Dave Sez

As a Clemson fan, you give me hope.

People criticize the RPI but I don't know what other solution there is. Clemson has done the same thing for 30 years. Every year on Jan. 1, Clemson is 13-1 or 12-2 or 14-0, based upon a schedule usually composed of the other schools in the area; this year it was heavyweights like: Monmouth, Arkansas St, Furman, Charleston Southern, Wofford, Georgia Southern, Western Carolina, and Georgia St. But wait, while Duke was playing Gonzaga and Marquette and Carolina was playing OSU and Gonzaga and Tennessee, Clemson was playing Appalachian State and Old Dominion. They played in-state rival USC who is really down this year and got a cupcake in the ACC-Big Ten challenge in Minnesota.

That is just a pathetic schedule. Why the media fall for the Clemson good record in January angle is beyond me. It has happened over and over since the Tates Locke days.

ODU is in the top 40 of the rpi now. App showed they could play with davidson as well. Some folks thought highly about Mississippi State coming into this year. And the ACC dictates who we play in the big ten challenge.

By virtue of being in the ACC, Clemson's schedule strength is 33rd according to Pomeroy, so they have probably had a pretty tough in conference slate. Their out of conference SOS is 246th. My point was not to denigrate Davidson and ODU; those are decent programs, but those were the toughest games for Clemson. Carolina and Duke schedule teams like Winthrop, Penn and Davidson also, but they also generally add a couple of nationally reknown traditional powers beyond that. Clemson is counting ASU and ODU those as their tough games.

For example, Carolina has in the past several seasons had two of the following on its non-conference schedule, with home and home match-ups: Kentucky, UConn and Arizona.

I don't want to insinuate that Clemson has one of the toughest non-conference schedules in the country. But I think that the schedule we played was probably more beneficial to this team and the program, rather than getting pounded by Pitt and Wisconsin like Florida State did. And I don't think you can bash this basketball team for winning games they were supposed to win.

I saw the RPI jumped to 37 today for the tigers with the win in blacksburg.

I think we've got eight teams in right now. Clemson and Georgia Tech likely both sealed their bids today (they could both use another win on Thursday, though). If FSU can win two games in the ACC Tournament, we'll get nine teams in. That would rock for the ACC.

I predicted at the beginning of the season that Carolina would be the Number one seed in the tournament, so I was right. Pretty good, huh?

Jerry wrote:

I think we've got eight teams in right now. Clemson and Georgia Tech likely both sealed their bids today (they could both use another win on Thursday, though). If FSU can win two games in the ACC Tournament, we'll get nine teams in. That would rock for the ACC.

This weekend really couldn't have gone much better for the ACC. The only black mark was UVA screwing their ACC and NCAA seed.

FSU still has some work to do, but at least they're still alive. Nine teams would be awesome! The only downside is that inevitably the ACC would be overhyped and fail to meet the outrageous expections. While nine could get in, only one or two will be seeded to make the second weekend.

All you Duke fans, let me know how it feels to play on a Thursday? See, Carolina never has. Hopefully you will win a couple so that Carolina can make you take your third beating of the year and hopefully without all the inelegant histrionics from Gerald Henderson. By the way, Duke fans, is it still the Duke party line that Gerald is the next Grant Hill? It's just that Grant seem so much better and more coordinated, but maybe that is just me.

And Coach K, I am afraid you can't blame this 8-8 record on your back. I don't recall Dean Smith ever having less than a winning record in ACC play.

Some of you have been watching longer than I have, but I cannot remember an uglier moment in ACC history. Anybody? To me, it was either intentional or grossly negligent. What it remind me of is some of the jerks who used to play intra-murals who would try to break your leg so their dorm or frat would get the intra-mural cup.

If any of you with those almost Ivy educations can tell me what he was trying to accomplish with 14 seconds left with that play, please tell me. And Billy Packer was going on and on about which Carolina player could take the free throws, as though anybody on Carolina cared? Surreal. Just when the rivalry starts to loose some heat this happens. Coach K does now officially have a losing record to Carolina. Kudos K.

It really is crazy how the games went this weekend. Incredible that Clemson won in Blackburg on Senior Day.

I have never seen such hyperbole on the DaveSez boards, no, any message board ever before in my entire lifetime!!!!

Guess they don't teach the definition of "histrionics" at the Hill.

I took the Henderson foul as payback for the elbow Hansblow nailed Lance Thomas with in the face earlier. You know, the one that was called a "timeout." That, or he was merely trying to block a shot really hard back into the face of a player on a team who had won, and the ball got moved. Watching it in slow-mo (like the referees) makes it look far more intentional than the speed it happened with in real time. (thank Tivo knockoffs)

Smith had a losing record in 1964 in conference play. Not bad for sure. I don't recall Smith winning a third championship, however.

