >
> >We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
> >Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will get back to us
> >after he checks the historical record. And mostly when those team
> >were worth playing, unlike this thread.
>
> Get Illinois off that list. AFAIK (and I'm almost certain), Duke has
> never been to Assembly Hall in Champaign-Urbana -- certainly not in
> the last 15-20 years. And Illinois actually hurts your case, because
> if there was a "home"-and-home (I'm not 100% sure there was) it was
> the United Center in Chicago (good exposure for Duke/K) and Cameron in
> Durham (where Illinois actually won).

Exposure or no, it was an Illinois dominated crowd, much more
so than, say, Duke in Madison Square Garden against anyone but
St. Johns. Or does Duke get dinged for playing St. Johns there?

It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
of a home game. Which might explain why the B10 challenge
game has been played there some. I went to the game where
we beat Illinois. :-)

--Tedward




01 Mar 2005 15:17:08
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu > writes:

>"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
>[ ... ]
>>We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>>Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will get back to us
>>after he checks the historical record. And mostly when those team
>>were worth playing, unlike this thread.
>
>Get Illinois off that list. AFAIK (and I'm almost certain), Duke has
>never been to Assembly Hall in Champaign-Urbana -- certainly not in
>the last 15-20 years. And Illinois actually hurts your case, because
>if there was a "home"-and-home (I'm not 100% sure there was) it was
>the United Center in Chicago (good exposure for Duke/K) and Cameron in
>Durham (where Illinois actually won). I say I'm not sure because my
>recollection is that Illinois played Duke in the UC in the late 90's,
>but in Cameron in the mid-90's. (I'm talking about games
>outside/before the ACC/Big Ten Challenge.) I'll see if I can look
>this up.

Found some more info. This page has notes prior to Illinois playing
Duke in November 1999 at the United Center in Chicago (this was before
the ACC/Big Ten Challenge):

http://fightingillini.collegesports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/112699aaa.html

Here's one paragraph:

Back on Dec. 3, 1994, Illinois and Duke played in the first
collegiate game at the United Center. Now five years later, these
two teams meet again at the site of some tremendous college
basketball games over the last five years. Duke edged the Illini,
70-65, in the Dec. 3 tilt but Illinois had its say on the return
trip the following year when the Illini broke the Blue Devils
95-game non-conference home win streak with a 75-65 victory at
Cameron Indoor Stadium.

So even though I was correct in remembering a game at the UC in the
late 90's, there was one earlier, and most likely the two games
mentioned did constitute a "home"-and-home. Still, Duke has never
been to Champaign-Urbana.

That page also mentions that Illinois' record against Duke was 2-1 up
to that point. So there was one other meeting between the two teams
at some point, I'm guessing on a neutral court, perhaps in a tournament.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


01 Mar 2005 15:18:21
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com > writes:

>In article <d01uve$45h$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,
> Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>> I say I'm not sure because my
>> recollection is that Illinois played Duke in the UC in the late 90's,
>> but in Cameron in the mid-90's. (I'm talking about games
>> outside/before the ACC/Big Ten Challenge.) I'll see if I can look
>> this up.
>
>Illinois played at Duke in fall of 1995 or 1996, IIRC.

Yeah, I just posted some more info about it -- it was fall 1995.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


01 Mar 2005 15:30:36
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
[ ... ]
>> >We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State,
>> >Illinois, Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will
>> >get back to us after he checks the historical record. And mostly
>> >when those team were worth playing, unlike this thread.
>>
>> Get Illinois off that list. AFAIK (and I'm almost certain), Duke
>> has never been to Assembly Hall in Champaign-Urbana -- certainly
>> not in the last 15-20 years. And Illinois actually hurts your
>> case, because if there was a "home"-and-home (I'm not 100% sure
>> there was) it was the United Center in Chicago (good exposure for
>> Duke/K) and Cameron in Durham (where Illinois actually won).
>
>Exposure or no, it was an Illinois dominated crowd,
[ ... ]

Red herring. You're missing the points (intentionally so?). I'll
grant that the UC is essentially as much a "home" court for Illinois
as Greensboro is for Duke. But that's irrelevant. The points are:

1. Duke has not played a true home-and-home with Illinois, as you
originally claimed.

2. Duke/K is willing to play "semi-away", especially when it has some
advantages for them, like exposure, or gaining familiarity with
NCAA-like environments. (They may have had some Chicago players on
their team back then, another reason they'd be willing to play at
the UC.)


>It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>of a home game.
[ ... ]

Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
court games for them.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


01 Mar 2005 11:31:01
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <d020mt$srv$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu >,
"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:
> It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
> of a home game. Which might explain why the B10 challenge
> game has been played there some. I went to the game where
> we beat Illinois. :-)

The other posters have valid arguments. Coach K is just like the other
coaches when it comes to lining up patsies. Even when he plays other
powers - he tries to get them on a neutral court. That is what coaches
do - they look for every edge they can get. That is why Coach K whines
up and down the sidelines at the refs. Why - because it works - I don't
like it but it is life.

But coach K pales compared to the way Dean Smith lined up the ducks.
Dean Smith did everything he could to benefit his school and team.

This is why the coaches will not settle on a 22 game conference schedule
because they lose control of the "cupcake factor." Even some posted on
here that a 22 game conference schedule was absurd.

Paterno at PSU does the same thing in football. For years he played
independent and lined up 10 patsies. It would give him undefeated
seasons and trips to a big bowl. Then he made the mistake of joining a
conference where he could not avoid better teams. So he would schedule
three patsies every year - and only if they would play in his park. His
excuse was he had to make money - but the real reason was he wanted the
advantage. So he dropped Pitt and Syracuse and West Virginia - three
rivals. PSU now plays below .500 - 100,000 people buy tickets for every
game - PSU gets lots of money.

Harry


01 Mar 2005 11:42:17
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote:
> 2. Duke/K is willing to play "semi-away", especially when it has some
> advantages for them, like exposure, or gaining familiarity with
> NCAA-like environments. (They may have had some Chicago players on
> their team back then, another reason they'd be willing to play at
> the UC.)
> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
> >of a home game.
> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
> court games for them.

You can't have it both ways. When Duke plays ILL at Chicago - you don't
call it a home game for ILL - but when Duke plays someone at Greensboro
- you call it a home game for Duke. Why?
When Duke plays SJU at the Garden - the Garden is SJU's home court. SJU
has a dinky little gym - but they only play a couple local cupcakes
there. They play 90% of their home games in the Garden.
I have attended the Duke "garden" games - and a lot of subway fans come
to see them there - many people seeing them live for the first time. But
it still has the feel of a SJU home game (wife was professor at SJU).
Most of the people in the arena want to see the local Storm beat up on
the big bad dukies.
Greensboro on the other hand is about 70 miles from Duke - and a game
there is filled mostly with Carolina residents that want to see anybody
beat up on the Dukies. :-) Duke alumni are spread out all over the
nation more evenly.
Coach K likes to load up his schedule as well as the next coach - that
is what coaches do.
Harry


01 Mar 2005 11:46:37
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Brian" <brian.dickerson@gmail.com > wrote:

> Another thing to keep in mind, when you're looking at the possibility
> of a 22 game conference schedule, is that the coaches and AD's don't
> get to pick all of the remaining opponents. You've got one game in the
> ACC-Big Ten challenge that's scheduled for you, and then you play in at
> least one tournament.

Coaches choose to be in the ACC challenge thingy. They could lobby and
get out of it. and not every team plays in another tournament.


01 Mar 2005 09:28:23
it's sam, bitches
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

>>Buckle up Sunday..

Last time you said that, you went flying through a windshield after
Felt-on fucked up.



01 Mar 2005 20:15:45
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-01, Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com > wrote:
> Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote:
>> 2. Duke/K is willing to play "semi-away", especially when it has some
>> advantages for them, like exposure, or gaining familiarity with
>> NCAA-like environments. (They may have had some Chicago players on
>> their team back then, another reason they'd be willing to play at
>> the UC.)
>> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>> >of a home game.
>> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>> court games for them.
>
> You can't have it both ways. When Duke plays ILL at Chicago - you don't
> call it a home game for ILL - but when Duke plays someone at Greensboro
> - you call it a home game for Duke. Why?

Do your reading comprehension review. We were stating that a Cameron Indoor
and United Center game pair, which is what took place, is not a home-and-home.

Perhaps you are confused because there was also a UC - Greensboro game
pair. No one would argue that is not neutral and neutral, or better put
semi-home and semi-home.

Duke also gains some recruiting advantage in Chicago, which they haunt
for recruits, by playing at the United Center. There is no recruiting
advantage for Illinois going to Greensboro.

Illinois has played Duke 6 times total and gone 2-4. The only home game
for either team was at Cameron Indoor at Duke. In other words, Duke has
not played a home-and-away series with Illinois.

--

Being against torture ought to be sort of a bipartisan thing.
-- Karl Lehenbauer


01 Mar 2005 21:36:44
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Perusion Hostmaster <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > writes:

>On 2005-03-01, Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com> wrote:
>> Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote:
>>> 2. Duke/K is willing to play "semi-away", especially when it has some
>>> advantages for them, like exposure, or gaining familiarity with
>>> NCAA-like environments. (They may have had some Chicago players on
>>> their team back then, another reason they'd be willing to play at
>>> the UC.)
>>> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>>> >of a home game.
>>> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>>> court games for them.
>>
>> You can't have it both ways. When Duke plays ILL at Chicago - you
>> don't call it a home game for ILL - but when Duke plays someone at
>> Greensboro - you call it a home game for Duke. Why?
>
>Do your reading comprehension review. We were stating that a Cameron
>Indoor and United Center game pair, which is what took place, is not
>a home-and-home.
[ ... ]

Yeah, what he said! How was I trying to have it both ways?

Let me make it clear for you. Chicago for Illinois and Greensboro for
Duke are about equivalent in terms of "homenesss", but neither is as
"home" as Champaign-Urbana is for Illinois and Durham is for Duke.
(And I've been consistent on this throughout this thread.)

And guess which one of those four places these teams have not played at?

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


01 Mar 2005 21:52:23
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Tue, 01 Mar, it's sam, bitches wrote:
>>>Buckle up Sunday..
>
> Last time you said that, you went flying through a windshield after
> Felt-on fucked up.

Apparently he learned *that* lesson. See UNC@Maryland.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


01 Mar 2005 14:17:47
it's sam, bitches
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

For what?



02 Mar 2005 01:37:34
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Tue, 01 Mar, it's sam, bitches wrote:
> For what?

For an example of how instead of passing up an open layup he *took* the
opening and scored the go-ahead basket.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


02 Mar 2005 03:01:05
navin
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Milt Epstein wrote:
> "Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
>
>
>>"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
>>
>
> [ ... ]
>
>>>>We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>>>
>>>Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
>>>played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.
>>
>>Semi-neutral? That's like a partial orchiectomy when you've only
>>got one nut.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
> significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.

That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.

--
reverse email to reply


02 Mar 2005 03:04:26
navin
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Mar, it's sam, bitches wrote:
>
>>For what?
>
>
> For an example of how instead of passing up an open layup he *took* the
> opening and scored the go-ahead basket.

That was because McCants was injured so the play was called for Felton :^)

--
reverse email to reply


02 Mar 2005 04:31:17
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

navin <snivan@earthlink.net > writes:

>Milt Epstein wrote:
>> "Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
[ ... ]
>>>>>We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>>>>
>>>>Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
>>>>played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.
>>>
>>>Semi-neutral? That's like a partial orchiectomy when you've only
>>>got one nut.
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
>> significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
>
>That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
>fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.

