http://www.sacbee.com/2010/03/14/2606897/why-did-duke-receive-favorable.html

Without reading the article, I'm guessing race plays a factor in whitlock's mind.

He had some good points, until he brought up the race issue. People watch Duke because they either love them and want to see them win or they hate them and want to see them lose.

I hate Duke as much as the next guy, but this a quite a stretch IMO.

He's always good for a laugh.

It was a good article until he brought race into it.

He and Jamele Hill need to be shipped off to some remote island so they can both talk about how race controls every aspect of the world.

It's pretty sad that I could tell you what the article was about without reading it when I found out who wrote it.

"Duke has white boys and the white people like to watch him play so CBS needs better ratings"

Get some new shit Whitlock, your act is old.

Apparently there are a lot of other people like myself who didn't need to read the article to know his motives. Dude is a one trick pony.

I would continue to hate Duke regardless of the race of their star players. Although this year, and after seeing this, I want to see them win a few games in The Dance.

That was as predictable as white on rice.

Whitlock is a joke, so I won't even read the article.

To be honest, I can't believe Duke still garners THAT much hate. The post-season success hasn't been there this decade, as he pointed out (well, aside from the championship at the beginning). You would think early round exits would make Duke more....irrelevant? forgotten? apathetic in people's minds? Quite frankly, I can't believe UNC hasn't replaced them. For the past four years, innocent Tyler Hansbrough had been the face of the team. Granted he didn't flop, whine, or was coached by K, but to people on the outside of the ACC, he had to be up hated similarly like Redick, Paulus, Scheyer, etc.
Sure they still have regular season success, but I can't believe all the losing these past several years still earns them the most hated team in the nation. Oh well, I guess a few disappointing seasons don't excuse one of the more historically-successful programs.

You would think if it was about ratings, the committee would showcase the more entertaining teams. Duke really isn't that fun to watch. I don't really care for John Wall, but the guy is a lot more exciting than Scheyer/Singler/Smith combined. Same with Sherron Collins, Evan Turner and company, Harongody, Syracuse, Georgetown, etc.

What happens if Duke chokes early on to Texas A&M, Louisville, or Purdue (which I don't see happening, Purdue is down big time) -- then you have an entire region that's relatively non-entertaining. The #1 seed is out, the #2 seed is weak, #3 Baylor? Who cares? #4 Purdue, COMPLETELY overrated without Hummel, and so on so forth.

As a side question, how far does everyone have Duke going? I actually have them losing to Louisville in the second round, ha. I think that's a stretch. I wouldn't be surprised to see them lose to Villanova in the elite eight, or even possibly make the final four, only to get crushed by UK or WVU.

That article turned into a joke.

I think this years Duke team is over hyped. I never root for them either. Jason Whitlock just might have done the impossible, has me rooting for the Pukies a lttle bit.

Is this another ()thread?

how far does everyone have Duke going?

The committee wants duke in the Final Four. With the path they gave them it is impossible for me not pick them. I will have duke in the FF, but I will always remember the favorable treatment they were given and the absurdity of their bracket. My guess is the committee realized duke couldn't earn their way anymore, so they did their best to pave the way. I, for one, think that goal was accomplished.

Therefore, I will give them zero credit for getting there, if they do.

Bulls?

The race card is tired.

This does appear easy...but no matter what the winner has to win 4 games against tournament quality teams...and two games against regional champions. This could be the year of the upsets where all the chic teams like a WVU somehow gets upset. If the sweet 16 has 8 teams with seeds lower than nine...does that make the tourney easy?

Purdue may find the magic at tourney time....
I dont know how many of you are old enough to remember the 89 dance...but who wouldve thought Michigan would do what they did?

This is the same man who thinks Herm Edwards and Carl Peterson shoudnt have been fired from the Chiefs. This is after the next year 33 players were either traded or cut and only 3 out of 33 made another teams roster the next year. Why does he think they shouldn't have been fired because Herm was Black he himself is more racist then any of the arguements he makes.