Dave, yer board has bugs!

Fats Durston wrote:

Dave, yer board has bugs!

Yeah, sorry about that! I'll clean up the double (triple) posts.

I said that I don't remember, lol, because I wasn't born yet at that point. Smith had one losing record overall and one losing record in conference. He certainly never finished in 7th and definitely never had any years as mediocre as this year or 1996 for Coach K. He was also fortunate enough to maintain good health by avoiding exhaustion and back pains, which are also known to crop up around some coaches during trying years.

About the play.
There were 14 seconds left in the game and Duke was down by 12 points. You don't leave your feet to make that play. Anyone who says anything different is being ludicrous. Henderson intended to do what he did, he just didn't think things through and that is adults are supposed to be there for guidance. You at least are being honest and saying it was intentional payback

I expect a warm welcome for Duke on Thursday by all of the other schools at the tournament.

"You don't leave your feet to make that play. Anyone who says anything different is being ludicrous."

I don't understand--when your opponent's All-American goes up for a dunk when leading by a dozen with 14 seconds to go, you don't go up to deny him? I can see the arguments against Henderson, but that he shouldn't have even been in the air doesn't strike me as the strongest one.

Perhaps Dean-O could've taken a year off for exhaustion, or whatever, might've helped him recuperate so that he coulda won an additional championship to be K's equal on the national level. Oh well, guess he just couldn't turn that fabulous consistency into true post-season success. And at least UNC did keep that 20 win -OR- loss streak alive in the oughts. Oh, wait, they broke that, too didn't they?

I suspect you don't play basketball at all, William (and especially can't jump eleventy feet in the air like Henderson). Blocking an opposing asshole's shot--he knew the most Hansblow was gonna do was shuffle his feet around some more--is about as glorious a thing as you can do in the game. If you're playing basketball, you automatically react on defense or else you're moving too slow (unless you're defending, say, Zoubek, then you can think on it a bit). I suppose the adults are supposed to run in and whisper in Henderson's ear between the rebound and the shot to provide this guidance you speak of?

You don't continue to look to score with a double-digit lead and less than 20 seconds. Anyone who says anything different is being ludicrous.

A hostile welcome for Duke at the ACC tourney? No different from every single year at least since I went to my first (1991).

And one last thing. Weren't you the poster who went on and on and on about how lackluster Virginia was for winning the conference this year, how it'd never've happened without expansion? And now Carolina's place is just shiny? Yuk yuk yuk.

Yeah, Fats, and so just how bad does that make Duke then? If you hadn't rigged the Clemson game, you'd be at 7-9.

Did you watch the game or did your have the pizza box over your stomach? Coach K was calling time-outs and taking three's and pressing right up to the end. Did you notice that at all? They have been showing the 2001 12 point comeback on Classic all week. Did you remember to pay your cable bill?

I am going to voluntary rub out most of my answer. You aren't worth it.

And Fats, Do you think Coach K will ever be able to hold a lead in a big NCAA game again or were the Indiana and UConn games pretty much par for the course for the rest of his career?

Enjoyed beating you for the fourth time in five games. Too bad your poor team of 8 McDonald's All Americans is so put upon.

Here's K's quote last year on Jim Larranaga suspending one of his own players for hitting another player, time to step up Kazooski:

"It sends chills through my entire body to hear what Jim did," Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski said. "Honestly, if he was here right now, I'd give him a big hug. We need more coaches to have the courage to step up in situations like this and say to our kids, 'That's wrong; I'm not making excuses for you.' If I were in the same situation, I hope I'd be gutsy enough and strong enough to do the same thing, but I can't swear to you that I would. If a big-name coach did something like that, people would be fitting him for sainthood by tomorrow.

william: This wasn't the ugliest moment in ACC Basketball. Henderson is still a good kid that was trying to make a play, but forearm shivered Tyler instead. It was a questionable hit, but nothing as malicious or innocent as either UNC or Duke fans try to make it out to be. Don't worry, UNC still won the ACC Regular Season (which does have lesser importance since abandoning the round-robin format, but is still very important).

Fats: Instead of worrying about the hyperbole some UNC fan is spewing, I'd worry about how McRoberts is playing. Both him and Scheyer were AWOL today at the Dean Dome, and only Paulus/Henderson showed up to play. Duke needs all of their players to play well in the ACC tournament so that they don't drop down to an unprotected sub-regional seed.

Dave: I think the FSU/Clemson game is an elimination game, with the winner getting an NCAA bid. The ACC should get eight bids if Georgia Tech takes care of business against Wake Forest.

