We absolutely dominated Duke, yet "only" won by 11....oh, right, Sirmons was a ref! Think it mattered?!?!
Duke's 4 seed
- Thread starter Mike-D
- Start date
plumlee ran around shoving people and had 2 fouls
lee and skal fouled out
poythress had 4
humphries had 3, in 12 minutes
well, in 2010 and 2015, you can't really say DUKE had the easy draw, and UK had the hard draw when we both had to play the same team.....(of course, with different outcomes)
You mean BOTH years UK was the heavy favorite, they put teams like DUKE in our path?
Hey, let me know the next time Duke is 38-0, I wanna see UK in YOUR path. Like in 2012, the next time Duke has a team like that, I wanna see teams like Indiana, Baylor, (before the final four) in your path.
Hell, you just got a better draw than UK did with our one seeds dude. The bias is real, everyone now sees it, Duke doesn't really earn their hardware, and you're just gonna have to deal with it. UK is king, the NCAA and selection committee don't want it, and they promote Duke. Won't matter in the end.
You made the most of it, but the point for most people is that you did not earn your draw. You certainly didn't earn your draw in 2010, you certainly didn't earn it this year, and last year was iffy at best. All 3 of those years, I would have traded draws with Duke, and in fact, I think that any of the 1 seeds in 2010 or last year, and any of the 4 seeds this year, would have traded draws with Duke. And since 2010, not one single time has Duke ended up below where they were projected prior to the tournament. That's now happened 3 different times to UK, and each time, it's sure as hell seemed that they've gone put of their way to throw up huge roadblocks. As opposed to say, having a Purdue team missing its best player as your 4, or having a disintegrating Villanova squad as the 2. Or having Gonzaga as a 2. Or being the 4 in the region with the 1 seed that would actually be a 3 seed (low 2 at best) if the committee used pretty much any computer rating system besides the (worthless) RPI.
Come back here the next time UK gets a draw like that, or when Duke gets slotted 5-8 spots below where people are projecting. If you wait until that happens, we'll probably never hear from you again.
I think much of it is reverse engineered. They come up with a bracket that creates storylines and/or protects certain teams. Then they decide which "rules" they can apply in order to somewhat justify those brackets. That's why all the "rules" don't apply across the board, and there are always must-see games or certain teams in cotton candy brackets.
We had to play that team to get a chance to play you...you only got us or them
Lets talk about 2010, using Kenpom (going by both pre and post tourny data) every team Duke played after the opening round was a Kenpom top 20 team. They're opponent rankings were (post tourney) 20, 14, 6, 8, and 9. Kentucky's were 59, 42, and 8. Also, that Purdue team missing it's best player was the only four seed that year to even make the sweet sixteen. And yes Duke had Villanova as their two seed but Baylor, the three seed that they actually played was rated higher than three of the four two seeds including Kentucky's two seed of West Virginia... who Duke beat as well.
Yet you still cannot utter the words S.C. talked about. I used to like Duke a great deal. they were my favorite team after Kentucky after all the help they have gotten over the years and the Magette fiasco I think Duke is dog feces.
#1 on your KenPom top 20 opponents was Cal, a 23-10 team that was the classic example of how certain systems see certain things in certain teams that no one else does. No one was all that fearful of 8 seeded Cal, regardless of the KenPom rank. #2 on that list was Purdue- which was MISSING HUMMEL (not reflected in the KenPom rating of 14), and had lost a Big 10 Tourney semi game by 27 points. Kudos to them for recovering enough to win a couple of tourney games, but they were 0 threat to Duke or any other 1 seed.
Any 1 seed in 2010 would have traded with you. I would have offered up body parts to get that region. Would you have traded with UK? If you say yes to that, you're a complete and total liar.
Kentucky played Wake Forest, Cornell, and West Virginia for pete's sake. there's nothing scary about that. I would have definitely taken that route over Duke's. Baylor was a tougher game for Duke in the elite eight than West Virginia was in the final four.
Ex post facto rationalization.
Before the tournament started, when the brackets came out, you would have taken UK's region, with West Virginia as the 2, over Duke's, with Villanova (and Purdue as the 4)?