I made that statement based on two things:

1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.

2. The setup (e.g., where the students sit and such) at Greensboro is
more like a college atmosphere (and hence more "home"-like) than it
is at the United Center. At least, that's been the case when I've
watched games involving Duke at Greensboro (only a couple).

OK, I'll add a third thing:

3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
Greensboro are sellouts.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 06:52:55
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote:
> Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
> Greensboro are sellouts.

Milt -
Wherever Duke goes - it is a sellout. People all want to see "America's
Team." ESPN would go out of business if they didn't have Duke games to
offer. Little old ladies watch Duke games during their weekly quilting
sessions in the church basement rec room. Kids in Harlem wear Duke
jerseys daily knowing they will never see the place much less play
there. The fact that Illinois - a number one team in the nation - can't
fill an arena in their own state where a majority of their students and
alumni live is puzzling. Don't blame Duke for filling arenas on the
road. That does not make Duke the home team. I agree with you - K does
not like to go into hostile arenas like Cameron. That is the job of a
coach - to give his team every edge he can legally get. K even played up
the $30 million offer from the Lakers to his advantage. Duke promised
him all sorts of goodies for the team and for K personally. K is not a
rat - he is a chameleon - able to change to fit into the environment. In
order to start practice earlier a couple of years ago - he booked games
in Europe. When the NBA took his start players - he had to adapt. When
Boozer broke his foot in a championship drive - K found a way to win.
Harry


02 Mar 2005 12:46:49
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-02, Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com > wrote:
> Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote:
>> Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
>> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
>> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
>> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
>> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
>> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
>> Greensboro are sellouts.
>
> Milt -
> Wherever Duke goes - it is a sellout. People all want to see "America's
> Team." ESPN would go out of business if they didn't have Duke games to
> offer. Little old ladies watch Duke games during their weekly quilting
> sessions in the church basement rec room. Kids in Harlem wear Duke
> jerseys daily knowing they will never see the place much less play
> there. The fact that Illinois - a number one team in the nation - can't
> fill an arena in their own state where a majority of their students and
> alumni live is puzzling. Don't blame Duke for filling arenas on the
> road. That does not make Duke the home team. I agree with you - K does
> not like to go into hostile arenas like Cameron. That is the job of a
> coach - to give his team every edge he can legally get. K even played up
> the $30 million offer from the Lakers to his advantage. Duke promised
> him all sorts of goodies for the team and for K personally. K is not a
> rat - he is a chameleon - able to change to fit into the environment. In
> order to start practice earlier a couple of years ago - he booked games
> in Europe. When the NBA took his start players - he had to adapt. When
> Boozer broke his foot in a championship drive - K found a way to win.

I can't stand it -- you are such a tool. So much for my moratorium on
personal attacks....

--

"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just
sit there." -- Will Rogers


02 Mar 2005 07:51:47
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Perusion Hostmaster <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > wrote:
> I can't stand it -- you are such a tool. So much for my moratorium on
> personal attacks....

Come on now. I thought you had more will power than that :-)
Harry


02 Mar 2005 13:40:44
fundoc
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Harry Everhart" <harry@everhart.com > wrote in message
news:harry-C86060.06525502032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...

> Kids in Harlem wear Duke jerseys daily
> knowing they will never see the place
> much less play there.

What the hell Harry, let's call a spade a spade, eh? Cute little nappy headed
pickaninnies you mean, in the ghetto, with welfare queen mothers who suck cock
for crack, and who don't know who their fathers are, and who if they aren't
killed in a drive by will grow up to rape pure white wimmin like your fine white
Christian wife and daughter in law, we all know how the darkies are, they can't
help themselves around the white gash, once they get that smell in their big
flat noses they're no better than baboons, thank god for good white Christians
like Pastor Thomas Robb, Grand Klagon of the Knights of the Invisible Empire, if
it wasn't for him and other brave white Christians like him no pure white
Christian woman would be safe, we'd be overrun, those people breed like rabbits,
but they sure can jump, that's why a few lucky ones get to go to a fine white
Christian university like Duke and play for a fine white Christian man like
coach KKK, he's pretty smart for a Pollack, and get themselves civilized, not
the militant ones with cannibal names like shaquille, but the other ones, the
ones with good Jew names like Sheldon and Elton who can be trusted not to go
insane when they get a whiff of delicious white Christian pussy, most of them it
goes straight to their big black cocks, and who can be trained to set picks for
great white players like JJ Redick, the best basketball player ever.

Yeah, those kids'll never get to duke, but they can sho nuff dream cants they.




02 Mar 2005 08:53:43
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"fundoc" <fundocx-no-archive:yes@skycap.com > wrote:
> ..........Yeah, those kids'll never get to duke, but they can sho nuff dream cants
> they.

Mom taught me to never getting into a peeing contest with a skunk - even
when you win........ you lose :-)
Harry


02 Mar 2005 14:25:15
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Perusion Hostmaster <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > writes:

>On 2005-03-02, Harry Everhart <harry@everhart.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
>
>I can't stand it -- you are such a tool. So much for my moratorium on
>personal attacks....

I've said it before and I'll say it again -- killfiles are your friend.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 10:56:40
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Harry Everhart" <harry@everhart.com > wrote

> > It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
> > of a home game. Which might explain why the B10 challenge
> > game has been played there some. I went to the game where
> > we beat Illinois. :-)
>
> The other posters have valid arguments. Coach K is just like the other
> coaches when it comes to lining up patsies.

True but trivial -- every team that isn't a patsy plays a bunch
of patsies. That said, only 10 out of 332 teams can claim that
their Sagarin SOS is in the top 10, and Duke is #7.

The real patsy is the argument that K is just like other coaches
when it comes to lining up patsies. Go ahead, look up the
historical record. Show me Duke's SOS for the past 20 years.

> Even when he plays other
> powers - he tries to get them on a neutral court.

That would be stupid. You need quality OOC wins and
quality road wins. Close losses are probably more than
excusable.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 10:59:04
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote in message news:d021qs$59k$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> "Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
>
> >"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
> [ ... ]
> >> >We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State,
> >> >Illinois, Georgetown, BC, St. John's, Temple...maybe Donnie will
> >> >get back to us after he checks the historical record. And mostly
> >> >when those team were worth playing, unlike this thread.
> >>
> >> Get Illinois off that list. AFAIK (and I'm almost certain), Duke
> >> has never been to Assembly Hall in Champaign-Urbana -- certainly
> >> not in the last 15-20 years. And Illinois actually hurts your
> >> case, because if there was a "home"-and-home (I'm not 100% sure
> >> there was) it was the United Center in Chicago (good exposure for
> >> Duke/K) and Cameron in Durham (where Illinois actually won).
> >
> >Exposure or no, it was an Illinois dominated crowd,
> [ ... ]
>
> Red herring. You're missing the points (intentionally so?). I'll
> grant that the UC is essentially as much a "home" court for Illinois
> as Greensboro is for Duke. But that's irrelevant. The points are:

Yeah, but have you seen a game in Cameron? Now way is
Greensboro comparable to Cameron without the students
on the floor in a tiny arena. Duke probably is giving up more.
But either the crowd is solidly for the respective teams.

> 1. Duke has not played a true home-and-home with Illinois, as you
> originally claimed.

Trivial distinction, unless your thinking of selection committee
rules. But that's often a wash. The win at the Garden wasn't a
neutral site (though that arena draw better than other away
game for Duke), but that's all the credit we get.

> 2. Duke/K is willing to play "semi-away", especially when it has some
> advantages for them, like exposure, or gaining familiarity with
> NCAA-like environments. (They may have had some Chicago players on
> their team back then, another reason they'd be willing to play at
> the UC.)

That's gravy. You seem to want it both ways -- Greensboro
is more of a home game, but UC isn't an away game. I don't
see much difference in considering it a home game. I do
remember a raucus crowd at UC though.

> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
> >of a home game.
> [ ... ]
>
> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
> court games for them.

And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
it.

*Shrug*

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 16:23:52
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-02, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:
>
> "Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote in message news:d021qs$59k$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
>> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>> >of a home game.
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>> court games for them.
>
> And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
> Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
> it.

No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever calls
it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)

--

I have a cop friend who thinks he ought be able to give a new ticket;
"too dumb for conditions".


02 Mar 2005 09:11:07
it's sam, bitches
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


Donnie Barnes wrote:
> On Tue, 01 Mar, it's sam, bitches wrote:
> > For what?
>
> For an example of how instead of passing up an open layup he *took*
the
> opening and scored the go-ahead basket.

So?



02 Mar 2005 17:38:55
fundoc
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Harry Everhart" <harry@everhart.com > wrote in message
news:harry-C871A8.08534302032005@comcast.dca.giganews.com...

> Mom taught me to never getting into a peeing contest with a skunk

You had to be taught that? You must have been a very stupid child.




02 Mar 2005 12:58:30
Geoffrey F. Green
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <d03fil$k6u$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu >,
Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote:

> navin <snivan@earthlink.net> writes:
>
> >Milt Epstein wrote:
> >> "Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
> [ ... ]
> >>>>>We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
> >>>>
> >>>>Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
> >>>>played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.
> >>>
> >>>Semi-neutral? That's like a partial orchiectomy when you've only
> >>>got one nut.
> >>
> >> [ ... ]
> >>
> >> It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
> >> significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
> >
> >That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
> >fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.
>
> I made that statement based on two things:
>
> 1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
> 2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
> of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.

Duke students who want to go to Duke games will go to games at Duke.
In my freshman dorm in 1991, there were about 2 people who went to the
Duke-St. John's BE challenge game in Greensboro (or was it
Charlotte?). Why bother?

> 2. The setup (e.g., where the students sit and such) at Greensboro is
> more like a college atmosphere (and hence more "home"-like) than it
> is at the United Center. At least, that's been the case when I've
> watched games involving Duke at Greensboro (only a couple).

Might be. Can't comment. But --


> OK, I'll add a third thing:
>
> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
> Greensboro are sellouts.

North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly, and the Duke games in
Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
such as this year's game against Davidson.

- geoff


02 Mar 2005 14:00:20
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com > wrote:
> North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
> whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly, and the Duke games in
> Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
> be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
> such as this year's game against Davidson. - geoff

You are right Geoff -
I have attended a few ACC tourney games at Greensboro over the last 6
years. There seems to be two crowds there - 10% of the people are for
Duke - and 90% of the people want to see Duke lose. When teams like FSU
and NCSU lose in the early rounds - their fans stick around and cheer
against Duke.
Harry


02 Mar 2005 19:25:18
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Wed, 02 Mar, Harry Everhart wrote:
> "Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
>> North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
>> whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly, and the Duke games in
>> Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
>> be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
>> such as this year's game against Davidson. - geoff
>
> You are right Geoff -
> I have attended a few ACC tourney games at Greensboro over the last 6
> years. There seems to be two crowds there - 10% of the people are for
> Duke - and 90% of the people want to see Duke lose. When teams like FSU
> and NCSU lose in the early rounds - their fans stick around and cheer
> against Duke.

You can't use the ACC tournament as a measure of Duke fan support. They
divide the tickets up equally for the member schools, and there seems to be
a fairly even representation there, usually. Well, okay, so FSU doesn't
bring that many, but Maryland does, and the closer schools certainly do.
Even Clemson, to a large degree. So it isn't surprising that your 10%
number happens for Duke.

Your data point just isn't very valid for *this* discussion, I'm afraid.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


02 Mar 2005 14:04:22
Drew
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote in message news:d03fil$k6u$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

[snip]

> OK, I'll add a third thing:
>
> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
> Greensboro are sellouts.

