From 1993-2009 Duke Signed 32 McDonald's AA; Coach K Won 1 Title

[dlh331]

IMO, Coach K is among the 2-3 best coaches ever. Only a true hater would doubt his status. But I constantly
read how Calipari should have won more than 1 title over the last 6 years with all the 5* and Micky Ds players
we have signed.

In that 17 year period from 1993-2009 Duke signed 32 McDonald's AA, 25-30 x 5*, and led the nation in the
recruiting rankings at least 4 times. Unlike the UK guys, Duke's players generally stayed longer than 1 season.
An argument can be made Duke had a top 3 team in talent nearly every season during that era. Yet "all" they
had to show for it was 1 title, 2 runners-up finishes and 4 Final 4s.

Cal is getting to the Final 4 nearly every season; he'll most likely win another title or 2. If he doesn't it has
still be as much fun as any era of my 55+ years of UK fandom.

Darryl

 

[KyFord]

Interesting stats, thanks. I totally agree with you as well, what Cal has done here in 6 years is amazing and historic.

When you really think about it, winning a title in college basketball is extremely rare and difficult. It takes not only a great team but also some luck too. Final Fours are the mark of a successful year for any program in the country. Tom Izzo is praised constantly for his Final 4 runs yet Cal is criticized.

We went through 13 years without a Final 4 and I think some fans are spoiled. Calipari has put Kentucky back on top and there is no coach in the country that would have been able to match what he has done here in 6 years.

 

[TUL]

Fans get itchy, and seem to forget, amidst the hype of huge recruiting and regular season wins, that national titles are nearly impossible to win. Check out Duke's win total over that period... I bet it is the best in the nation. But titles are so very hard to win...

Basketball is a lot more fun when the regular season wins mean something. Unfortunately, historically, they sort of don't

 

[coolcat9lives]

Thanks for information, it definitely puts things in perspective but..............NO MORE DUKE THREADS!!! Please?

 

[jrpross]

Thanks for information, it definitely puts things in perspective but..............NO MORE DUKE THREADS!!! Please?

I'm of the same mindset. I actually find this quite interesting and a very nice response to all the people worrying so much about Duke. However I don't want this to be like the Louisville board where all of their posts are about Kentucky.

 

[ThroughBlue]

The ones complaining about Duke threads are the same ones replying and bumping them to the top. Irony

 

[wcc31]

What???? Coach K just started signing elite prospects these last two years. Before that, he never got any.

 

[dezyDeco]

In that 17 year period from 1993-2009 Duke signed 32 McDonald's AA, 25-30 x 5*, and led the nation in the
recruiting rankings at least 4 times. Unlike the UK guys, Duke's players generally stayed longer than 1 season.
An argument can be made Duke had a top 3 team in talent nearly every season during that era. Yet "all" they had to show for it was 1 title, 2 runners-up finishes and 4 Final 4s.


Darryl

...and they had a little help to get that one, even:

(piggyback rides are not always a foul, when you're Dook)

 

[harlanhomeboy]

OP, thank you for this wise post. People need to chill out on Duke, especially since we are going to hang a big L on them this year

 

[UK-chulo]

I made a spreadsheet on this and posted it a couple of years ago. K has had far more bullets in his gun than Cal, plus has been in a BCS conference for the majority of his career.

 

[Son_Of_Saul]

Not counting this year's class, we have had something like 27 McDonald's All-Americans since 1999, plus guys who didn't make the game for various reasons like Wall, Noel, Miller, Bledsoe, WCS, Orton, Hayes, Meeks, Azubuike.

Like someone else said, it's hard to win the title. There are about a dozen other schools that are going all-in the win the national title, with coaches who get paid millions to do everything they can to disrupt our momentum. Some of our fans will never get it, but that's okay.

 

[KA4Prez]

K had talent. Yes. However, it's convenient how the time span of 1993-2009 is used, considering he's won 4 more titles if you expand that range from 1991-2015.