Re: the play - You can't fault Henderson for leaving his feet. He did, however, have ample time to notice that the ball was already out of Hansbrough's hands, and he came down with his flying slap anyway. That indicates to me that the act was most likely intentional (though probably borne out of frustration instead of calculated premeditation), though I don't believe Henderson meant for the blow to end up being as hard as it was. He caught Hansbrough with his elbow when he meant to connect with his hand. That's why it ended up being a more serious incident than a similar act in the Duke-Carolina season finale last year (if you'll recall, Dockery shoved Hansbrough in the face with his palm after Hansbrough had already secured a rebound). Gerald Henderson deserves his one-game suspension, but I don't think he was out to inflict serious bodily harm on Tyler Hansbrough. It just ended up that way.

By the way, I've never believed in the ridiculous notion that, somehow, when the score reaches some sizable deficit (whatever number of points is taken to be an "insurmountable lead" changes game to game, depending on whose fans you ask, btw), the players on each team should just stop playing as hard as they can. The notion that the players should stop shooting or playing intense D in such situations is an appalling affront to the integrity of the game. You can't say that this incident is Henderson's fault because he tried to make a defensive play or Hansbrough's fault for trying to take the ball to the basket. That's what you're supposed to do as long as you're on the court and the game isn't over yet.

The question is motive.

"I was not intentionally trying to hurt anybody," Henderson said. "Obviously, it was a foul. I was not trying to hurt or hit the kid."

After viewing the replay several times, I agree that the blow to the face did not appear to be intentional. Henderson was going to block Hansbrough's shot, and then Hansbrough's arm was pulled down and the ball flew out, and Henderson's forearm smashed Psycho T's face. This was not a premeditated knockout.

However, Henderson appeared to be going in with the intent to deliver an enthusiastically hard foul. There is a place in the game for hard fouls, for forcefully preventing easy baskets, for occasionally planting an opponent on his rear end.

But when the hard foul goes wrong, for whatever reason, you run the risk of it accidentally turning into assault and battery. Like this.

And when that happens, you pay the price with an ejection and a suspension. The officials did the right thing in tossing Henderson.

Stolen from: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=2787890&sportCat=ncb

^^Clemson is in. They've got 21 wins, play in the best conference in America, and should have a RPI under 40 after today's results are all in. In a year where mid-majors don't figure to gobble up many at-large bids, I don't see how you can leave them out.

FSU is our one real "bubble" team. I think they need to beat Clemson and UNC to get a bid, and since I don't see them beating both of those teams on consecutive afternoons, I'm thinking that the ACC will place eight in the NCAAs (UNC, UVa, VT, Duke, BC, Terps, Jackets, Tigers).

Nine would be awesome though. It'd be fun to speculate which two teams would end up on the same half of a regional.

regarding Clemson/FSU as elimination game:
Clemson has swept the season series from FSU, not to mention 6 RPI top 50 wins, the second most difficult conference schedule, and only 1 non top 50 loss. With Clemson owning the season series with FSU, its hard to pitch the tourney game as an elimination game.

For all you guys who seem to think what Henderson did is cute, or part of the game, you make me sick to my stomach. I have seen too many people suffer serious injuries to ever accept that that is part of the game. Maybe the Jack Tatum's and the Duke's of the world will win a few more games by endangering the welfare of their opponents; maybe its the Chicago way.

I'm from Chapel Hill and I guess we are part of the wine and cheese crowd. I don't want to win that way. And one wonders whether American Express wants to be associated with winning (or this year, losing) that way either.

Re: SuperJew

Heh, heh. I get worried every dribble, every post entry, every shot, every defensive sequence. Big picture worrying is too much to even contemplate. And regarding the spew--he just keeps setting them up so easy. To wit,

Re: Wm

Proof that neither difficult words, comprehension, nor high-level math (numbers greater than 2) are part of the Carolina experience. "If you hadn't rigged the Clemson game, you'd be at 7-9." William, William, William. Did you watch that game, or did you have tissue stuffed in your nose? [This makes as much sense as your pizza comment.] I did not rig the game; in fact, a Carolina graduate was in charge of the timekeeping. The game was also tied at the point of the clock error, suggesting that Duke might, just might've won in overtime. In addition, the 2.3 seconds that should've remained on the clock might, just might've been enough time to use a different scoring play. You might know this from all the dwelling in the past that you do, with the Dean Smith hosannahs (din't know he was still coaching) and ESPN Classic watching. I find myself disappointed that that network never runs my faves--"The Show" Arceneaux, Penn State with a buncha nobodies, and Boston College in '94, I believe.

I don't see a single person on the board claiming Henderson's action as "cute", so I'm not sure why your stomach is turned. And you're dripping with hypocrisy by defending the same guy who (as I've mentioned previously) purposely elbowed a Duke player in the face earlier in the same game, and in UNC's previous game took a swing at a GT player (which might've very well been a retaliation for earlier GT action which I didn't see) that was missed by the referees. That ugliness comes from "your" corner, too.