I can vouch for this. With the Illini having the best season a Big Ten
team has had in almost 30 years, all of the talk around here is that
it looks like the Bulls will finally be back in the playoffs this year.
I listen to a lot of sports radio, and while they do make the occasional
comment like "Will Illinois go undefeated" it's obviously not something
they care passionately about. The Cubs, and Sammy Sosa, get more
airtime during November-March than any college team.

For that matter, I can get UIC (the Flames, not the Illini) and Notre
Dame on the radio, but never the Illini.

Drew




02 Mar 2005 15:47:52
Geoffrey F. Green
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <slrnd2c4ml.orv.djbSPAMSUCKS@localhost.localdomain >,
Donnie Barnes <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote:

> On Wed, 02 Mar, Harry Everhart wrote:
> > "Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
> >> North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
> >> whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly, and the Duke games in
> >> Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
> >> be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
> >> such as this year's game against Davidson. - geoff
> >
> > You are right Geoff -
> > I have attended a few ACC tourney games at Greensboro over the last 6
> > years. There seems to be two crowds there - 10% of the people are for
> > Duke - and 90% of the people want to see Duke lose. When teams like FSU
> > and NCSU lose in the early rounds - their fans stick around and cheer
> > against Duke.
>
> You can't use the ACC tournament as a measure of Duke fan support. They
> divide the tickets up equally for the member schools, and there seems to be
> a fairly even representation there, usually. Well, okay, so FSU doesn't
> bring that many, but Maryland does, and the closer schools certainly do.
> Even Clemson, to a large degree. So it isn't surprising that your 10%
> number happens for Duke.

To support your point, even accounting for fans selling their tickets,
I don't think anyone would argue that there are anywhere near as many
Duke fans in NC as there are UNC or NCSU fans, so it's clear that
head-to-head, Duke's going to lose any matchup. Also, in recent times
(since 1999), *everyone* was rooting against Duke because they won
every damn time out (until last year, of course).


02 Mar 2005 15:50:15
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Donnie Barnes" <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote

> >>>Buckle up Sunday..
> >
> > Last time you said that, you went flying through a windshield after
> > Felt-on fucked up.
>
> Apparently he learned *that* lesson. See UNC@Maryland.

My browser is so lame it thinks that is an email address.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 16:09:10
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > wrote

> >> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
> >> >of a home game.
> >> [ ... ]
> >>
> >> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
> >> court games for them.
> >
> > And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
> > Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
> > it.
>
> No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
> are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever calls
> it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)

I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the
reason to take some great offense at Duke playing
there instead of Champaign.

The selection committee considers it a neutral game.
I think that is stupid (though I understand why they
do it), and I consider it more of an away game and/or
not dodging an away game.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 16:10:08
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"fundoc" <fundocx-no-archive:yes@skycap.com > wrote

> > Mom taught me to never getting into a peeing contest with a skunk
>
> You had to be taught that? You must have been a very stupid child.

Heh. Well, at least he didn't get sprayed.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 21:37:26
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote in message news:d021qs$59k$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
[ ... ]
>> 1. Duke has not played a true home-and-home with Illinois, as you
>> originally claimed.
>
>Trivial distinction,
[ ... ]

No, it's a huge difference. It means it's nowhere close to a true
home-and-home. And I believe K realizes this, and is in enough of a
position of power to get teams to schedule these "home"-and-homes
instead of true home-and-homes.


>> 2. Duke/K is willing to play "semi-away", especially when it has some
>> advantages for them, like exposure, or gaining familiarity with
>> NCAA-like environments. (They may have had some Chicago players on
>> their team back then, another reason they'd be willing to play at
>> the UC.)
>
>That's gravy. You seem to want it both ways -- Greensboro is more of
>a home game, but UC isn't an away game. I don't see much difference
>in considering it a home game. I do remember a raucus crowd at UC though.

I've clarified (not changed) my position -- I think Greensboro and the
UC are essentially equivalent in terms of "home"-ness for these teams
(with a slight edge to Greensboro for reasons I described elsewhere),
but not nearly as "home" as their true home courts.

I'm sure you realize that the crowd is only one aspect of the home
court advantage.


>> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>> >of a home game.
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>> court games for them.
>
>And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
>Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for it.
[ ... ]

Just the same as Illinois playing in front of a Duke crowd in Greensboro.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 21:38:54
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Perusion Hostmaster <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > writes:

>On 2005-03-02, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote in message news:d021qs$59k$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
>>> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>>> >of a home game.
>>> [ ... ]
>>>
>>> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>>> court games for them.
>>
>> And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
>> Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
>> it.
>
>No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent.
[ ... ]

Well, I kinda did :-). But the difference is slight, especially when
compared to either's true home court.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 16:44:02
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote:
> No, it's a huge difference. It means it's nowhere close to a true
> home-and-home. And I believe K realizes this, and is in enough of a
> position of power to get teams to schedule these "home"-and-homes
> instead of true home-and-homes.

You are correct Milt. K knows he holds the upper hand - and he knows
that most schools will give in to anything to get a game with Duke. They
doubt they will win but they get the exposure and kids see them playing
Duke and want to go there. Of course they dream of a victory and instant
recognition that their coach and program gets. It is K's job to play
this to Duke's benefit - wouldn't you?

K has it up to two game a season now in the Garden. It keeps his NY
alumni happy and also gets his team familiar with the atmosphere. It
also gets him a shot at the NY talent.

Harry


02 Mar 2005 21:48:00
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com > writes:

>In article <d03fil$k6u$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu>,
> Milt Epstein <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote:
[ ... ]
>> >> It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
>> >> significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
>> >
>> >That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
>> >fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.
>>
>> I made that statement based on two things:
>>
>> 1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
>> 2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
>> of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.
>
>Duke students who want to go to Duke games will go to games at Duke.
>In my freshman dorm in 1991, there were about 2 people who went to
>the Duke-St. John's BE challenge game in Greensboro (or was it
>Charlotte?). Why bother?

Now I'm just a no good Yankee, and I sure ain't no expert on North
Carolina geography, but seems to me, Charlotte is a good deal further
from Durham than Greensboro.


[ ... ]
>> OK, I'll add a third thing:
>>
>> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
>> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
>> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
>> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
>> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
>> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
>> Greensboro are sellouts.
>
>North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
>whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly, and the Duke games in
>Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
>be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
>such as this year's game against Davidson.

Looks like that game was in Charlotte, not Greensboro.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 21:55:06
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Drew" <yeah@right.not > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote in message news:d03fil$k6u$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
>
>[snip]
>
>> OK, I'll add a third thing:
>>
>> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
>> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
>> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
>> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
>> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
>> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
>> Greensboro are sellouts.
>
>I can vouch for this. With the Illini having the best season a Big
>Ten team has had in almost 30 years, all of the talk around here is
>that it looks like the Bulls will finally be back in the playoffs
>this year. I listen to a lot of sports radio, and while they do make
>the occasional comment like "Will Illinois go undefeated" it's
>obviously not something they care passionately about.
[ ... ]

In my experience, they do get a fair amount of coverage on sports
radio and in the newspapers, but it's usually of the negative kind.
They may say they're covering it that way to be controversial and draw
people's interest, but I think the explanation is simpler: they're
morons.


>For that matter, I can get UIC (the Flames, not the Illini) and Notre
>Dame on the radio, but never the Illini.

Gotta give the Illini Athletics department some blame here -- they
haven't done the best job marketing the Illini and getting them
available as widespread as they could. They really need to jump on
the opportunity created by the team's success and popularity this year.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 22:09:09
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
[ ... ]
>> No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
>> are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever
>> calls it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)
>
>I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to
>take some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.
>
>The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
>stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more
>of an away game and/or not dodging an away game.

I see it very much as dodging a true away game. And it is most
definitely *not* a true away game. There are lots of factors that go
into a home court advantage besides who the crowd is rooting for.
Like the ability of the regular fans to attend, familiarity, comfort,
not having to travel, the entire routine, the entire atmosphere (e.g.,
when you're on a team's home court you know it, the decorations, the
banners, the signs, all tell you; most college facilities have the
fans closer in than at larger neutral courts).

What would be a non-biased rationale for preferring a neutral court?
Size? Not a factor for Illinois (and most big schools), their arena
is plenty big enough. Ease of travel? Tough, that's part of the home
court advantage (or the road court disadvantage, if you prefer).

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 17:12:37
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >> >> It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
> >> >> significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
> >> >
> >> >That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
> >> >fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.
> >>
> >> I made that statement based on two things:
> >>
> >> 1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
> >> 2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
> >> of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.
> >
> >Duke students who want to go to Duke games will go to games at Duke.
> >In my freshman dorm in 1991, there were about 2 people who went to
> >the Duke-St. John's BE challenge game in Greensboro (or was it
> >Charlotte?). Why bother?

Yeah, it ain't free, and you have to like drive off-campus.
Spoiled weiners, the lot of you.

But donut worry. There are plenty of alum in this area,
Duke employees, and even average Joe fans in Durham.
The Illinois game was heavily in favor of Duke and it was
loud to boot. Lots of drunken alums (even though many
leave the area, we have a lot more class(es) to pul' from).

Good game too.

> Now I'm just a no good Yankee, and I sure ain't no expert on North
> Carolina geography, but seems to me, Charlotte is a good deal further
> from Durham than Greensboro.

Ayup. You can't get there from heeya.

> >> OK, I'll add a third thing:
> >>
> >> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
> >> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
> >> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
> >> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
> >> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
> >> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
> >> Greensboro are sellouts.
> >
> >North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
> >whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly,

You are mistaken. Carolina > State > Duke, but we ain't
no drop in the bucket. Were you the type of student
that never left campus?

> and the Duke games in
> >Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
> >be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
> >such as this year's game against Davidson.
>
> Looks like that game was in Charlotte, not Greensboro.

That was maybe supposed to be an away-game-nice-arena
like the UC, but it turned out to be pretty much a home game.
There's hardly any Davidson fans in this state.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 22:15:44
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-02, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:
> "Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
>
>> >> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>> >> >of a home game.
>> >> [ ... ]
>> >>
>> >> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>> >> court games for them.
>> >
>> > And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
>> > Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
>> > it.
>>
>> No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
>> are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever calls
>> it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)
>
> I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to take
> some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.

I don't take any offense at it as long as the return game is at
Greensboro.

>
> The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
> stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more of
> an away game and/or not dodging an away game.

That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many, many
teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game pair. They don't
usually bite.

Hell, Pitt offered Illinois a home-and-home, Illinois took it and beat
Pitt at their place. Then Pitt reneged on the return game indicating
they would play at UC. And they wonder why they can't get games with
decent teams....

--

In character, in manners, in style, in all things, the supreme excellence
is simplicity. -- Longfellow


02 Mar 2005 17:15:05
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> Gotta give the Illini Athletics department some blame here -- they
> haven't done the best job marketing the Illini and getting them
> available as widespread as they could. They really need to jump on
> the opportunity created by the team's success and popularity this year.

Tell them to get the homer campus official liscence store
ready ahead of time. My wife was temping there when
we won the first time. They got swamped. Duke made
a boatload off clothing sales alone.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 22:37:20
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
>
>> Gotta give the Illini Athletics department some blame here -- they
>> haven't done the best job marketing the Illini and getting them
>> available as widespread as they could. They really need to jump on
>> the opportunity created by the team's success and popularity this year.
>
>Tell them to get the homer campus official liscence store ready ahead
>of time. My wife was temping there when we won the first time. They
>got swamped. Duke made a boatload off clothing sales alone.