You have to also remember that during that era, while Duke was good, they were NOT the premier program. North Carolina and Kentucky could definitely lay claim to portions of that time period, being the most dominating program. You could probably throw in Kansas, Connecticut and Arizona as well.

It's a great number for Duke and K, but it isn't comparable to just how dominant Cal has been in recruiting. In 7 classes, Calipari has 21 Burger Boys. This does not include John Wall, Enes Kanter, Nerlens Noel and Jamal Murray (all ineligible for certain reasons). The first 3 were all consensus top 5 players in the class and Murray is right there.

 

[Shawn (uk7spd)]

K had talent. Yes. However, it's convenient how the time span of 1993-2009 is used, considering he's won 4 more titles if you expand that range from 1991-2015.

You have to also remember that during that era, while Duke was good, they were NOT the premier program. North Carolina and Kentucky could definitely lay claim to portions of that time period, being the most dominating program. You could probably throw in Kansas, Connecticut and Arizona as well.

It's a great number for Duke and K, but it isn't comparable to just how dominant Cal has been in recruiting. In 7 classes, Calipari has 21 Burger Boys. This does not include John Wall, Enes Kanter, Nerlens Noel and Jamal Murray (all ineligible for certain reasons). The first 3 were all consensus top 5 players in the class and Murray is right there.

The problem with your analysis is that players did not leave college nearly as fast. If the top players back then only played 1 or maybe 2 years, you don't think K's recruiting numbers during that time span would be triple what he had? When half your team (and nearly all your best players) leave every year, you have to recruit very well every year to keep the ball rolling.

Also, while other programs were dominant during that time span (including UK probably matching Duke during the 90s), Duke was considered one of the top two or three programs the entire time. Just like now, there are a few top programs (Duke, UK, Kansas).

 

[Neue Regel]

...and they had a little help to get that one, even:

(piggyback rides are not always a foul, when you're Dook)

Yea because if not for that one play Arizona win's by 30 and Dunleavy doesn't hit four 3's(18 second half pts) and Battier doesn't dominate down the stretch, Boozer doesn't get a double-double and of course Arizona's backcourt doesn't go 4-22 from 3.

Regarding the OP, I could care less about Happy Meal kids. It's not about kids named by a burger Co, it's about College AA'S. That's what you want if you want to get titles. In that time span Duke was on the cusp of winning two in losing two games in the final 50 seconds. (1994 vs Arkansas and UCONN in 1999.) Also, that time for College Basketball there were greater teams every year than there is now. And as others pointed out in general, winning a title is incredibly difficult.

 

[Neue Regel]

The problem with your analysis is that players did not leave college nearly as fast. If the top players back then only played 1 or maybe 2 years, you don't think K's recruiting numbers during that time span would be triple what he had? When half your team (and nearly all your best players) leave every year, you have to recruit very well every year to keep the ball rolling.

Also, while other programs were dominant during that time span (including UK probably matching Duke during the 90s), Duke was considered one of the top two or three programs the entire time. Just like now, there are a few top programs (Duke, UK, Kansas).

Good points. Duke was in 5 National Championship games in the 1990's. That's a 50% ratio of being in the biggest game in the sport in that decade. Nobody did that. Not even Kentucky. (three Finals) not UNC (5 Final Fours but only one appearance on Monday night. Heels were semi-final victims four out of five trips.)

 

[KA4Prez]

..and I get that. However, the initial post was to bash K and to defend Cal. Great. Cal doesn't need defended. However, it's easy to rip K for that time period when you remove 8 of the surrounding years, 4 of which included Duke national titles.

What's the OP's argument? K should have 10 titles?

Between his first and last for K, you're talking 25 years. Cal has 1 in 6 at UK. It's pretty much even...