If people really pay attention to the brackets, it isn't as if Duke has a cakewalk, you could argue (and I would agree) that they have the weakest 2 seed (Villanova) and 4 seed (Purdue) in their region, but IMO that actually makes their road tougher.

Unlike 'Cuse and Kansas they don't have a "home" first weekend and have to travel to Jacksonville and could play a very tough 2nd round game against L'ville.

If Purdue can't get it together post-Hummel, that likely means a sweet 16 game against aTm......in Houston. If Villanova doesn't live up to its 2 seed billing it could mean a Final 8 game against Baylor....in Houston. So Duke has to travel both weekends and could potentially play 2 games in the regionals in their opponents' backyard. All things considered, I would MUCH rather have Syracuse's seeding - pretty much home games the first weekend (I can't see 'Zaga travelling and beating 'Cuse, assuming they get past FSU), and a not overly difficult rest of the region in Salt Lake City (who cares about the travel when you have to fly across the country either way, it isn't as if Houston is that much closer than SLC).

The one thing puzzling is why Villanova got the 2 in the South and WVU got the 2 in the East, then again perhaps the committee didn't want to punish UK in potentially playing Villanova in Syracuse (there are a lot more 'Nova grads in New York than WVU grads), and again Duke potentially playing Baylor in the regional finals won't be a cakewalk.

Prescott wrote:The committee wants duke in the Final Four. With the path they gave them it is impossible for me not pick them. I will have duke in the FF, but I will always remember the favorable treatment they were given and the absurdity of their bracket. My guess is the committee realized duke couldn't earn their way anymore, so they did their best to pave the way. I, for one, think that goal was accomplished.

Therefore, I will give them zero credit for getting there, if they do.

You tell 'um sista.

LTrain23 wrote:Bulls

Inside joke Prescott knows what it means. I don't remember the specifics anymore (I don't copy, paste and store online post entries like I scarily believe he once did), but a few years back, at the height of his Duke hate (which seems to be coming back. YES!), prescott started up a Chris Duhon thread on the college basketball forum about Duhon getting benched by the Chicago Bulls for missing some practice time or something, and tried to pin it back on Duke. It was even more ridiculous than that, but I can't remember exactly.

He practically pleaded that the thread be left for dead at the bottom of the old Huddle. Lol.

prescott wrote:The committee wants duke in the Final Four. With the path they gave them it is impossible for me not pick them. I will have duke in the FF, but I will always remember the favorable treatment they were given and the absurdity of their bracket. My guess is the committee realized duke couldn't earn their way anymore, so they did their best to pave the way. I, for one, think that goal was accomplished.

Therefore, I will give them zero credit for getting there, if they do.

I love it. And Duke is back. Boom, baaaabbbbyyy! As the Indiana Pacer call man Slick Leonard might say

I love it.And Duke is back.

I''d love it too. My team gets treated like the #1 overall seed, at the expense of a balanced tournament.But then again,dukies are used to getting special treatment from officials.

If they choke now, they have nobody to blame but themselves.

What was Duke's resume compared to some of the two seeds?

Here is Sagarin's ratings (which I prefer to the RPI), note the first '7' seeds line up with the NCAA bracket inso far as the 1 and 2 seeds in the region. Now obviously computer rankings alone don't speak to Ohio St. and Purdue which had former and current injury problems, which are challenging to deal with, but what is important to me is that Kansas is by far the best team per the computer, but the next 5 or 6 teams there really isn't that big of a statistical difference - at least nothing that screams major injustice. Duke doesn't look so good because they have a losing record against the top 25 teams, but on the other hand they beat the teams they were supposed to beat. You can't fault Kentucky's record, but they could have easily lost 5 or 6 more games this year that went down to the wire against inferior competition. Sagarin's computer really likes Texas, so maybe UK is getting screwed after all.

http://www.kiva.net/~jsagarin/sports/cbsend.htm