Oh, I think the local stores are doing just fine. They seem to have
plenty of clothes, mostly shirts, all different styles, and always
seem to be busy. Recall that this year is the 100th anniversary of
Illinois basketball, so they already had lots of new things ready for
that. (OK, OK, I admit it, I bought a 100th anniversary t-shirt --
can't have too much orange clothing, after all. I did pass on the
lame ass #1 t-shirts though. Now I'm sure I'll see some back-to-back
outright championship ones.)

"Once you go orange, you never go back."

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 17:57:52
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >> No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
> >> are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever
> >> calls it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)
> >
> >I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to
> >take some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.
> >
> >The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
> >stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more
> >of an away game and/or not dodging an away game.
>
> I see it very much as dodging a true away game. And it is most
> definitely *not* a true away game. There are lots of factors that go
> into a home court advantage besides who the crowd is rooting for.
> Like the ability of the regular fans to attend, familiarity, comfort,
> not having to travel, the entire routine, the entire atmosphere (e.g.,
> when you're on a team's home court you know it, the decorations, the
> banners, the signs, all tell you; most college facilities have the
> fans closer in than at larger neutral courts).

I'll give you the familiarity and maybe some comfort. As to the
crowd factors, the thing that matters is having some mininum of
hostile or friendly cheering. Other than that, it doesn't really
matter what they are chanting or how close. Even arenas like
Cameron have not shown to have much of a difference in the
homerism advantage.

> What would be a non-biased rationale for preferring a neutral court?
> Size? Not a factor for Illinois (and most big schools), their arena
> is plenty big enough. Ease of travel? Tough, that's part of the home
> court advantage (or the road court disadvantage, if you prefer).

It's the type of game you can expect in the tournament if you
are Duke. ~3/4 of the crowd is usually hostile, and it's a big
arena. Witness the shooting at the MSG.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 23:17:25
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
[ ... ]
>> >I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to
>> >take some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.
>> >
>> >The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
>> >stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more
>> >of an away game and/or not dodging an away game.
>>
>> I see it very much as dodging a true away game. And it is most
>> definitely *not* a true away game. There are lots of factors that go
>> into a home court advantage besides who the crowd is rooting for.
>> Like the ability of the regular fans to attend, familiarity, comfort,
>> not having to travel, the entire routine, the entire atmosphere (e.g.,
>> when you're on a team's home court you know it, the decorations, the
>> banners, the signs, all tell you; most college facilities have the
>> fans closer in than at larger neutral courts).
>
>I'll give you the familiarity and maybe some comfort. As to the
>crowd factors, the thing that matters is having some mininum of
>hostile or friendly cheering. Other than that, it doesn't really
>matter what they are chanting or how close. Even arenas like Cameron
>have not shown to have much of a difference in the homerism
>advantage.

Well, if there's good empirical evidence that shows that these
semi-home courts are as good as true home courts, I'll defer. But
until then you're going to have a hard time convincing me that those
additional factors don't make a difference. It just makes sense that
louder, more clearly hostile/unfriendly places are going to be more
difficult venues. It also matches up with reports from players (they
always do these "what's the most difficult place to play" surveys).


>> What would be a non-biased rationale for preferring a neutral
>> court? Size? Not a factor for Illinois (and most big schools),
>> their arena is plenty big enough. Ease of travel? Tough, that's
>> part of the home court advantage (or the road court disadvantage,
>> if you prefer).
>
>It's the type of game you can expect in the tournament if you are
>Duke. ~3/4 of the crowd is usually hostile, and it's a big arena.
>Witness the shooting at the MSG.

Of course it's advantageous for Duke. You're missing my point.
Suppose you're K, and Weber comes and offers to play you a (true)
home-and-home. You come back and say, we'll come to the United
Center. What do you offer as justification that this is fair to
Illinois/Weber, as rationalization that he should go for it, without
him laughing in your face? "It's just as good as/better than Assembly
Hall because ...."?

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


02 Mar 2005 23:49:37
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Wed, 02 Mar, Geoffrey F. Green wrote:
> To support your point, even accounting for fans selling their tickets,
> I don't think anyone would argue that there are anywhere near as many
> Duke fans in NC as there are UNC or NCSU fans, so it's clear that
> head-to-head, Duke's going to lose any matchup. Also, in recent times
> (since 1999), *everyone* was rooting against Duke because they won
> every damn time out (until last year, of course).

Yeah, I was thinking that, but I couldn't bring myself to type it. *sigh*


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


02 Mar 2005 23:51:39
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Wed, 02 Mar, Harry Everhart wrote:
> K has it up to two game a season now in the Garden. It keeps his NY
> alumni happy and also gets his team familiar with the atmosphere. It
> also gets him a shot at the NY talent.

You misplet NJ.


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


02 Mar 2005 19:38:55
Geoffrey F. Green
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <d05dqp$lgp$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu >,
"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:

> "Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
>
> > >> >> It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
> > >> >> significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
> > >> >
> > >> >That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
> > >> >fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.
> > >>
> > >> I made that statement based on two things:
> > >>
> > >> 1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
> > >> 2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
> > >> of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.
> > >
> > >Duke students who want to go to Duke games will go to games at Duke.
> > >In my freshman dorm in 1991, there were about 2 people who went to
> > >the Duke-St. John's BE challenge game in Greensboro (or was it
> > >Charlotte?). Why bother?
>
> Yeah, it ain't free, and you have to like drive off-campus.
> Spoiled weiners, the lot of you.
>
> But donut worry. There are plenty of alum in this area,
> Duke employees, and even average Joe fans in Durham.
> The Illinois game was heavily in favor of Duke and it was
> loud to boot. Lots of drunken alums (even though many
> leave the area, we have a lot more class(es) to pul' from).
>
> Good game too.
>
> > Now I'm just a no good Yankee, and I sure ain't no expert on North
> > Carolina geography, but seems to me, Charlotte is a good deal further
> > from Durham than Greensboro.
>
> Ayup. You can't get there from heeya.
>
> > >> OK, I'll add a third thing:
> > >>
> > >> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
> > >> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
> > >> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
> > >> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
> > >> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
> > >> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
> > >> Greensboro are sellouts.
> > >
> > >North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
> > >whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly,
>
> You are mistaken. Carolina > State > Duke, but we ain't
> no drop in the bucket. Were you the type of student
> that never left campus?

Nah -- just never paid too much attention to who rooted for who, I
suppose. Just what I picked up on (well, what I tried to pick up on).

- geoff


02 Mar 2005 20:06:08
Dick Sidbury
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Donnie Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Mar, Harry Everhart wrote:
>
>> "Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com> wrote:
>>
>>>North Carolina is not a big Duke-supporting state. There are not a
>>>whole lot of Duke fans there, quite frankly, and the Duke games in
>>>Greensboro haven't seemed to have raucous crowds favoring Duke. I'd
>>>be willing to bet that not all of them have been sellouts, either,
>>>such as this year's game against Davidson. - geoff
>>
>>You are right Geoff -
>>I have attended a few ACC tourney games at Greensboro over the last 6
>>years. There seems to be two crowds there - 10% of the people are for
>>Duke - and 90% of the people want to see Duke lose. When teams like FSU
>>and NCSU lose in the early rounds - their fans stick around and cheer
>>against Duke.
>
>
> You can't use the ACC tournament as a measure of Duke fan support. They
> divide the tickets up equally for the member schools, and there seems to be
> a fairly even representation there, usually. Well, okay, so FSU doesn't
> bring that many, but Maryland does, and the closer schools certainly do.
> Even Clemson, to a large degree. So it isn't surprising that your 10%
> number happens for Duke.
>
> Your data point just isn't very valid for *this* discussion, I'm afraid.
>
>
So how is ACC fandom divided now? is it ABD or ABC?

dick


03 Mar 2005 01:18:14
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Thu, 03 Mar, Dick Sidbury wrote:
> So how is ACC fandom divided now? is it ABD or ABC?

I'd been ABD for the last few years with hints of ABC still around. This
year I'm sure it'll be ABD *and* ABC with it being in the Maryland area and
UNC being pretty good for a change (and Duke still no slouch, dammit).


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


02 Mar 2005 20:40:14
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > wrote in message news:slrnd2ceof.1to.nanae@bill.heins.net...
> On 2005-03-02, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote:
> > "Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
> >
> >> >> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
> >> >> >of a home game.
> >> >> [ ... ]
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
> >> >> court games for them.
> >> >
> >> > And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
> >> > Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
> >> > it.
> >>
> >> No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
> >> are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever calls
> >> it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)
> >
> > I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to take
> > some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.
>
> I don't take any offense at it as long as the return game is at
> Greensboro.
>
> >
> > The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
> > stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more of
> > an away game and/or not dodging an away game.
>
> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many, many
> teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game pair. They don't
> usually bite.

You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno).
Every team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois
travel to all those patsies?

> Hell, Pitt offered Illinois a home-and-home, Illinois took it and beat
> Pitt at their place. Then Pitt reneged on the return game indicating
> they would play at UC.

That's a different kettle of fish. That is scummy.

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 02:13:56
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-03, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:
>
> "Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote in message news:slrnd2ceof.1to.nanae@bill.heins.net...
>> On 2005-03-02, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote:
>> > "Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
>> >
>> >> >> >It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>> >> >> >of a home game.
>> >> >> [ ... ]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>> >> >> court games for them.
>> >> >
>> >> > And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
>> >> > Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
>> >> > it.
>> >>
>> >> No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
>> >> are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever calls
>> >> it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)
>> >
>> > I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to take
>> > some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.
>>
>> I don't take any offense at it as long as the return game is at
>> Greensboro.
>>
>> >
>> > The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
>> > stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more of
>> > an away game and/or not dodging an away game.
>>
>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many, many
>> teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game pair. They don't
>> usually bite.
>
> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe getting
> less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every team does
> this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to all those
> patsies?

So now you are calling Illinois a patsy? You Dukies do have a bit of
a superiority complex....I hope they play in the tourney this year so
Duke can have their way paved to the final four. 8-)

>
>> Hell, Pitt offered Illinois a home-and-home, Illinois took it and beat
>> Pitt at their place. Then Pitt reneged on the return game indicating
>> they would play at UC.
>
> That's a different kettle of fish. That is scummy.

They were getting a lot of static over their cheesy non-conference schedule,
so their SID was putting out press releases that they had tried to get
games with better teams but couldn't find takers. They had the cojones
to mention Illinois as a team that had turned them down, too.

--

For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for Nature cannot be fooled. -- Dick Feynman


02 Mar 2005 20:04:14
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote in <news:d05a5k$k8f
$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu >:

>>> Mom taught me to never getting into a peeing contest with a skunk
>>
>> You had to be taught that? You must have been a very stupid child.
>
> Heh. Well, at least he didn't get sprayed.

On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?

--
Q


03 Mar 2005 02:36:24
navin
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Milt Epstein wrote:
> navin <snivan@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>
>>Milt Epstein wrote:
>>
>>>"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
>
> [ ... ]
>
>>>>>>We've had homers-and-awaves with Michigan, Michigan State, Illinois,
>>>>>
>>>>>Slight nitpick to keep this wonderful thread alive. Duke has never
>>>>>played at Illinois, only at the semi-neutral United Center in Chicago.
>>>>
>>>>Semi-neutral? That's like a partial orchiectomy when you've only
>>>>got one nut.
>>>
>>>[ ... ]
>>>
>>>It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
>>>significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
>>
>>That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
>>fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.
>
>
> I made that statement based on two things:
>
> 1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
> 2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
> of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.
>
> 2. The setup (e.g., where the students sit and such) at Greensboro is
> more like a college atmosphere (and hence more "home"-like) than it
> is at the United Center. At least, that's been the case when I've
> watched games involving Duke at Greensboro (only a couple).
>
> OK, I'll add a third thing:
>
> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
> Greensboro are sellouts.