"...the same guy who (as I've mentioned previously) purposely elbowed a Duke player in the face earlier in the same game, and in UNC's previous game took a swing at a GT player (which might've very well been a retaliation for earlier GT action which I didn't see) that was missed by the referees. That ugliness comes from 'your' corner, too."

Heck, Hansbrough himself got a technical for taking a swing at a player in the first State game.

NOTE: NONE of this excuses Henderson's aggressive play. It looked to me like he deserved a technical at least. But it's clearly wrong to think that this is some sort of new low for the league, Duke, or whatever.

I think most people here are on target about what happened - Henderson went up to block the shot - vigorously - and then had redirect his actions when the ball squirted out sideways and Tyler's hands never came up. I think that's why Henderson's arm was bent - he was reaching towards where the ball ended up. Still, he didn't come anywhere near the ball and as one of the camera angles clearly showed, he accelerated his arm/elbow into Hansbrough's face. At the same time, he wasn't really looking in that direction.

My verdict - an accident, but not a complete accident. Given the end result, I think an ejection was fair. A simple T would have been fair as well.

Does it mean he's a bad guy or dirty player? No. I don't recall seeing him do other similar stuff this year. If it happens again in his career, I'll reassess.

In fairness, as someone pointed out, Hansbrough elbowed a Dukie (Thomas, I think) in the face earlier in the game just before he called timeout. Just like the later foul, it wasn't fully intentional or fully accidental either. Had his elbow landed an inch or two in a different direction, it might have had the same result.

The notion that folks shouldn't have been in the game is ridiculous and it was an extremely petty comment from Coach K. He should know better than that. Tyler was shooting the free throws and had a sub waiting. When he got fouled (the first time), Duke had all of their non-fouled-out starters still in. K only cleared the bench once Tyler was on the line. Had Tyler hit his second free throw, he would have been subbed out as well.

All in all, it made for some great theater.

And hey Fats, that Weber State game is coming up on ESPN Classic this week.

Re Steven Vickers:

Regardless, Hansbrough is usually the recipient of exceptionally hard fouls. (See the games that we played against Ga. Tech. He practically gets mugged in them.) Now, does Hansbrough usually get the benefit of the doubt offensively? Absolutely. He practically lives at the free-throw line. However, the man does get fouled hard a bunch of times and virtually nobody could handle those fouls with the same type of patience over a 30+ game season.

(I know that this wasn't the point you were getting at, but Tyler is (contrary to some UNC fans) human and can get angry when hard fouls occur. Dave hit it right on the head in the post above.)

Re Clemson:

I still don't think that they're completely in. 3-7 in their last 10 (including a loss at Wake) including a worse RPI/SOS than several other bubble teams and a lack of a huge signature win (Georgia Tech? VTech? BC?) really cripple them. Now, they do have a rediculously hard ACC schedule and have some decent non-confrence wins, but I still think they need to beat FSU (and maybe play UNC close) in order to clinch a ticket to the Big Dance.

K can't have it both ways. If the game was over, then why did he call time-out with 50 seconds left? Why was Duke still pressing? Why did they foul Carolina several times in the last minute and a half?

I tivo'ed the Duke-Maryland game from 2001 in College Park. It was on last Wednesday. It was clear that Duke had not conceded with 50 seconds left. K has no credibility on that point.

I think Dave's comments have merit, but I ask where was the apology or the remorse? Henderson showed none, not when it took place, nor after the game. Secondly, we all take about how good the different schools are, but most people would agree that Duke and Virginia are the most highly rated.

As a Duke student, from an elite school, Henderson's actions show an utter failure to understand how much time was left in the game and the possible utility of his actions. This is why the referees were absolutely correct. If he had done the same thing ten minutes earlier, he probably would have only been charged with a flagrant foul. Doing what he did at that point in the game shows either lack of intellect or common sense. You don't go for a running back's knees when your team is down by 36 points in the fourth quarter and you don't come hellfire across the lane during garbage time.

The other thing is that he showed no remorse at all. He could have immediately apologized to Hansbrough or told the referees, "oh my God, I didn't mean for that to happen! I am really sorry1" Even after the game, Henderson's attitude was, "well, that's basketball."

In soccer, sometimes you try to make a tackle and you screw it up and you can really hurt a guy or break his leg. If I do something on the field and I don't mean to, I am going over and trying to find out about the well-being of the person.

I remember once on my high school baseball team, I ran over the catcher on the other team and I really did not mean to. I immediately leapt up and apologized to both the catcher and to the umpire and the umpire did not throw me out of the game, which was the normal penalty, because I showed remorse and concern about what I had done.

