They played in Louisville and Atlanta. Basically home games for U.K. that year. I'm sure you're a troll, but please bring facts
There is only one reason why Duke lost:
- Thread starter mrchmadness23
- Start date
They played in Louisville and Atlanta. Basically home games for U.K. that year. I'm sure you're a troll, but please bring facts
I've seen the fact that Duke sometimes gets to play tournament games in North Carolina brought up multiple times, but it seems like such a simple concept that even the thickest should be able to wrap their minds around it: Duke has never played an opening weekend game in North Carolina when they weren't a top 3 seed. Ever. Just last year they were a 4, so they went to Rhode Island, despite Raleigh being an opening site.
Duke did not play well enough to win, and SC was on Mars in the second half, but the reality remains that no 7 seed should have such a locational advantage over a 2 seed. Particularly when it is such an easy thing to rectify: there are four 7 seeds; if a pod is in the home state of one of those seeds, then they should not be in that pod. And I know the "scrubbing process" and pseudo-snake seeding work they do, but it never, ever works out that way for a number of factors (i.e., the overall #1 never has the worst 2, the best 3, the worst 4, etc.). Due to conference rematches, location, etc., it never shakes out like that. People, Duke fans included, can say that is sour grapes or an excuse, and that's fine. But that doesn't change the obvious logic.
Duke did not play well enough to win, and SC was on Mars in the second half, but the reality remains that no 7 seed should have such a locational advantage over a 2 seed. Particularly when it is such an easy thing to rectify: there are four 7 seeds; if a pod is in the home state of one of those seeds, then they should not be in that pod. And I know the "scrubbing process" and pseudo-snake seeding work they do, but it never, ever works out that way for a number of factors (i.e., the overall #1 never has the worst 2, the best 3, the worst 4, etc.). Due to conference rematches, location, etc., it never shakes out like that. People, Duke fans included, can say that is sour grapes or an excuse, and that's fine. But that doesn't change the obvious logic.
I had a hard time wrapping my head around what exactly went wrong in the 2nd half that led to SC shooting over 70%. This video helps. It shows every shot SC made in the 2nd half. What stands out to me the most is 3 turnovers that turned into easy buckets and also the atrocious D by Kennard. The turnovers accounted for 6 points and in my opinion, Kennard's D gave them 10 points. You all can judge for yourself.
I watched and counted thinking you had to be exaggerating. Nope, I got the same count you did.
I haven't watched yet, but how the hell did they fit in all those baskets in under 5 minutes?
It's certainly sour grapes but it doesn't mean you're wrong either. Duke didn't do enough to win, but the combo of SC playing in SC and with UNC fans coming off a win in the previous game was the reason why when the brackets came out I said this was the most concerning portion of our draw in the tournament.
We had a chance to put them away and we let them hang around, gain confidence and keep the crowd energy high/against us.
Not exaggerating at all unfortunately. I hope if Luke stays that he spends countless hours in the off season working on his defense.
No player on the court even saw the 1980s, let alone the '70s. This was Amile Jefferson's 13th NCAA Tournament game, Matt Jones' 12th, and Grayson Allen's 11th. No one else on the team has more than 5.
If the game was played 10 times, we'd have won blah, blah, blah. That's not how it works.
If Duke were a #7 seed and placed in Gboro/Raleigh/Charlotte/NY/NJ there would be a federal investigation. The internet would shutdown from online protesting. That's a fact.
OK guys -- here are the only, real two reasons why we lost:
1. South Carolina scored more points then we did; and
2. South Carolina did not let us score as many points as they did.
It's pretty simple. You want to argue about how one of those two reasons occurred, fine. But it starts to sound like a dentist drill really fast.
1. South Carolina scored more points then we did; and
2. South Carolina did not let us score as many points as they did.
It's pretty simple. You want to argue about how one of those two reasons occurred, fine. But it starts to sound like a dentist drill really fast.
Last edited:
Never looked at it that way but you're right. We'd be hearin' more about it than a Grayson incident.
There are a few reasons we lost...1. No point guard. K's teams don't do well without great point guard play. 2. This team never meshed. 3. Too many injuries and distractions.
Has to be the most disappointing/underachieving Duke team I've ever seen from beginning to end. It's great they won the acc tourney but Duke plays for final fours and national championships.
Has to be the most disappointing/underachieving Duke team I've ever seen from beginning to end. It's great they won the acc tourney but Duke plays for final fours and national championships.