Fair enough... I don't believe that distance is that big of an issue,
especially when you're talking about THE state school in Illinois vs. a
small, private school in NC. Based on alumni alone, Illinois would have
a huge advantage, and I imagine a lot of Illinois graduates go to work
in Chicago.

The point about pro sports is a good one. California (the school)
suffers the same problem in the bay area. however with the recent
decline of the 49ers, Raiders, Giants, and A's combined with the
Warriors continued decrepitness, the Bears seem to be gaining in
popularity. Illinois caught a bad break with the Bulls finally turning
it around this year.

navin
--
reverse email to reply


03 Mar 2005 02:41:58
navin
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Perusion Hostmaster wrote:
> On 2005-03-03, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote:
>
>>"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote in message news:slrnd2ceof.1to.nanae@bill.heins.net...
>>
>>>On 2005-03-02, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com> wrote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>It's not like Duke gets to claim Greensboro isn't the equivalent
>>>>>>>>of a home game.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[ ... ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Actually, they do. I believe that games there will count as neutral
>>>>>>>court games for them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And the Illinois game in UC counts for less as a neutral site as well.
>>>>>>Duke played in front of an Illinois crowed and didn't get credit for
>>>>>>it.
>>>>>
>>>>>No one is arguing that Greensboro and the UC are not equivalent. We
>>>>>are arguing that the UC and Cameron are not equivalent, as whoever calls
>>>>>it a home-and-home is arguing. (Who would that be?)
>>>>
>>>>I never said they were equivalent, I just don't see the reason to take
>>>>some great offense at Duke playing there instead of Champaign.
>>>
>>>I don't take any offense at it as long as the return game is at
>>>Greensboro.
>>>
>>>
>>>>The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think that is
>>>>stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I consider it more of
>>>>an away game and/or not dodging an away game.
>>>
>>>That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many, many
>>>teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game pair. They don't
>>>usually bite.
>>
>>You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe getting
>>less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every team does
>>this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to all those
>>patsies?
>
>
> So now you are calling Illinois a patsy? You Dukies do have a bit of
> a superiority complex....I hope they play in the tourney this year so
> Duke can have their way paved to the final four. 8-)

Beating Duke in the Tournament is a good sign. I believe since Kentucky
beat Duke in 1998, Duke has lost to either the champ or the national
runner up, except in 2001 of course.

navin
--
reverse email to reply


03 Mar 2005 02:57:29
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Perusion Hostmaster <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > writes:

>On 2005-03-03, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> > The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think
>>> > that is stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I
>>> > consider it more of an away game and/or not dodging an away
>>> > game.
>>>
>>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many,
>>> many teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game
>>> pair. They don't usually bite.
>>
>> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
>> getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every
>> team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to
>> all those patsies?
>
>So now you are calling Illinois a patsy?
[ ... ]

That's just what occurred to me :-).

It's got nothing to do with ticket sales, or anything like that. It's
simply a matter of fairness -- we play on your home court, you play on
ours. None of this nearby big city neutral court crap.

I believe Illinois would love to schedule true home-and-homes with top
teams/major conference teams. But they run into a lot of resistance
and end up doing these nearby-neutral-court swaps (e.g., Illinois
played Arkansas in Chicago last year, this year we played them in
Little Rock), and sometimes even giving in and doing
nearby-neutral-court-and-home swaps (e.g., I don't recall 100%, but we
may be playing at Oregon in the next year in exchange for playing them
in Chicago). A lot of season ticket holders complain about the lack
of quality non-conference games on the home schedule. I can't
remember the last time a major conference team played in
Champaign-Urbana (outside the ACC/Big Ten Challenge, which brough NC
here two years ago and Wake this year).

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


03 Mar 2005 03:15:28
fundoc
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote in message
news:d05a5k$k8f$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu...

> "fundoc" <fundocx-no-archive:yes@skycap.com> wrote
>
> > > Mom taught me to never getting into a peeing contest with a skunk
> >
> > You had to be taught that? You must have been a very stupid child.
>
> Heh. Well, at least he didn't get sprayed.


Man: Oh... I wonder what other people use for aftershave lotion?


First Gumby: I use a body rub called Halitosis to make my breath seem sweet.

Second Gumby: I use an aftershave called Semprini.

Cardinal Ximiaez: I use two kinds of aftershave lotions - Frankincense, Myrrh -
three kinds of aftershave lotions, Frankincense, Myrrh, Sandalwood - four kinds
of aftershave lotion. Frankincense, ....

Another Man: I have a cold shower every morning iust before I go mad, and then I
go mad, 1. Mad, 2. Mad, 3. Mad, 4...

Shabby: I use Rancid Polecat number two. It keeps my skin nice and scaly.




03 Mar 2005 03:24:45
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

navin <snivan@earthlink.net > writes:

>Milt Epstein wrote:
[ ... ]
>>>>It's more neutral than Greensboro is for Duke, and much more
>>>>significantly, than Assembly Hall is for Illinois.
>>>
>>>That would be surprising. I'm willing to be that there are more UIUC
>>>fans in Chicago than Duke fans in Greensboro.
>>
>> I made that statement based on two things:
>>
>> 1. Chicago is farther from UIUC than Greensboro is from Duke (about
>> 2.5 hours to about one hour), meaning that fewer students and fewer
>> of the more rabid fans will be the ones attending.
>>
>> 2. The setup (e.g., where the students sit and such) at Greensboro is
>> more like a college atmosphere (and hence more "home"-like) than it
>> is at the United Center. At least, that's been the case when I've
>> watched games involving Duke at Greensboro (only a couple).
>>
>> OK, I'll add a third thing:
>>
>> 3. Chicago is not really that big an Illini-supporting town (most
>> years -- this year is different). They're more pro sports
>> oriented, and often the media there is (irrationally) anti-Illini.
>> There have been a number of times when the Illini have not been
>> able to sellout the UC (they've played an annual game there for
>> about ten years). I'm guessing that most/all of Duke's games in
>> Greensboro are sellouts.
>
>Fair enough... I don't believe that distance is that big of an
>issue, especially when you're talking about THE state school in
>Illinois vs. a small, private school in NC. Based on alumni alone,
>Illinois would have a huge advantage, and I imagine a lot of Illinois
>graduates go to work in Chicago.

Yeah, but by then they're old and sedate and can barely stand :-).


>The point about pro sports is a good one. California (the school)
>suffers the same problem in the bay area. however with the recent
>decline of the 49ers, Raiders, Giants, and A's combined with the
>Warriors continued decrepitness, the Bears seem to be gaining in
>popularity. Illinois caught a bad break with the Bulls finally
>turning it around this year.

AFAIK, Illinois is getting plenty of publicity this year, in Chicago
and elsewhere.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


03 Mar 2005 03:50:02
R. Bharat Rao
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote in message
news:d04nps$dda$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu...
>
> True but trivial -- every team that isn't a patsy plays a bunch
> of patsies. That said, only 10 out of 332 teams can claim that
> their Sagarin SOS is in the top 10, and Duke is #7.
>
> The real patsy is the argument that K is just like other coaches
> when it comes to lining up patsies. Go ahead, look up the
> historical record. Show me Duke's SOS for the past 20 years.

Thats a complete red herring.

Duke's SOS is composed of its SOS in-conference and out-of-conf.
The in-conf is very high -- Duke usually plays a couple of very good
teams as many as 3 times in conf and tourney because they usually
go deep in their own tourney.

The out-of-conf schedule also has one game fixed by the Big 10 - ACC
agreement, and again as Duke is #1 or #2 in the ACC they get a good
Big 10 opponent.

The remaining is what Coach K schedules, and he probably is justified in
lining up a bunch of patsies given his tough in-conf (+1 big 10 game)
schedule.

But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.

Bharat
rao_bharat@yahoo-nospam-this.com







02 Mar 2005 23:04:42
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >> Gotta give the Illini Athletics department some blame here -- they
> >> haven't done the best job marketing the Illini and getting them
> >> available as widespread as they could. They really need to jump on
> >> the opportunity created by the team's success and popularity this year.
> >
> >Tell them to get the homer campus official liscence store ready ahead
> >of time. My wife was temping there when we won the first time. They
> >got swamped. Duke made a boatload off clothing sales alone.
>
> Oh, I think the local stores are doing just fine. They seem to have
> plenty of clothes, mostly shirts, all different styles, and always
> seem to be busy.

I'm sure they are doing fine now. The problem will occur --
and not for lack of customers -- if Illinois wins it all. In 1991,
Duke's official store was caught woefully unprepared.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 23:08:43
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Donnie 'Diaper Boy' Barnes" <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote

> > K has it up to two game a season now in the Garden. It keeps his NY
> > alumni happy and also gets his team familiar with the atmosphere. It
> > also gets him a shot at the NY talent.
>
> You misplet NJ.

Actually, the last time I checked you were probably still in diapers,
and the top three states admission-wise were NC, NY, then NJ...

As a tech writer at a university somewhere in Idaho said, "Please check
your facts *before* posting nonsense to usenet."

TIA,

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 23:12:51
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Geoffrey F. Green" <geoff-usenet2@stuebegreen.com > wrote

> > You are mistaken. Carolina > State > Duke, but we ain't
> > no drop in the bucket. Were you the type of student
> > that never left campus?
>
> Nah -- just never paid too much attention to who rooted for who, I
> suppose. Just what I picked up on (well, what I tried to pick up on).

There is a sizable Duke contingent in Charlotte, and Duke gets
equal press. With UNC, anyway. NC State is the proverbial
redheaded stepchild, mostly because Herb needs to be fired.

--Tedward




02 Mar 2005 23:26:42
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >>> > The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think
> >>> > that is stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I
> >>> > consider it more of an away game and/or not dodging an away
> >>> > game.
> >>>
> >>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many,
> >>> many teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game
> >>> pair. They don't usually bite.
> >>
> >> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
> >> getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every
> >> team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to
> >> all those patsies?
> >
> >So now you are calling Illinois a patsy?
> [ ... ]
>
> That's just what occurred to me :-).

Just pointing out the inherent contradictions in the system...

> It's got nothing to do with ticket sales, or anything like that. It's
> simply a matter of fairness -- we play on your home court, you play on
> ours. None of this nearby big city neutral court crap.

"Other than our tradition of playing some UC games", which
is your prerogative, but don't be surprised if other schools
want in on *that* action. And I think playing some games at
the UC is good for Illinois in more ways than one.

It's not K's fault the Chicago media ignores you.

> I believe Illinois would love to schedule true home-and-homes with top
> teams/major conference teams. But they run into a lot of resistance
> and end up doing these nearby-neutral-court swaps (e.g., Illinois
> played Arkansas in Chicago last year, this year we played them in
> Little Rock), and sometimes even giving in and doing
> nearby-neutral-court-and-home swaps (e.g., I don't recall 100%, but we
> may be playing at Oregon in the next year in exchange for playing them
> in Chicago). A lot of season ticket holders complain about the lack
> of quality non-conference games on the home schedule. I can't
> remember the last time a major conference team played in
> Champaign-Urbana (outside the ACC/Big Ten Challenge, which brough NC
> here two years ago and Wake this year).