I know that there are managers like Tony LaRusso and coaches like K (remember the Wake game 2 years ago) who believe that it is part of sports to throw at batters, or in basketball, to foul someone hard to send a message. I disagree.

Whatever you want to say about Dean Smith, I have seen hundreds of his games and read all his books and I can guarantee that he would vehemently disagree that it is ever appropriated to foul someone harder than necessary, just to send a message or stand up for your program. If that makes Carolina soft, then so be it.

Unless this "kid" makes a public apology, I will never have any use for him and I will not buy all this stuff about him being "a good kid."

I think that Dave does a great job at being a moderator. Some things can just strike a person and make one livid and it is good to have a Cavalier, which is a kind of knight or gentleman to help sort through things.

I have to say that when Henderson did that, I almost felt as though he had struck a family member of mine. I have not been that livid in a long time.

It should be noted, Dave, however, that this is the second time in four games against the Blue Devils that a Duke player has struck Hansbrough in the face. It happened last season at Cameron when Sean Dockey hit Hansbrough in the face at the end of the game which did not result in anything other than a common foul. Vitale defended it then in much the same way that Packer did yesterday.

Add that to what happened against Wake Forest in 2005, where K put the walk-ons in to foul hard, and the Laettner garbage that he never punished, and I believe the case for defending either Duke or Henderson is weaker than you acknowledge.

"Add that to what happened against Wake Forest in 2005, where K put the walk-ons in to foul hard"

Now here's a myth that just won't die. Those were a pair of hand-checks/bumps by the one of the smallest players on Duke's team. Now, was it done to rattle the (easily rattled, as it turns out) Chris Paul? Certainly could have been. "Hard fouls"? No, not by any normal definition of the term.

Well, if you go back in time - the Laettner "stomp" was fifteen years ago - you can find instances of bad behavior in any program.

I distinctly remember Jerry Stackhouse taking a swing at Cherokee Parks, I think in that famous '95 game. He missed and nothing was called, but it was clearly a punch.

Virginia had Keith Jenifer punching an Indiana guard in the nuts.

Julius Hodge cold-cocked Steve Blake in the back of the head.

Chris Paul hit Hodge in the Li'l Julius.

It happens everywhere. These are competitive guys playing an intense game, and let's be honest, they aren't typically that representative of the student bodies. In general, the players come from rougher backgrounds where physical confrontations and rough play are probably more common.

As you've pointed out, this kind of thing was actually much more common 30-40 years ago.

I don't think Duke is dirtier than any other team in the ACC. In fact, I can't really think of an ACC program right now that I'd consider dirty. BC might be the closest.

This was just one unfortunate play. Henderson was trying to make damn sure that Hansbrough didn't get a big dunk (because that's pretty clearly what Tyler was gearing up for) and he screwed up. He expected to be swinging higher and against an object with much more resistance (the ball and Hansbrough's arms). When Tyler couldn't get his hands up and the ball squirted sideways, it threw off Henderson's flight plan.

Was it preventable? Sure. Was it hard? Definitely. Was it dirty? I don't think so.

Duke has been known, like Carolina, for great comebacks, but here K says that wasn't his intent. and that Roy should have taken out his starters.

Perhaps, Coach K needs to incorporate a white flag into his sideline repertoire so that the opposing coach can know when to take our his starters because with all the fouling, and the pressing and the calling of time-outs by Duke in the last minute, one could reasonably think they had not given up.

Duke has been known, like Carolina, for great comebacks, but here K says that wasn't his intent. and that Roy should have taken out his starters.

That is, of course, not what Krzyzewski said. Krzyzewski said that *both teams* should have pulled their starters by that point.

I agree with you about BC, but that is another story. Some of this may also break down to the different team philosophies. Since the mid-1970's Virginia and Duke have been the two major successful programs that Dean Smith has had issues with in terms of their style of play. He simply has not had the same issues with Sloan or Valvano or Lefty. It doesn't necessarily make him right, but I can try to describe some of the issues.

Virginia was the first one that I remember hearing Dean talk about with their physical play in the mid-70s. I don't necessarily remember the great Cavs' teams of the earlier 80's as playing that style, but by then the enmity between Holland and Smith was thick. Kentucky with big Rick Robey, was another team brutal team of that period that Dean had disdain for.

With Duke, it was much more palpable. Smith felt that Coach K was bringing a style of play into the ACC that was horrendous. If you know soccer, you might compare it to the issues between countries like France and Brazil and Spain, compared to Italy, Germany and England. Definitionally, a style is legal, if the referees allow that style to gain success by not penalizing it. Italian soccer is characterized by low scoring and often brutal and violent play, while the French and the Brazilians prefer more free flowing non-contact play.

Just as in basketball, opinions differ as to whether that is wimpy or beautiful.