You lie.
Just like you're a liar if you say that you weren't absolutely ecstatic to see Gonzaga as your 2 last year, or to get placed as the 4 with Oregon as the 1 this year.
And while we're at it, tell me the last time that your team got seeded lower than you were expecting going into the selection show? Because that's happened 3 times to UK in 6 years now, resulting in UK getting paired with the overall #1 seed in 2011 (and paired with the team that beat them the previous year in a 4-5 matchup), paired with an undefeated 1 seed for a 2nd round game in 2014 (then with Louisville in the Sweet 16 if they adavanced), and now paired with the Big 10 and ACC regular season champs this year.
Your team gets preferential treatment, UK gets sh** on. Rationalize all you want, but after the fiasco the committee created this year, it's become blatantly obvious.
so, just to be sure......all you guys saw duke's bracket and IMMEDIATELY inked them into the final 4?....just sayin...
I would have taken Kentucky's bracket over Duke's in 2010 before the tournament and I am not lying. I understand you're mad that UK didn't achieve what you thought or what they we're predicted to those years. But in 2015 and 2010 Kentucky lost with Duke waiting for them in the next round. That's not Duke's fault or mine.
Personally I think Duke should have been a five seed this year and Kentucky a three, but Kentucky does have the weakest two seed and a charmin soft one seed so you have that going for you. Also throwing the "Big 10 regular season champs" title on Indiana isn't impressing anyone.
You're 100% full of sh**.
As if Baylor, a team that hasn't been to the FF since 1948, coming out of a conference that hasn't had a team other than Kansas in the FF since 2003, was such an intimidating force.
And I also forgot to mention that UK's 8 seed that year was Texas, which turned out to be nothing but was a team that had been ranked #1 for a few weeks that year.
So just go away. At least Neue Regel has the integrity to admit that he knows Duke has received some favorable draws in recent years, as opposed to the line of BS you're trying to promote.
Last edited:
You are a good poster, for a Duke fan ;-), and even though I do think Oregon or Baylor will take Duke out, you have to admit that Duke got by far the easiest region don't you? In the upper half of our region, there are 3 of the 6 Power 6 conference champions. That's insane. Hard to blame UK fans for coming up with conspiracy theories when this ish happens to us over and over and over.
Texas finished the season on a 7-10 stretch...
What does what Baylor did in any year since 1948 have to do with their 2010 team?
Blah blah blah blah blah. Keep rationalizing.
What does Gonzaga never having made the FF have to do with their 2015 team?
What does Oregon not having made the FF in 50+ years have to do with their 2016 team?
What does Purdue not having Robbie Hummel have to do with their 14 RPI rating in 2010?
What does Villanova's finishing on a 2-5 stretch have to do with them being Duke's 2 seed in 2010?
What does UK beating Duke on a neutral floor by 11 and having a higher RPI (and every other rating) have to do with the selection committee rating Duke ahead of UK?
What does your AD and 2 former employees of the Duke athletic department being on the selection committee have to do with anything?
But yes, you would rather face what UK has in the tournament than have those type of things working for you.
Stuff a sock in it. You're the 400 pound man trying to tell someone else not to eat so much.
I'm about 188 right now.
Also if you read above I said I thought Duke and UK's seeds we're wrong this year.
You guys don't seem to get this; actually, you don't want to get it.
Who was the HEAVY favorite in 2010, 2012, and 2015? UK.
Go look at our roads. Indiana with 2 top draft picks, A stacked Baylor team. Schools like Duke, a team with pros in west virginia.
The point is, when Duke is really good (like last year), they give you a WALK. They won't put Duke in a region with those kinds of teams. Hell, this year you're not even a favorite and they still give you a favorable bracket.
It's ok, the nation is seeing Duke play 1, maybe 2 tough games a year per tournament. It's pitiful really, as I believe Cal would have 4 or 5 title inside of 10 years with those roads.
You don't earn it. Enjoy it, and deal with it. Don't come over here telling us you actually earn what you get. When everyone looks back when Duke isn't winning anymore after K, most people will call it tainted titles. Just the way it is.