Cry me a river. Gonzaga will bite, and St. John's will even let *you*
have the "upper hand". Illinois' situation probably helps the team,
other than seeding issues. Either way you are in the drivers seat
this year -- both for the top seed, and as a lock for a one. You
could totally screw up and be a two seed. Bummer. (I don't see
much difference between the top 3 seeds. The one is a little easier,
but not all that much.)

--Tedward







02 Mar 2005 23:44:02
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote in

> >I'll give you the familiarity and maybe some comfort. As to the
> >crowd factors, the thing that matters is having some mininum of
> >hostile or friendly cheering. Other than that, it doesn't really
> >matter what they are chanting or how close. Even arenas like Cameron
> >have not shown to have much of a difference in the homerism
> >advantage.
>
> Well, if there's good empirical evidence that shows that these
> semi-home courts are as good as true home courts, I'll defer. But
> until then you're going to have a hard time convincing me that those
> additional factors don't make a difference.

I don't claim there's no difference, just that it isn't enough
to whine over. Illinois has a decided edge at the UC, and
when they win, they get credit for a neutral site.

Cry me a river.

> It just makes sense that
> louder, more clearly hostile/unfriendly places are going to be more
> difficult venues. It also matches up with reports from players (they
> always do these "what's the most difficult place to play" surveys).

Paging George Harris...George Harris, line one...

> >> What would be a non-biased rationale for preferring a neutral
> >> court? Size? Not a factor for Illinois (and most big schools),
> >> their arena is plenty big enough. Ease of travel? Tough, that's
> >> part of the home court advantage (or the road court disadvantage,
> >> if you prefer).
> >
> >It's the type of game you can expect in the tournament if you are
> >Duke. ~3/4 of the crowd is usually hostile, and it's a big arena.
> >Witness the shooting at the MSG.
>
> Of course it's advantageous for Duke. You're missing my point.
> Suppose you're K, and Weber comes and offers to play you a (true)
> home-and-home. You come back and say, we'll come to the United
> Center. What do you offer as justification that this is fair to
> Illinois/Weber, as rationalization that he should go for it,

You can either accept K's offer or not. He does not
have to explain his rational. Duke is popular and good
on a consistent basis. Do you want to socialize scheduling
basketball games? This minor advantage, and I really
thing K is "exploiting" it for other reasons, is no reason
to whine or overhaul the system.

If Illinois has to play UC games to have a good OOC, then
suck up and do it. Be glad you aren't Gonzaga or Dayton.
Imagine you are a mid-major. You don't like Illinois' market
situation. I hear you. But it isn't that bad. Jeez, you pick on
me about Duke this year..."We have to plaaaaay at the Uuuuu
Cccccc...."

> without
> him laughing in your face? "It's just as good as/better than Assembly
> Hall because ...."?

He can laugh in people's faces *this* year. It doesn't seem to
matter where the game is, either.

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 04:49:54
navin
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

R. Bharat Rao wrote:
> "Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> wrote in message
> news:d04nps$dda$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu...
>
>>True but trivial -- every team that isn't a patsy plays a bunch
>>of patsies. That said, only 10 out of 332 teams can claim that
>>their Sagarin SOS is in the top 10, and Duke is #7.
>>
>>The real patsy is the argument that K is just like other coaches
>>when it comes to lining up patsies. Go ahead, look up the
>>historical record. Show me Duke's SOS for the past 20 years.
>
>
> Thats a complete red herring.
>
> Duke's SOS is composed of its SOS in-conference and out-of-conf.
> The in-conf is very high -- Duke usually plays a couple of very good
> teams as many as 3 times in conf and tourney because they usually
> go deep in their own tourney.
>
> The out-of-conf schedule also has one game fixed by the Big 10 - ACC
> agreement, and again as Duke is #1 or #2 in the ACC they get a good
> Big 10 opponent.
>
> The remaining is what Coach K schedules, and he probably is justified in
> lining up a bunch of patsies given his tough in-conf (+1 big 10 game)
> schedule.
>
> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.

I pulled up the non conference schedule rankings for the top ten teams
according to Pomeroy. Duke is 4th out of 10 teams, pretty much average
for the group. You should be harping on the Big East teams or the Big
Ten(11) teams instead.

Non-Conf
Rnk Team SOS Rnk
1 Illinois 50.18 101
2 North Carolina 52.86 25
3 Wake Forest 52.47 31
4 Duke 51.27 63
5 Oklahoma St. 50.92 72
6 Michigan St. 48.80 138
7 Kentucky 50.01 107
8 Villanova 49.39 124
9 Connecticut 49.87 112
10 Kansas 56.57 5

In addition, here are the OOC schedule rankings for the past four years,
as far back as Pomeroy has them listed. None of them seem unreasonable.

2004 13
2003 85
2002 26
2001 16


navin
--
reverse email to reply


03 Mar 2005 00:05:37
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"R. Bharat Rao" <rao_bharat@yahoo-nospam-this.com > wrote

> > True but trivial -- every team that isn't a patsy plays a bunch
> > of patsies. That said, only 10 out of 332 teams can claim that
> > their Sagarin SOS is in the top 10, and Duke is #7.
> >
> > The real patsy is the argument that K is just like other coaches
> > when it comes to lining up patsies. Go ahead, look up the
> > historical record. Show me Duke's SOS for the past 20 years.
>
> Thats a complete red herring.

Why? Should K be a moron and not realize he doesn't
as tough of an OOC schedule? (Not that he *acts* upon
that in a way that compares to Syracuse, Georgetown, or
BC).

> Duke's SOS is composed of its SOS in-conference and out-of-conf.
> The in-conf is very high -- Duke usually plays a couple of very good
> teams as many as 3 times in conf and tourney because they usually
> go deep in their own tourney.
>
> The out-of-conf schedule also has one game fixed by the Big 10 - ACC
> agreement, and again as Duke is #1 or #2 in the ACC they get a good
> Big 10 opponent.
>
> The remaining is what Coach K schedules, and he probably is justified in
> lining up a bunch of patsies given his tough in-conf (+1 big 10 game)
> schedule.
>
> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.

Your claim, *you* defend it. Go ahead. The numbers
are out there.

Good luck.

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 07:49:21
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-03, navin <snivan@earthlink.net > wrote:
> R. Bharat Rao wrote:
>> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
>> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.
>
> I pulled up the non conference schedule rankings for the top ten teams
> according to Pomeroy. Duke is 4th out of 10 teams, pretty much average
> for the group. You should be harping on the Big East teams or the Big
> Ten(11) teams instead.
>
> Non-Conf
> Rnk Team SOS Rnk
> 1 Illinois 50.18 101
> 2 North Carolina 52.86 25
> 3 Wake Forest 52.47 31
> 4 Duke 51.27 63
> 5 Oklahoma St. 50.92 72
> 6 Michigan St. 48.80 138
> 7 Kentucky 50.01 107
> 8 Villanova 49.39 124
> 9 Connecticut 49.87 112
> 10 Kansas 56.57 5
>
> In addition, here are the OOC schedule rankings for the past four years,
> as far back as Pomeroy has them listed. None of them seem unreasonable.
>
> 2004 13
> 2003 85
> 2002 26
> 2001 16

You won't find me criticising Duke's schedule strength -- they play
some tough teams year in, year out. So does Illinois in the last
10 years.

This year for the Illini was a bit of an anomaly because it had the Las
Vegas Invitational -- three extra games against some really bad teams.
If you took the top 11 OOC games of each of the ten above, Illinois
would trail only Kansas with a number of 53.25.

--

I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90%
how I react to it. And so it is for you... we are in charge
of our attitudes. -- Charles Swindoll


03 Mar 2005 07:59:44
Perusion Hostmaster
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On 2005-03-03, Edward M. Kennedy <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote:
> "Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
>
>> >>> > The selection committee considers it a neutral game. I think
>> >>> > that is stupid (though I understand why they do it), and I
>> >>> > consider it more of an away game and/or not dodging an away
>> >>> > game.
>> >>>
>> >>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many,
>> >>> many teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game
>> >>> pair. They don't usually bite.
>> >>
>> >> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
>> >> getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every
>> >> team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to
>> >> all those patsies?
>> >
>> >So now you are calling Illinois a patsy?
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> That's just what occurred to me :-).
>
> Just pointing out the inherent contradictions in the system...
>
>> It's got nothing to do with ticket sales, or anything like that. It's
>> simply a matter of fairness -- we play on your home court, you play on
>> ours. None of this nearby big city neutral court crap.
>
> "Other than our tradition of playing some UC games", which
> is your prerogative, but don't be surprised if other schools
> want in on *that* action. And I think playing some games at
> the UC is good for Illinois in more ways than one.
>
> It's not K's fault the Chicago media ignores you.
>

I am not blaming Duke for the world's problems. As for Illinois'
marketability, that will be boosted a little bit by this season in any
case, but a *lot* if we win the title. I am well aware that you have to
have the hardware to make the next leap.

I am certainly not complaining about media coverage. That is off
the charts this year.

In any case, Illinois plays plenty of good games and doesn't really
have that much trouble getting them. We just would like to see more
against good teams in Champaign. The good teams want to play in
Chicago because of 1) a bit easier floor to play on, and
2) get their team in front of the recruiting bonanza that is the
Windy City.

I knew I shouldn't have quibbled and kept this thread alive -- Ted
has more gin than I have coffee.

--

"Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just
sit there." -- Will Rogers


03 Mar 2005 04:47:08
Michael Baldwin Bruce
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> Edward M. Kennedy writes:
>
> > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
>
> On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?

Wow, Bruce! You just love to kookdance all over the place.



03 Mar 2005 13:27:46
Donnie Barnes
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

On Thu, 03 Mar, Edward M. Kennedy wrote:
> "Donnie 'Diaper Boy' Barnes" <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com> wrote
>
>> > K has it up to two game a season now in the Garden. It keeps his NY
>> > alumni happy and also gets his team familiar with the atmosphere. It
>> > also gets him a shot at the NY talent.
>>
>> You misplet NJ.
>
> Actually, the last time I checked you were probably still in diapers,
> and the top three states admission-wise were NC, NY, then NJ...
>
> As a tech writer at a university somewhere in Idaho said, "Please check
> your facts *before* posting nonsense to usenet."

Dammit. Broke my line. That's what I get for fishing only for the small
ones. Gotta have confidence and *expect* to catch the big ones. *sigh*


--Donnie

--
Donnie Barnes http://www.donniebarnes.com 879. V.


03 Mar 2005 10:15:58
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Perusion Hostmaster" <nanae@nanae.perusion.com > wrote

> In any case, Illinois plays plenty of good games and doesn't really
> have that much trouble getting them. We just would like to see more
> against good teams in Champaign. The good teams want to play in
> Chicago because of 1) a bit easier floor to play on, and
> 2) get their team in front of the recruiting bonanza that is the
> Windy City.

Can someone please explain what the problem is? That
is win-win for Illinois (and the other team too!).

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 10:39:29
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Donnie Barnes" <djbSPAMSUCKS@donniebarnes.com > wrote

> >> > K has it up to two game a season now in the Garden. It keeps his NY
> >> > alumni happy and also gets his team familiar with the atmosphere. It
> >> > also gets him a shot at the NY talent.
> >>
> >> You misplet NJ.
> >
> > Actually, the last time I checked you were probably still in diapers,
> > and the top three states admission-wise were NC, NY, then NJ...
> >
> > As a tech writer at a university somewhere in Idaho said, "Please check
> > your facts *before* posting nonsense to usenet."
>
> Dammit. Broke my line. That's what I get for fishing only for the small
> ones. Gotta have confidence and *expect* to catch the big ones. *sigh*

You broke my line too. I need to quit fishing in the
same pond as you.