Anyway, when K came in the league they were known for much more agressive, almost smoldering defense, with a lot of use of the hands and more body contact than the ACC had traditionally had.

Ultimately Coach K may have won the debate if you will, because the referees were allowing it and that style seemed to be more successful in the post season. Smith never changed his opinion. Strangely enough, Smith's close friend, John Thompson seemed to employ tactics somewhat similar to Duke's as Georgetown and Duke both enjoyed great success in the 80's. Houston, which as a team played more like Carolina, UCLA and Louisville, never was able to win a title.

I remember that the culmination of this bad blood was in 1989, when Carolina won an ugly game against Duke, 77-74, before eventually losing to that year's national champ, Michigan, who played a similar style to Carolina, in the regional semi's. Duke made it to the Final Four that year by beating number one seed Georgetown, in a game where Duke stood up to the Hoya paranoia and gave better than they got. I remember watching that game and thinking to myself that the Tar Heels could never have beaten Georgetown the way that Duke did that day.

At some point, it seems as though the pendulum swung back some and it doesn't seem to me that college basketball is as physical now as it was in the mid to late 1980's. Maybe the growing use of the three pointer has had a lot to do with that, as well as the re-establishment of Carolina by Dean in 1993 and the success by Rick Pitino, who showed that it wasn't necessary to play the Duke style to win the national title.

In fact, I can't really think of an ACC program right now that I'd consider dirty. BC might be the closest.

BC is physical and aggressive, but I think you are more likely to see "dirty" plays in a Georgia Tech game.

You might recall that Dean had a couple of run-ins with Rick Barnes over his teams' physical play as well. Clemson played a very similar style to Terry Holland's teams (and Dave Odom's and Jeff Jones' too).

I never really thought of Duke being an over physical defense, certainly not like teams I just listed or John Thompson's Georgetown squads. What Duke has always done is play very aggressively on the perimeter and in the passing lanes.

I left Clemson out because I said "major successful" programs. Rick Barnes had a couple of O.K. years but State, Duke, Maryland and Virginia had years where they were perennial national powers. But you are definitely right about the disdain between the two, which Roy Williams does not seem to share.

You probably know more about basketball in terms of play than I do. I can try to find some quotes from Smith's and Chansky's books, but Smith definitely perceived Duke as importing an improper style of play into the ACC. Maybe Smith had no idea what he was talking about. He isn't always right. In the words of Duke's Bill Foster: "I thought that Naismith invented basketball, not Deansmith."

News and Observer:

In college, Ellington and Henderson still will be close, only 8 miles apart. But can they still be pals? Ellington thinks so, though he knows things will be different.

"We'll definitely socialize," he said. "I don't know if [Henderson] will be allowed on our campus -- and I know I'm not going over there -- but we'll be good friends."

Henderson said the story of teammates-turned-rivals will be true only on the court.

"That's for the fans, the media and all that," he said. "We know we're going to be friends for a long time. Basketball will never break the friendship we have. But when we're on the court, we're enemies, just like any other guys I'm playing against."

The announcers didn't point this out at the time, and nobody I talked to seemed to notice it, but at about the 11th minute mark in the second half Demarcus Nelson airballed a three point jumper. He landed on both foot, and then just fell in what appeared to be an attempt to draw a foul. No foul was called and Danny Green took off on a break. Nelson clearly attempts to trip Green with his right foot, misses, and then successfully sticks his left foot up and trips Green.
Did anyone else notice this play?

As for the Hansbrough elbow to Lance Thomas, it without question did occur and a foul could easily have been called, however the elbow wasn't as hard as the flopping Thomas made it appear. That's what I hate the most about Duke, the constant flopping and running in front of opposing players, not having their feet set, and still drawing a charge. (See McRoberts earlier in the game)

As far of the Henderson issue, I agree with most people here. He was trying to send a message and was completely reckless, but I don't think his intention was in line with the end result. The 1 game suspension is fair decision.