SO just deal with that, go enjoy your middle school schedule, and deal with it. But for real, stfu, because we are sick and tired of hearing your BS AND EXCUSES.
NO NO WE PLAY TOUGH ROADS. WE EARN IT. WE REALLY DO, WE'RE JUST LIKE UK.[laughing]
Idiots.
Idiots.
Saying Cal would have had more titles with Duke's draws sounds more like an excuse than anything else. Don't get so upset, it's not healthy.
Trust me mr. first round exits, Cal does more with less (speaking of roads) than coach K ever has.
And ignore the post and throw out your BS. You know your team is hand picked and doesn't earn. Deal with it.
Lol why do ppl care so much.
Who cares what road some team took. To win the title you have to beat good teams.
They beat the teams that knocked us out in 10 and 15.
Congrats to them. **** happens.
Who cares what road some team took. To win the title you have to beat good teams.
They beat the teams that knocked us out in 10 and 15.
Congrats to them. **** happens.
No. Screw that. Why sit in silence when UK is continually screwed by a process that claims to be aiming for fairness, while Duke is continually rewarded? However futile complaining is, I'm not willing to sit back in silence and just say "**** happens". **** happens because specific people have no integrity, and make decisions that totally contradict the standards they are supposed to be enforcing.
Unfortunately, there really isn't anything we can do about it. Complaining about it on a message board won't make the problem go away.
Hopefully as years go by and people become more receptive to advanced metrics, we'll start to see a more accurate seed list.
As far as regions and balance.......well you know how that goes. With geography comes imbalance
Who was NOT the 3 seed last year in your bracket?
And you have the delusional nads to say your not protected? Sell it to the low information voters - cause we aint buying.
Last edited:
This is false, and you are severely being disingenuous as to how rest severely effects these outcomes. Duke, like last year, was coming into a title game with all of there legs. Teams like Wisconsin and UK were playing for dear life. It makes a huge difference, and trust me, from a players perspective, it means everything. I understand we've discussed you're not a former athlete, and thats fine, but please don't pretend to understand what its like to play exhausted while your opponent has a nice fresh set of legs.
Duke doesn't earn what they get. If the committee is going to insist on protecting them, its time to start calling their hardware tainted. They can't have it both ways.
I actually have played sports.
Not sure what your talking about. When UK and Wisconsin played, each team had a week off. When Duke and Wisconsin played they each played a game that Saturday.
Point being, each team had equal time.
So don't give me the one team had a fresh set of legs bs. If you want to say that the UK game took more outta Wisconsin than Duke got from Michigan St that's fine but I don't think so.
duke was just a better team than wiscy.....they'd already beaten them at THEIR house earlier in the year. UK had a whole week to prepare for them....
2015 Duke had the easiest draw possible going into the tourney. They got the easy path to the final 4 handed to them that UK deserved to have as the number one overall seed instead of Duke, there reasoning though was location (lol). Btw refs jobbed Wisconsin in the title game. Definitely an asterisk next to that banner. And if you watched the UK/Wiscy game. Was probably the most rigged game I've ever seen in my entire life. 2nd most rigged game was the title game that followed. It was as if the NCAA hand picked the Title game teams, and the title game outcome.
What is all this talk about deserved paths and all.
No one ever said that having the overall 1 seed meant that you were gonna have the easiest road to the final four.
I don't know where this is coming from.
All the overall 1 seed means is that you have your pick of region. That you're gonna get sent pretty much to your closest location
No one ever said that having the overall 1 seed meant that you were gonna have the easiest road to the final four.
I don't know where this is coming from.
All the overall 1 seed means is that you have your pick of region. That you're gonna get sent pretty much to your closest location
if you don't think the NCAA wanted Duke/UK, you're insane....ratings and hype would have been 5times that of Duke/Wiscy...but like you alluded to, y'all might have been tired like wiscy was....
it seems, from your view, that there is NEVER a game that UK loses, or that duke wins, that isn't "rigged"
I'm looking for that asterisk......