--Tedward




01 Mar 2005 16:13:29
Kubez
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote in
news:d01rol$r5j$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu:

> Um, no. A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
>

Yeah, 11 road games would throw the rat's back outta wack again.


03 Mar 2005 15:58:14
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
[ ... ]
>> >>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many,
>> >>> many teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game
>> >>> pair. They don't usually bite.
>> >>
>> >> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
>> >> getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every
>> >> team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to
>> >> all those patsies?
>> >
>> >So now you are calling Illinois a patsy?
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> That's just what occurred to me :-).
>
>Just pointing out the inherent contradictions in the system...

The only contradiction here is you calling playing Illinois in Chicago
a home-and-home.


>> It's got nothing to do with ticket sales, or anything like that. It's
>> simply a matter of fairness -- we play on your home court, you play on
>> ours. None of this nearby big city neutral court crap.
>
>"Other than our tradition of playing some UC games", which is your
>prerogative, but don't be surprised if other schools want in on
>*that* action. And I think playing some games at the UC is good for
>Illinois in more ways than one.

Hey, we have no problem with playing games up at the UC -- they're
fun, and there are indeed a lot of advantages for Illinois. We've
been playing at least one a year up there for at least ten years now.
And if that's what it takes to get more big name teams on the
schedule, fine. We're perfectly happy to trade nearby-neutral-court
games with them. It's just a little different when the other teams
want to trade that with a game on their home court.

Some of the problem with that has nothing to do with its inherent
unfairness. It has to do with the fact that it's so rare to get big
name teams to come to Assembly Hall, where the most loyal fans -- many
of whom can't make it up to Chicago -- would be able to see them.


>It's not K's fault the Chicago media ignores you.
[ ... ]

No one said it was. That was just a peripheral issue that happened to
come up in this discussion.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


03 Mar 2005 16:10:25
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
>
>> >> Gotta give the Illini Athletics department some blame here -- they
>> >> haven't done the best job marketing the Illini and getting them
>> >> available as widespread as they could. They really need to jump on
>> >> the opportunity created by the team's success and popularity this year.
>> >
>> >Tell them to get the homer campus official liscence store ready ahead
>> >of time. My wife was temping there when we won the first time. They
>> >got swamped. Duke made a boatload off clothing sales alone.
>>
>> Oh, I think the local stores are doing just fine. They seem to have
>> plenty of clothes, mostly shirts, all different styles, and always
>> seem to be busy.
>
>I'm sure they are doing fine now. The problem will occur --
>and not for lack of customers -- if Illinois wins it all. In 1991,
>Duke's official store was caught woefully unprepared.

Well, I guess it's a little hard to prepare for that. You basically
have to bite the bullet and make some ahead of time -- or, at least,
get everything geared up for making some very quickly -- which runs
the risk of wasted expense should it not come to pass.

FWIW, there are several stores in town that sell these kinds of
things, so it wouldn't just be the official store. And it might turn
out to be more of a problem in a big market like Chicago.

Do they sell championship T-shirts at the Final Four right after the
title game is over? For that they'd obviously have to have shirts for
both of the teams. Guess they ship the losers to some third world
country.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


03 Mar 2005 17:16:13
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote in
[ ... ]
>> >> What would be a non-biased rationale for preferring a neutral
>> >> court? Size? Not a factor for Illinois (and most big schools),
>> >> their arena is plenty big enough. Ease of travel? Tough, that's
>> >> part of the home court advantage (or the road court disadvantage,
>> >> if you prefer).
>> >
>> >It's the type of game you can expect in the tournament if you are
>> >Duke. ~3/4 of the crowd is usually hostile, and it's a big arena.
>> >Witness the shooting at the MSG.
>>
>> Of course it's advantageous for Duke. You're missing my point.
>> Suppose you're K, and Weber comes and offers to play you a (true)
>> home-and-home. You come back and say, we'll come to the United
>> Center. What do you offer as justification that this is fair to
>> Illinois/Weber, as rationalization that he should go for it,
>
>You can either accept K's offer or not. He does not have to explain
>his rational.

So there is no rationale. Which means you're effectively admitting
that there is enough difference to not consider it a home-and-home.
Thank you.

> Duke is popular and good on a consistent basis. Do
>you want to socialize scheduling basketball games? This minor
>advantage, and I really thing K is "exploiting" it for other reasons,
>is no reason to whine or overhaul the system.
[ ... ]

Huh? Where do you get this from? You're reading way too much into
this. No one's whining or talking about overhauling the system.
We're simply correcting one Duke fan's mistaken belief about what
constitutes a home-and-home.


>> without
>> him laughing in your face? "It's just as good as/better than Assembly
>> Hall because ...."?
>
>He can laugh in people's faces *this* year. It doesn't seem to
>matter where the game is, either.

Well, hopefully Illinois can continue their ascendency, and then
they'll be able to get teams to do these neutral-home exchanges (and
even call them home-and-homes) :-).

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


03 Mar 2005 12:48:24
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >> >>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many,
> >> >>> many teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game
> >> >>> pair. They don't usually bite.
> >> >>
> >> >> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
> >> >> getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every
> >> >> team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to
> >> >> all those patsies?
> >> >
> >> >So now you are calling Illinois a patsy?
> >> [ ... ]
> >>
> >> That's just what occurred to me :-).
> >
> >Just pointing out the inherent contradictions in the system...

No refutation of the point that Illinois doesn't do some
genuine home-and-homes for their own reasons.

> The only contradiction here is you calling playing Illinois in Chicago
> a home-and-home.

No. For all practical porpoises, it's an away game for Duke
and a home game for Illinois. Even penguins know that.

When looking at Coach K's scheduling -- the original context --
I can either classify this game as home, neutral or away. Away
sounds good to me. If you want to add finer granularity than
neutral -- > away, such "almost away", feel free. Just note that
it is a dinstinction not normally made.

And I concede that the NCAA idiots call it a neutral game and
we all know that's idiotic.

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 12:55:33
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

In article <Xns960C7232B93CBKubez@66.26.32.9 >,
Kubez <president@whitehouse.gov > wrote:
> > Um, no. A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> Yeah, 11 road games would throw the rat's back outta wack again.

I agree with you. K has an advantage and he uses it. Power unused is
power wasted. K knows "built it and they will come." He built the
program and people come to worship at the "temple of Cameron."

It is the job of a coach to use every legal advantage. Face it - K knows
how to do it. I hate the way he rides the refs - I do not like him
cussing up a storm - I think he could be above that - but he is a
pragmatist. What works - works.

K will change his color as the game changes.

11 road games would throw his back out of wack again - point well taken.
Sometimes a back injury is just a back injury - sometimes a cigar is
just a cigar - sometimes a shotgun is a substitute for "you know."

You have to agree the "$30 million Laker fiasco" was worked to
perfection. He will "spend that capital" for years to come.

For his opponents and rivals - like Gary Williams - it makes it all the
sweeter when you beat him.

Enjoy the 21-4 "down year" at Duke.

Harry


03 Mar 2005 12:56:03
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote

> >> >> Gotta give the Illini Athletics department some blame here -- they
> >> >> haven't done the best job marketing the Illini and getting them
> >> >> available as widespread as they could. They really need to jump on
> >> >> the opportunity created by the team's success and popularity this year.
> >> >
> >> >Tell them to get the homer campus official liscence store ready ahead
> >> >of time. My wife was temping there when we won the first time. They
> >> >got swamped. Duke made a boatload off clothing sales alone.
> >>
> >> Oh, I think the local stores are doing just fine. They seem to have
> >> plenty of clothes, mostly shirts, all different styles, and always
> >> seem to be busy.
> >
> >I'm sure they are doing fine now. The problem will occur --
> >and not for lack of customers -- if Illinois wins it all. In 1991,
> >Duke's official store was caught woefully unprepared.
>
> Well, I guess it's a little hard to prepare for that. You basically
> have to bite the bullet and make some ahead of time -- or, at least,
> get everything geared up for making some very quickly -- which runs
> the risk of wasted expense should it not come to pass.
>
> FWIW, there are several stores in town that sell these kinds of
> things, so it wouldn't just be the official store. And it might turn
> out to be more of a problem in a big market like Chicago.

There were people calling in from all over the country.
Yeah, they could have gone to some sporting goods
store that had a minimum selection of Duke stuff...
And how much Duke stuff is stocked in Seattle?

> Do they sell championship T-shirts at the Final Four right after the
> title game is over? For that they'd obviously have to have shirts for
> both of the teams. Guess they ship the losers to some third world
> country.

Probably some bootlegs. I bought a (surprisingly high
quality) T-shirt at Duke's bonfire in '91. They guy selling
them said he had to bribe the few cops he saw with
a shirt.

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 13:00:42
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu > wrote in message news:d07got$q5i$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> "Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com> writes:
>
> >"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote in
> [ ... ]
> >> >> What would be a non-biased rationale for preferring a neutral
> >> >> court? Size? Not a factor for Illinois (and most big schools),
> >> >> their arena is plenty big enough. Ease of travel? Tough, that's
> >> >> part of the home court advantage (or the road court disadvantage,
> >> >> if you prefer).
> >> >
> >> >It's the type of game you can expect in the tournament if you are
> >> >Duke. ~3/4 of the crowd is usually hostile, and it's a big arena.
> >> >Witness the shooting at the MSG.
> >>
> >> Of course it's advantageous for Duke. You're missing my point.
> >> Suppose you're K, and Weber comes and offers to play you a (true)
> >> home-and-home. You come back and say, we'll come to the United
> >> Center. What do you offer as justification that this is fair to
> >> Illinois/Weber, as rationalization that he should go for it,
> >
> >You can either accept K's offer or not. He does not have to explain
> >his rational.
>
> So there is no rationale. Which means you're effectively admitting
> that there is enough difference to not consider it a home-and-home.
> Thank you.

Actually, I've explained his rational for you. He doesn't
need "justification".

> > Duke is popular and good on a consistent basis. Do
> >you want to socialize scheduling basketball games? This minor
> >advantage, and I really thing K is "exploiting" it for other reasons,
> >is no reason to whine or overhaul the system.
> [ ... ]
>
> Huh? Where do you get this from? You're reading way too much into
> this. No one's whining or talking about overhauling the system.
> We're simply correcting one Duke fan's mistaken belief about what
> constitutes a home-and-home.

Strictly speaking, it isn't. When countering the claim that Coach
K only plays tough games at Cameron, it counts.

> >> without
> >> him laughing in your face? "It's just as good as/better than Assembly
> >> Hall because ...."?
> >
> >He can laugh in people's faces *this* year. It doesn't seem to
> >matter where the game is, either.
>
> Well, hopefully Illinois can continue their ascendency, and then
> they'll be able to get teams to do these neutral-home exchanges (and
> even call them home-and-homes) :-).

They certainly won't call them Champaign-Champaigns.

--Tedward




03 Mar 2005 20:26:40
Art Deco
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za > wrote:

> Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> > Edward M. Kennedy writes:
> >
> > > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> >
> > On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?
>
> Wow, Bruce! You just love to kookdance all over the place.

Tholenator(tm) is a ramblin' kinda guy, he passes out bricks to
everyone he meets.

