June 2, 201016 yr Hahahahaha.....while I don't care for this thread....your post is a great way to end the day....thanks for the laugh.......hahahaha You are welcome. I'm happy to return the favor. Your posts in the College Basketball Forum are always easily among the most laughable.
June 2, 201016 yr How was it a cakewalk? Do we need to revisit the collective RPI's of the teams they beat (two in true road games).... Duke deserved the national title. There is no denying that. But if you can't admit that going in Duke's bracket was really weak then we are wasting our time discussing it with you. Purdue was missing their best player, Villanova was an awful 2 seed and had no business being there. Baylor never beat anyone good all year, and beat mid majors to get to Duke. It was a weak bracket. Duke took care of business though and they beat 2 great teams in the Final 4.
June 2, 201016 yr 4 titles in the last 19 years is quite off the map, IMO. Come on RP, Duke wasn't off the map but they had fallen off over the last 4 or 5 years. At the early part of this decade it seemed that Duke was one of, if not THE title favorite every year. You have to admit they had some years where they seemed less invincible. And I'm about the least biased towards Duke UK fan that you will find.
June 2, 201016 yr Author Duke deserved the national title. There is no denying that. But if you can't admit that going in Duke's bracket was really weak then we are wasting our time discussing it with you. Purdue was missing their best player, Villanova was an awful 2 seed and had no business being there. Baylor never beat anyone good all year, and beat mid majors to get to Duke. It was a weak bracket. Duke took care of business though and they beat 2 great teams in the Final 4. I can agree with that assessment. IMO, their bracket doesn't matter because they took care of business when they got to the Final Four. Weak bracket? Fine, we had the weakest bracket but we beat 2 winners from 2 tougher brackets so I can dig it. It's cool.
June 2, 201016 yr Author Come on RP, Duke wasn't off the map but they had fallen off over the last 4 or 5 years. At the early part of this decade it seemed that Duke was one of, if not THE title favorite every year. You have to admit they had some years where they seemed less invincible. And I'm about the least biased towards Duke UK fan that you will find. Again, if Duke falling off consists of losing in round 2 twice and losing in the Sweet 16 3 times in the last 3 years then cool. That makes UK, UConn, UCLA, and UNC dead as they have all been in the NIT once in the last 5 years. It's all good. Just kidding with my boy Cats people, just some bantering amongst friends. Don't take it too seriously. And yes, Cats is easily the least biased about Duke while being a UK fan. I can vouch for that.
June 2, 201016 yr Again, if Duke falling off consists of losing in round 2 twice and losing in the Sweet 16 3 times in the last 3 years then cool. That makes UK, UConn, UCLA, and UNC dead as they have all been in the NIT once in the last 5 years. It's all good. Just kidding with my boy Cats people, just some bantering amongst friends. Don't take it too seriously. And yes, Cats is easily the least biased about Duke while being a UK fan. I can vouch for that. That's a great point about Duke's "falling off". The fact that 2nd round exits are as bad as it's been for the Devils speaks to the amount of success they've had under Coach K.
June 2, 201016 yr I can agree with that assessment. IMO, their bracket doesn't matter because they took care of business when they got to the Final Four. Weak bracket? Fine, we had the weakest bracket but we beat 2 winners from 2 tougher brackets so I can dig it. It's cool. I am glad we can agree!
June 2, 201016 yr I can agree with that assessment. IMO, their bracket doesn't matter because they took care of business when they got to the Final Four. Weak bracket? Fine, we had the weakest bracket but we beat 2 winners from 2 tougher brackets so I can dig it. It's cool. Weak bracket is a weak excuse. Duke was the last team standing out of the 65. No one can complain about a weak bracket because at the end of the day to win you're going to have to beat some good teams. It's not like Duke got a bye to the Final Four.
June 2, 201016 yr Author So do you feel the same way toward US History? If that were the case then my pride in country would have beeen severly tarnished having grown up during Watergate. Luckily I have a deep appreciation that the world neither begins with me nor ends with me. :walk: Everybody is different. Obviously you believe UK's history in men's basketball is as relevant as U.S. History. All we are saying is since our birth, Duke has been the better school so we don't understand what we are supposed to be jealous about. We acknowledge all of things UK and UCLA have done in their past but Duke, UConn and UNC to name a few have all had better programs than UK and UCLA since our births. But hey, history always repeats itself, right?
June 2, 201016 yr Not a Duke fan, but don't hate them either. I have a lot of respect for Coach K and think he is a great coach. The only thing I don't like about him is the whole neutral court thing and his unwillingness to play home and home series. Duke had 14 non-home regular season games. 8 of those were conference games(have to play those at the other's site), 6 were non-conference games. Of those 6, only two were true road games. At Wisconsin and at Georgetown. The other 4 were at neutral sites. I remember a few years back, he wouldn't go to Champaign to play Illinois in the Big Ten / ACC challenge. The game had to be played in Chicago. That's the only thing about him that irks me.