If we can talk about the actual game for a second, from a UNC's fan perspective, here are 10 things that stood out to me.
1. Tyler Hansbrough is a legend. Nuff said.
2. Was Josh McRoberts really considered the best HS prospect 2 years ago. He's a very good shot blocker and a decent defender, but I have not seen one half way decent post move in his 2 years at Duke. And can we please has announcers stop slurping the fact that he can dribble the ball upcourt. WOW! Amazing! Good for Him! Now if only he could not turn it over 6 times in one half in the process we might have something.
3. Marcus Ginyard has become the real unsung hero on UNC. He hit a huge three in the second half and is a real defensive stopper. As a fan, I feel confident with him in.
4. Greg Paulus really surprised me. He hit so tough/big shots to keep Duke in the game, and even though I really dislike him, he has played well in the second half of the year.
5. I didn't mind K pressing and shooting threes in the last minute, but the timeout was absurd. What was the purpose? To make the final look better in the box scores? If Coach K had put his bench players in, Roy would surely have done the same. And if Duke hadn't kept fouling, UNC would have stopped their offensive attack and the game would have ended peacefully.
6. Based on skill set and atleticism, Henderson is the one player that I wouldn't mind seeing in Carolina blue. However, after Sunday, I look foward to rooting against him.
7. Brandan Wright's blocks of David McClure and Demarcus Nelson were pretty impressive. Terry's wasn't half bad either. Does anybody know what the ACC Record for FG% is and how many shots are needed to qualify? I know Wright isn't approaching it this year, but I would like to know.
8. Was there a reason Scheyer didn't make the bus trip? Was he practicing his face contorting act for the circus?
9. A whole bunch is made of Duke's inexperience causing their struggles, but North Carolina is just as young, if not younger.
10. Can anybody argue that the rivalry is taking a serious swing in UNC's favor? Duke better hope Singler is as good/better as advertised because after taking 07 off, UNC is expected to grab another monster 08 class.

Roy wrote:

5. I didn't mind K pressing and shooting threes in the last minute, but the timeout was absurd. What was the purpose? To make the final look better in the box scores? If Coach K had put his bench players in, Roy would surely have done the same. And if Duke hadn't kept fouling, UNC would have stopped their offensive attack and the game would have ended peacefully.

As a coach, his job is to win and teach. They weren't going to win, but they were close and in a big game with a hostile crowd. What better time to work on end-game situations? They may find themselves in a similar situation in the next week or two when the margin is 1 or 2 points instead of 10.

Roy wrote:

10. Can anybody argue that the rivalry is taking a serious swing in UNC's favor? Duke better hope Singler is as good/better as advertised because after taking 07 off, UNC is expected to grab another monster 08 class.

Yes. I'll make that argument right now. Duke is going to return everyone (unless McRoberts is an idiot) and will add three more McDonald's All-Americans. The Heels are going to lose and probably Wright as well (and possibly even Lawson and Hansbrough). They'll still be loaded next year, but Duke should be better. I don't see things tipping too far in either direction.

I am quickly getting tired of hearing about Duke's personnel problems and I would think that with the exception of Georgia Tech, probably the other conference members are as well. Nelson, Scheyer, Paulus, McRoberts, Thomas, Zoubek and Henderson were all highly rated and most of those guys were McDonald's All Americans and that doesn't count the two other ones that K drove off and who transferred to other schools, Boateng and Boykin.

So, Dave, why was it K's job to be teaching his players in the last minute, but not Roy's?

And K himself does not agree with your argument Dave, because he said both teams should have had their scrubs in.

The truth is that he was hoping against hope for a miracle comeback. There was little reason to call that timeout with 50 seconds left, but if you are going to do that, you forfeit your right to complain about the other team continuing to play.

There simply is no argument as to which way the rivalry is swinging if you are going to count the starting point as the beginning of Williams' tenure at Carolina. Not only has he won a national championship, he has won four of the last five games.

Coach K looked old, small and diminished to me yesterday when he stood next to Roy Williams. If you look at some of the beatings that he put on Carolina during the Guthridge and Doherty days (without Carolina whining about him running up the score), it is clear that those days are gone. He has the equivalent of another Dean Smith to compete with, plus Gary Williams and possibly a re-invigorated UVa to compete for "smart" recruits.

We saw something similar happen to Bobby Knight with the rise of Michigan and Illinois and Michigan State in the Big Ten conference. After 1993, his program was greatly diminished. I don't think K will fall quite that much, but we stopped hearing about Bobby Knight all the time in the mid-1990's.

Even if you want to argue about the near future, well, that seems pointless to me. We were told two years ago that McRoberts was number one in his class. We were told last year that Gerald Henderson was going to be as good as Grant Hill. We were told that Shavlik Randolph was going to be better than Christian Laettner. All three were fine players, even very good ones, but they were not close to the hype. Part of it is that Duke is like the NY Yankees. They are the most popular team all over the country, but especially in the Northeast and some of the information we get tends to be overly optimistic.

I guess we will see how good Duke's guys are when they get here and if they all stay rather than transfer as so many have done the past few years.

Dave, that was my point in point #10 (if that makes sense?).
Let's Compare 2007 teams taking the worst case scenario for UNC
Duke would go 10 deep but Coach K usually prefers a more concentrated lineup so here's the top 8 from each team.
McRoberts Thompson
Singler Ginyard
Nelson Green
Henderson Ellington
Paulus Lawson
Scheyer Frasor
King Graves
Zoubek Stephenson
Duke admittedly looks better there. But much better? No, and that's assuming Hansbrough leaves even though he's stated that he'd like to stay four years. (Lawson is too small and has too much to prove to go pro after 1 year) My point is that 2007 could be a very important season for Duke because unless they make waves next year, star 2008 recuits would likely favor UNC. Roy has already shown the ability to out recruit Duke the last 2 years head to head.