 

[KA4Prez]

Good points. Duke was in 5 National Championship games in the 1990's. That's a 50% ratio of being in the biggest game in the sport in that decade. Nobody did that. Not even Kentucky. (three Finals) not UNC (5 Final Fours but only one appearance on Monday night. Heels were semi-final victims four out of five trips.)

It's also hard to lump "the 90's" together as Duke 90-92 was a far different program than Duke 95-97. It's not a shock that UK dominated during the 3 year period that was by far K's worst at Duke since he took over a destitute program. He almost had more losses in that 3-year span (40) than he had in the next 9 years (42).

 

[Neue Regel]

It's also hard to lump "the 90's" together as Duke 90-92 was a far different program than Duke 95-97. It's not a shock that UK dominated during the 3 year period that was by far K's worst at Duke since he took over a destitute program. He almost had more losses in that 3-year span (40) than he had in the next 9 years (42).

destitute? when K took over, Duke was coming off an ACC Championship and an NCAA elite 8 appearance having beat some team named Kentucky in Rupp arena in the 1980 NCAA Tournament round of sixteen. Had spent several weeks ranked # 1 in both that season, the prior season (78/79) and won the ACC Championship and played for the National Championship two seasons before that. (1977/78) I would not describe the state of the program as destitute in 1980 when he was hired. Many fans were sad to see Bill Foster go.

Also that was not K's worst period at Duke. His first three years were.

 

[KA4Prez]

Yes, his first 3 years is what I was referring to...

 

[dezyDeco]

Yea because if not for that one play Arizona win's by 30 and Dunleavy doesn't hit four 3's(18 second half pts) and Battier doesn't dominate down the stretch, Boozer doesn't get a double-double and of course Arizona's backcourt doesn't go 4-22 from 3.

.

Please refresh my memory... what # foul should that have been, and at what time in the game?

 

[ArmyWildcat81]

Good points. Duke was in 5 National Championship games in the 1990's. That's a 50% ratio of being in the biggest game in the sport in that decade. Nobody did that. Not even Kentucky. (three Finals) not UNC (5 Final Fours but only one appearance on Monday night. Heels were semi-final victims four out of five trips.)

Kiss our ass and take a hike Duke nerd.

 

[Neue Regel]

Kiss our ass and take a hike Duke nerd.

I wish I could be the biggest nerd on the planet, maybe I'd have a lot more money! alas...

 

[Neue Regel]

Please refresh my memory... what # foul should that have been, and at what time in the game?

I think his 3rd but I can't remember the time. Late first maybe. He was 5-15 in the game and out of control throughout taking terrible shots. I don't know where his head was at but Duke was much smoother when he sat with foul issues as Duhon did a terrific job out there running the team. Everyone on that team played well except Williams. (That's one of the best title teams in the last two decades imo.)

 

[Willy4UK]

With the way the NCAA gives Duke cake walks in the tourneys and "special reffing", I'm more surprised that they don't have more titles.

Just glad some of those teams were able to push pass the special privileges given to Duke and overcome all odds to beat them.

 

[HeLooks2MuchLikeDave]

^ mmm, yes.

 

[dezyDeco]

I think his 3rd but I can't remember the time. Late first maybe. .)

I appreciate your response. Would've been #3 at about the halfway point (9+ left on the clock) of the first half.

Nobody knows how it would've played out if that one had been called. What we do know is that Dook didn't have to worry about such things, that night.

BTW, Battier (you mentioned his domination) had 4 fouls... during the entire Final Four. 4 fouls in 80 FF minutes.

Regardless, just because I only posted one photo, didn't mean that was all there was to it. IMO, that picture (it does say a 1000 words!) is the ultimate symbol of Dook-favoritism. There's not enough web space on Rupp Rafters to post all of the evidence that supports the widely held theory that Dook has received preferential treatment during some pretty big games.

 

[ArmyWildcat81]

Duke vs Zona, and Duke vs UConn were both free ref given titles to duke.

I do remember UK kicking the dog snot out of Duke in the 78 title however.