June 2, 201016 yr I can agree with that assessment. IMO, their bracket doesn't matter because they took care of business when they got to the Final Four. Weak bracket? Fine, we had the weakest bracket but we beat 2 winners from 2 tougher brackets so I can dig it. It's cool. Not taking anything away from Duke- they were maybe the best TEAM this season. Most talented? 100% no. They did what all champions do, and that's win games you're supposed to win and catch a few lucky breaks. Only it seemed this season Duke caught more than one lucky break. 1. Get a #1 seed which was highly questionable 2. Someone blew up the S-curve and Duke was dealth the weakest #2 seed 3. The rest of their bracket was turrible 4. Took advantage of WVU beating UK 5. Beat a cinderella in the title game Like I said, they took care of business, but business was good to them.
June 2, 201016 yr Everybody is different. Obviously you believe UK's history in men's basketball is as relevant as U.S. History. All we are saying is since or birth, Duke has been the better school. We acknowledge all of things UK and UCLA have done in their past but Duke, UConn and UNC to name a few have all had better programs than UK and UCLA since our births. But hey, history always repeats itself, right? So where is the line of demarcation? My birth year is 1963. I believe yours is about 10 years later. What about the guy on the site whose birth year is '53? He's been around to see an undefeated UK team ('54) which is a greater year than any team except UNC (1), UCLA (4 X), IU (1) or San Francisco (1) has seen. Truth is that we can throw them all in a hat and talk history/shop and come up with answers as to why "our" team is better than "your" team arguments. I mean if it's just lifetimes then in mine UK has won more conference titles, had more tourney appearances, and trails in titles by only 1 to the Blue Devils thanks to this years Duke team. The premise of the thread was a jealousy of Duke. I'm far from jealous. I acknowledge what they've accomplished. Like any fan, I will not admit to a Duke Superiority over UK just like a good Duke fan will not admit to a UNC superiority over the Dukies. :thumb:
June 2, 201016 yr Not taking anything away from Duke- they were maybe the best TEAM this season. Most talented? 100% no. They did what all champions do, and that's win games you're supposed to win and catch a few lucky breaks. Only it seemed this season Duke caught more than one lucky break. 1. Get a #1 seed which was highly questionable 2. Someone blew up the S-curve and Duke was dealth the weakest #2 seed 3. The rest of their bracket was turrible 4. Took advantage of WVU beating UK 5. Beat a cinderella in the title game Like I said, they took care of business, but business was good to them. I know this is a Duke thread, and again I don't like them, but what were they supposed to do-lose to the team in front of them? Point 3-I think that is a matter of opinion. Many on BGP picked Baylor to come out of that region so they must not have been too bad. Point 4-that is the point of the tournament. You handle your business-win and advance. Point 5-I don't care who they beat in the finals. They won it, and Butler to me was the second best team in the country last year. I think they proved that in the tournament. I think your points prove the jealousy factor towards Duke. The bottom line is Kentucky did not advance to the level they were projected to by the committee in 2010, so they had the letdown, not Duke.
June 2, 201016 yr So where is the line of demarcation? My birth year is 1963. I believe yours is about 10 years later. What about the guy on the site whose birth year is '53? He's been around to see an undefeated UK team ('54) which is a greater year than any team except UNC (1), UCLA (4 X), IU (1) or San Francisco (1) has seen. Truth is that we can throw them all in a hat and talk history/shop and come up with answers as to why "our" team is better than "your" team arguments. I mean if it's just lifetimes then in mine UK has won more conference titles, had more tourney appearances, and trails in titles by only 1 to the Blue Devils thanks to this years Duke team. The premise of the thread was a jealousy of Duke. I'm far from jealous. I acknowledge what they've accomplished. Like any fan, I will not admit to a Duke Superiority over UK just like a good Duke fan will not admit to a UNC superiority over the Dukies. :thumb: Good post Hatz. :thumb:
June 2, 201016 yr Author So where is the line of demarcation? My birth year is 1963. I believe yours is about 10 years later. What about the guy on the site whose birth year is '53? He's been around to see an undefeated UK team ('54) which is a greater year than any team except UNC (1), UCLA (4 X), IU (1) or San Francisco (1) has seen. Truth is that we can throw them all in a hat and talk history/shop and come up with answers as to why "our" team is better than "your" team arguments. I mean if it's just lifetimes then in mine UK has won more conference titles, had more tourney appearances, and trails in titles by only 1 to the Blue Devils thanks to this years Duke team. The premise of the thread was a jealousy of Duke. I'm far from jealous. I acknowledge what they've accomplished. Like any fan, I will not admit to a Duke Superiority over UK just like a good Duke fan will not admit to a UNC superiority over the Dukies. :thumb: I feel you Hatz, but with all due respect, and you know I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and you opinion, but when I started this thread it was a light hearted attempt to poke fun at my UK brethren. That being said, I definitely know UK's place in the history of men's basketball as the overall top program. However, since MY birth, as a Duke fan I cannot find anything to be jealous of UK about. Not a thing. That's for those folks thinking I am jealous of UK. Jealous of what? I can only judge things by what I have seen. Not by what I haven't seen. It's all good though, Hatz. I am sure you understand where I am trying to come from. I am trying to keep things light hearted. I do feel bad that you are in Duke/UNC land. I was very disappointed in the tone of devilsillustrated. Who would have thunk that I would rather discuss Duke basketball on a very pro-UK board on BGP than on a Duke message board. Kind of sad really. But it is also a testament to how well ran BGP is as well as the fact that despite our differing opinions we still coexist somewhat.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.