I'm not saying that UNC will beat Duke 10 straight times and Duke will become a forgotten program, all I'm saying is I think they are surpassing Duke but not by an insurmountable margin. Just like Duke did in the late 80s and early 90s before Dean Smith put his foot down.

William, it's probably not reasonable to take a 2-year stretch and bury the Duke program, particularly when Duke has won 7 of 8 conference titles (the real ones, not "regular season titles").

I agree with you on the hype Duke recruits get, although it cuts both ways--the ignorant anti-Duke crowd (not lumping you in here by any means!) tends to make the simultaneous arguments that 1) Duke recruits are overhyped and 2) Coach K isn't that great a coach because Duke has only barely been the best program in the country during his tenure while having so many McDonalds All-Americans, without seeming to notice the contradiction between the two positions.

That said, barring really bad decisions by relevant players (McRoberts and Hansbrough), Duke and UNC will both be solid national title contenders next year.

I said diminished. He may win another national title, but let's face it, I don't think he can expect to go 14-2 in the conference every year like he was averaging between 1998 and 2005. Honestly, he can win every ACC tournament title till the cows come home if he wants to. I have written about that elsewhere on here, but there is little or no correlation between winning the tournament and winning the national championship. I happen to believe that one reason why Duke seems to falter so horribly in the NCAA's (i.e., versus Kentucky, Indiana, UConn, MSU) is that he doesnt play many guys and wears them out in the stupid three day format that has nothing to do with the NCAA playoff format whatsoever.

william wrote:

So, Dave, why was it K's job to be teaching his players in the last minute, but not Roy's? And K himself does not agree with your argument Dave, because he said both teams should have had their scrubs in.

I was just talking about the sequence with 50 seconds left where Duke hit a three and called timeout. They then set up a press to try to get a steal, just like they would in a winnable game.

I think coaches should have their teams play as if games are still in play as much as possible. The exception is if we are talking about a complete rout and running up the score, but that wasn't an issue here.

Once it got down to 15 seconds or so and Hansbrough got fouled, that's a good time to get the starters out. And both teams pretty much did, other than Hansbrough, who was shooting the free throws. I don't blame either coach at that point. I think K was out of line for suggesting Hansbrough shouldn't have been in. Actually, I'm guessing he forgot that Hansbrough had been shooting the free throws just before all hell broke loose.

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=184357 :

"Though behind by 11 points, Duke still was pressing with 27 seconds left. Carolina broke that press, and Tar Heels guard Bobby Frasor advanced the ball to the edge of the foul lane with 21.5 seconds left. At that point, Frasor turned and headed toward midcourt, where he likely intended to dribble out the final seconds. There was no shot clock to beat, so the game was over. Instead, Duke's Greg Paulus reached out and fouled Frasor."

None of the Duke defenders has an answer for the above.

william-

That's certainly fair, I don't see a 98-00 like run of 15-1, 16-0, 15-1 coming soon for Duke (or UNC--as good as they are, remember, they did "only" go 11-5 in the conference this year. To have sustained runs like 14-2 require the conference to be down, which it was in the late-90s-early-00s).

As for the postseason, I actually agree with you that there isn't that strong a relationship between conference tourney and NCAA tourney success, although frankly a lot of that is that there's a huge amount of luck involved in winning the NCAA tournament that no one really wants to talk about. But, really, are UNC fans anxious to put Roy's NCAA tourney record against K's?

As for the Paulus foul, I didn't like it and never have liked those sorts of fouls. But I wish UNC fans would acknowledge that Coach K was clearly saying that both teams should have had walk-ons in (i.e., faulting himself to a significant degree). I understand Roy not--he was fed a misleading quote by a reporter--but we have the benefit of the full text.

Dave, neither Lawson nor Hansbrough will jump to the NBA. Wright will probably make the leap since he's projected to be top 6, but if Lawson/Hansbrough go to the pros, that'd be a mistake along the lines of Forte.

I think that is true, Steven. If you look at at 2005, there were 3 great teams, but maybe the conference was someone top heavy. Probably none of the teams this year is as good as Wake, Duke and UNC were that year, but perhaps up and down the conference is better.

If you look at what NC State did in 1973 and 1974, it is pretty amazing. If I am counting right, the Wolfpack won 30 straight conference games including two ACC championships, two Big Four titles and one NCAA championship. This includes 6 straight wins against Lefty and his great Terps and 9 straight wins against Dean and his Tar Heels. That gives State an incredible 15 wins over 2 years without a loss against top ten competition in the conference.