 

[Blueaz]

..and I get that. However, the initial post was to bash K and to defend Cal. Great. Cal doesn't need defended. However, it's easy to rip K for that time period when you remove 8 of the surrounding years, 4 of which included Duke national titles.

What's the OP's argument? K should have 10 titles?

Between his first and last for K, you're talking 25 years. Cal has 1 in 6 at UK. It's pretty much even...

IMO. he was only defending CAL. Not bashing K at all. He was just saying it is hard to win the NACCT.
Why is that so hard for some to comprehend?

 

[Neue Regel]

Duke vs Zona, and Duke vs UConn were both free ref given titles to duke.

I do remember UK kicking the dog snot out of Duke in the 78 title however.

Of course because titles are only earned when UK wins them! however since they don't revoke titles as a direct result of "whimpering" from rival schools fans, I hope they continue to be given.

 

[brianpoe]

@cutnets

Your thoughts on this thread?

 

[ganner918]

K also went to Final Fours in 86, 88, 89, and 90 without winning a title. He can't win the big one! He won't adjust! He only wins when he has a clearly superior team!

 

[.S&C.]

Good points. Duke was in 5 National Championship games in the 1990's. That's a 50% ratio of being in the biggest game in the sport in that decade. Nobody did that. Not even Kentucky. (three Finals) not UNC (5 Final Fours but only one appearance on Monday night. Heels were semi-final victims four out of five trips.)

and you still were not team of the decade. UK holds that claim.

I actually don't think Duke has ever been the team "of the decade" have they?

 

[.S&C.]

Of course because titles are only earned when UK wins them! however since they don't revoke titles as a direct result of "whimpering" from rival schools fans, I hope they continue to be given.

I think people just get sick of the favoritism. It's blatant and dishonest. It's why very little people respect Duke outside of the exchange program and national media. It just doesn't always seem like Duke has to earn it.

 

[Hoskins91]

The ones complaining about Duke threads are the same ones replying and bumping them to the top. Irony

There's nothing else to post in.

 

[ganner918]

and you still were not team of the decade. UK holds that claim.

I actually don't think Duke has ever been the team "of the decade" have they?

It's really incredibly close between Kentucky and Duke for "team of the 90s."

• Two titles each.
• Duke 2 runners up, Kentucky 1.
• Duke 5 total FFs, Kentucky 4.
• Kentucky 7 Elite 8s, Duke 6.
• Kentucky 7 Sweet 16s, Duke 6.
• Duke 9 tournament appearances, Kentucky 8.
• Kentucky 81.7%, Duke 77.7%

 

[Neue Regel]

and you still were not team of the decade. UK holds that claim.

I actually don't think Duke has ever been the team "of the decade" have they?

There is no official recognition for such a thing so anyone can name themselves anything. (UNC has excelled at that) Kansas won the most games, Duke won the most Tournament and Final Four games. Kentucky had an awesome run as well so I'm sure all three bases are happy.

 

[ganner918]

Hell and Carolina made the tournament all 10 years, had 7 sweet 16s, only 5 elite 8s, 5 FFs, no runners up and only 1 title. All had incredibly strong decades.

 

[KMKAT]

Hated losing to Wisconsin last year, and Duke took advantage.

There's not a stat out there that makes up for our loss last year.

It's not easy to get over, but somehow Cal's recruiting allows it.

 

[fla.cat]

I like Cal a lot.
He has been out coached in two recent big games, U Conn, and Wisconsin.
His refusal to zone, or change defense line ups is totally perplexing for a man as smart as he appears to be.

coach K has won 3 times in 14 years...that is fact.

 

[dlh331]

I like Cal a lot.
He has been out coached in two recent big games, U Conn, and Wisconsin.
His refusal to zone, or change defense line ups is totally perplexing for a man as smart as he appears to be.

coach K has won 3 times in 14 years...that is fact.

Actually, it is not a fact. Coach K has won 3 times in the last 15 years.....

Darryl