--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler

"a photon can travel faster than light when it is not excited"
"Ions are attracted to IRON"
"The dense ions in the ionosphere are simulating a
much higher gravitational pull to earth."
-- Alexa Cameron demonstrates her 200+ alien-implanted IQ

"I really don't care too much for humans"
"Just think of all the fun watching them from above while they
dance their kooker-step on their burning planet ..."
-- Chuckweasel Bohnehead's delusional non-human self-image


04 Mar 2005 07:38:39
Michael Baldwin Bruce
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Bruce AKA Art Deco wrote:
> Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za> wrote:
>
> > Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> > > Edward M. Kennedy writes:
> > >
> > > > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> > >
> > > On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?
> >
> > Wow, Bruce! You just love to kookdance all over the place.
>
> Tholenator(tm) is a ramblin' kinda guy, he passes out bricks to
> everyone he meets.

I wonder what he does instead of bootskooting? Bricklaying?

> --
> Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
>
> "a photon can travel faster than light when it is not excited"
> "Ions are attracted to IRON"
> "The dense ions in the ionosphere are simulating a
> much higher gravitational pull to earth."
> -- Alexa Cameron demonstrates her 200+ alien-implanted IQ
>
> "I really don't care too much for humans"
> "Just think of all the fun watching them from above while they
> dance their kooker-step on their burning planet ..."
> -- Chuckweasel Bohnehead's delusional non-human self-image



04 Mar 2005 20:15:19
Art Deco
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za > wrote:

> Bruce AKA Art Deco wrote:
> > Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za> wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> > > > Edward M. Kennedy writes:
> > > >
> > > > > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> > > >
> > > > On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?
> > >
> > > Wow, Bruce! You just love to kookdance all over the place.
> >
> > Tholenator(tm) is a ramblin' kinda guy, he passes out bricks to
> > everyone he meets.
>
> I wonder what he does instead of bootskooting? Bricklaying?

He writes professional papers about the developments he has achieved in
digestor scripts. Not sure where he gets them published, however.

--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler

"a photon can travel faster than light when it is not excited"
"Ions are attracted to IRON"
"The dense ions in the ionosphere are simulating a
much higher gravitational pull to earth."
-- Alexa Cameron demonstrates her 200+ alien-implanted IQ

"I really don't care too much for humans"
"Just think of all the fun watching them from above while they
dance their kooker-step on their burning planet ..."
-- Chuckweasel Bohnehead's delusional non-human self-image


05 Mar 2005 21:44:55
R. Bharat Rao
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > wrote in message
news:d06615$u97$1@gargoyle.oit.duke.edu...
> "R. Bharat Rao" <rao_bharat@yahoo-nospam-this.com> wrote
>> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
>> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.
>
> Your claim, *you* defend it. Go ahead. The numbers
> are out there.

Your flow of logic was "Look at Duke's SoS, hence Duke does not
schedule patsies"

I pointed out the flaw in *YOUR* argument. No claims at my end,
simply pointing out that your simplistic argument is incorrect.

Bharat




05 Mar 2005 21:52:20
R. Bharat Rao
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win


"navin" <snivan@earthlink.net > wrote in message
news:SHwVd.4579$wy3.742@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
>> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.
>
> I pulled up the non conference schedule rankings for the top ten teams
> according to Pomeroy. Duke is 4th out of 10 teams, pretty much average
> for the group. You should be harping on the Big East teams or the Big
> Ten(11) teams instead.
>
> Non-Conf
> Rnk Team SOS Rnk
> 1 Illinois 50.18 101
> 2 North Carolina 52.86 25
> 3 Wake Forest 52.47 31
> 4 Duke 51.27 63
> 5 Oklahoma St. 50.92 72
> 6 Michigan St. 48.80 138
> 7 Kentucky 50.01 107
> 8 Villanova 49.39 124
> 9 Connecticut 49.87 112
> 10 Kansas 56.57 5
>
> In addition, here are the OOC schedule rankings for the past four years,
> as far back as Pomeroy has them listed. None of them seem unreasonable.
>
> 2004 13
> 2003 85
> 2002 26
> 2001 16

Duke's SoS is extremely high. Duke's non-conference SoS is also quite high.
That isn't the point. The point -- at least in the original argument -- was
that
Coach K does / does not schedule patsies.

So if you REMOVE the games the Coach K is forced to play -- like the Big 10
=
ACC challenge (and of course the in-conference games), just how good is the
SoS for the games that Coach K *CHOOSES* to schedule.

That is the fundamental issue being discussed -- not the strength of the out
of conference schedule, but the strength of the games that Coach K chooses
to schedule.

That said, those numbers look quite high, and possibly Coach K does choose
to add to his already tough schedule with tough opponents. All I'm saying
is
that looking just at SoS (as Tedward did) isn't enough. Looking at OOC SoS
is close and probably good enough (if, the one Big 10 / ACC game doesn't
really have a big impact).

Bharat

PS: I'm guessing relative numbers (the ordering of OOC SoS) are enough here.
Would be nice to have an absolute number, comparing the OOC SoS with the
In-conf SoS.




06 Mar 2005 02:49:57
Edward M. Kennedy
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"R. Bharat Rao" <rao_bharat@yahoo-nospam-this.com > wrote

> >> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
> >> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.
> >
> > Your claim, *you* defend it. Go ahead. The numbers
> > are out there.
>
> Your flow of logic was "Look at Duke's SoS, hence Duke does not
> schedule patsies"

Of course Duke schedules patsies. He also does home and
aways with Michigan, BC and St. Johns -- and mostly when
they were good.

> I pointed out the flaw in *YOUR* argument. No claims at my end,
> simply pointing out that your simplistic argument is incorrect.

It's equally simplistic to look at the non-forced games only,
because *of course* a murderous vs. mediocre forced
schedule is going to affect how you schedule your other
games. It's like you're penalizing Duke for being in the
ACC.

Gonzaga damn well better scrounge up a tough OOC.

Is playing a game at UC instead Champaign really all that
relevant here?

--Tedward




06 Mar 2005 01:14:42
Michael Baldwin Bruce
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Bruce AKA Art Deco wrote:
> Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za> wrote:
>
> > Bruce AKA Art Deco wrote:
> > > Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> > > > > Edward M. Kennedy writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> > > > >
> > > > > On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?
> > > >
> > > > Wow, Bruce! You just love to kookdance all over the place.
> > >
> > > Tholenator(tm) is a ramblin' kinda guy, he passes out bricks to
> > > everyone he meets.
> >
> > I wonder what he does instead of bootskooting? Bricklaying?
>
> He writes professional papers about the developments he has achieved
in
> digestor scripts. Not sure where he gets them published, however.

In the Kook's Digest Monthly.

> --
> Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
>
> "a photon can travel faster than light when it is not excited"
> "Ions are attracted to IRON"
> "The dense ions in the ionosphere are simulating a
> much higher gravitational pull to earth."
> -- Alexa Cameron demonstrates her 200+ alien-implanted IQ
>
> "I really don't care too much for humans"
> "Just think of all the fun watching them from above while they
> dance their kooker-step on their burning planet ..."
> -- Chuckweasel Bohnehead's delusional non-human self-image



06 Mar 2005 08:35:53
Art Deco
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za > wrote:

> Bruce AKA Art Deco wrote:
> > Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za> wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce AKA Art Deco wrote:
> > > > Michael Baldwin Bruce <mbbruce@mighty.co.za> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bruce AKA tholen@antispam.ham wrote:
> > > > > > Edward M. Kennedy writes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > A 22 game conference schedule is patently absurd.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On what basis do you make that claim, Kennedy?
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow, Bruce! You just love to kookdance all over the place.
> > > >
> > > > Tholenator(tm) is a ramblin' kinda guy, he passes out bricks to
> > > > everyone he meets.
> > >
> > > I wonder what he does instead of bootskooting? Bricklaying?
> >
> > He writes professional papers about the developments he has achieved
> in
> > digestor scripts. Not sure where he gets them published, however.
>
> In the Kook's Digest Monthly.

/me heads for the library...

--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler

"a photon can travel faster than light when it is not excited"
"Ions are attracted to IRON"
"The dense ions in the ionosphere are simulating a
much higher gravitational pull to earth."
-- Alexa Cameron demonstrates her 200+ alien-implanted IQ

"I really don't care too much for humans"
"Just think of all the fun watching them from above while they
dance their kooker-step on their burning planet ..."
-- Chuckweasel Bohnehead's delusional non-human self-image


06 Mar 2005 10:49:55
Harry Everhart
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

Agreed - Duke schedules patsies - all coaches schedule patsies - that is
what coaches do. Computers then rate schedules. What is Duke's schedule
rating this year? Last year? I think the computers rate Duke's schedule
difficulty as high. What do you think?
Harry


07 Mar 2005 17:29:14
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"Milt Epstein" <mepstein@uiuc.edu> wrote
>
>> >> >>> That is the problem. *You* don't see the problem -- we do. Many,
>> >> >>> many teams have offered Illinois that home and neutral game
>> >> >>> pair. They don't usually bite.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You're right, I don't see a problem, other than Illinois maybe
>> >> >> getting less in ticket sales (maybe they get more, I dunno). Every
>> >> >> team does this to some extent if they can. Does Illinois travel to
>> >> >> all those patsies?
>> >> >
>> >> >So now you are calling Illinois a patsy?
>> >> [ ... ]
>> >>
>> >> That's just what occurred to me :-).
>> >
>> >Just pointing out the inherent contradictions in the system...
>
>No refutation of the point that Illinois doesn't do some genuine
>home-and-homes for their own reasons.

Only if you ignore all the points about how teams don't want to play
Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, how Illinois is willing to trade games
at "semi-home" nearby neutral courts, how Illinois has even traded
such games for games on the other team's home court, how teams have
backed out of agreed upon home-and-homes, and so on. In other words,
Illinois has the willingness to do so.


>> The only contradiction here is you calling playing Illinois in
>> Chicago a home-and-home.
>
>No. For all practical porpoises, it's an away game for Duke and a
>home game for Illinois. Even penguins know that.
>
>When looking at Coach K's scheduling -- the original context -- I can
>either classify this game as home, neutral or away. Away sounds good
>to me. If you want to add finer granularity than neutral --> away,
>such "almost away", feel free. Just note that it is a dinstinction
>not normally made.
>
>And I concede that the NCAA idiots call it a neutral game and we all
>know that's idiotic.

It's ironic that you call how the NCAA classifies such games
"idiotic", and you're willing to add enough detail such that it suits
your purposes -- but not beyond that.

I like what Pomeroy does with such games, he essentially adds a
"semi-neutral" category (i.e., "semi-home" for one team, "semi-away"
for the other) -- indicated by an 'n' in his data instead of an 'N'.

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu


07 Mar 2005 17:30:34
Milt Epstein
Re: UNC/MD: Another Great Road Win

"Edward M. Kennedy" <nospam@baconburger.com > writes:

>"R. Bharat Rao" <rao_bharat@yahoo-nospam-this.com> wrote
>
>> >> But saying in effect "look how tough my SOS is in the games I'm forced
>> >> to play -- hence I don't schedule patsies" is complete rubbish.
>> >
>> > Your claim, *you* defend it. Go ahead. The numbers
>> > are out there.
>>
>> Your flow of logic was "Look at Duke's SoS, hence Duke does not
>> schedule patsies"
>
>Of course Duke schedules patsies. He also does home and aways with
>Michigan, BC and St. Johns -- and mostly when they were good.
[ ... ]

Good thing you trimmed that list down from the last time you posted it :-).

--
Milt Epstein
mepstein@uiuc.edu