Oh I get it. Bring up NCAA title, which I already admitted to Duke struggling, and you guys winning it all. I bring up head to head and you bring up titles, so this was my reply. Typical response to run from the facts. The amount of titles mean nothing to you, but if Roy were to pass K for total titles, you and some others would pound your chests
"carolina's just better"
- Thread starter Heelswin
- Start date
Why do you feel the need to insult me Gary?
Yeah, Dean just beat K most of the time at the beginning. He won 8 of the last 9 matchups against duke. It changed alright.
This is the easiest argument there is to settle: the dookie himself said it--- "Carolina's just better"....end of argument!!!
What I found doesn't quite go with your view. In their first 9 matchups, Smith won 8, after that he was 16-13 vs K. Overall he was 24-14 head to head. It's like I stated Dick, that early on he whipped K, then the rivalry leveled out after K built Duke up.
Coach Smith was great, can't deny. So is K
Look, we like our coach and you like yours. Can you imagine how this conversation would be going if I tried to defend Roy on your board? The reaction you've gotten is mild by comparison.
Personally, I wouldn't trade Roy for 10 Knight Lites. But then I'm a little biased. One is a great coach and a good man, one is simply a great coach who has let his unbridled ego and desire to win cause him to act too much like his mentor for my tastes.
Personally, I wouldn't trade Roy for 10 Knight Lites. But then I'm a little biased. One is a great coach and a good man, one is simply a great coach who has let his unbridled ego and desire to win cause him to act too much like his mentor for my tastes.
Then what you found is wrong. If you Google "Dean Smith vs Coach K", the first sentence reads: Dean Smith was 59–35 vs. Duke and 24–14 vs. Krzyzewski, winning 8 of the last 9 matchups before retiring in 1997.
That feeling is certainly mutual with your board. I made 2 flippin' poasts on your board the night of the championship game (weren't inflammatory, but I admit were gloating) and I got banned. Pretty short leash considering I had poasted there in the past as well.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2017/04/roy...-unc-ncaa-tournament-success-tom-izzo-coach-k
^ Couple interesting links on who is better. I would offer some math that may clear this up a little bit. Now consider that Roy's wins have ALWAYS come as head coach of a team in a power conference, not mid level programs but blue blood programs where the competition is very strong EVERY year. In other words, no weak conference fluff to Roy's record like would be there if Roy coached Memphis, UMass, a SEC school, or Army.
The math:
Roy has a career win total of 816 having head coached 1032 total games, his winning % is 79%
K has won 1071 games having head coached 1401 games for a winning % of 76%
Now that is a very large sample size for both coaches so the % are not likely to change for either of these hall of fame coaches. K has coached 369 more games than Roy has so if we apply Roy's expected winning % to that extra number of games so that the games each have coached is equalized, it would add ( 369 games x Roy's career win % of 79%) would add another 291 wins to Roy's current total = 1323 wins for Roy to Ks current total of 1071.
Now it is not likely that Roy coaches another 369 + how ever many more K coaches to see the exact final records be equally considered, best we do do at this point is extrapolate statistically having a large sample set in order to draw reasonable conclusions.
Bottom line, I will take Roy! LOL
It was broadcast on ESPN Radio sir; maybe two-three weeks ago. Then briefly talked about on ESPN. Not at all making this up.
Again, Roy and K have two different approaches, both of which are very effective. I think we can all agree on that. After that, it's a matter of personal preference.
Yeah sorry, did this in the middle of 3 other ongoing issues, thanks for the correction arch!
Matchups are nothing more than what it says: matchups. Dook plays a 4 guard system heavily reliant on the 3 ball which is tough for UNC and its big man dominated team to defend. When Dook has hot shooting nights it can allow for inferior teams like their 2012 and 2016 teams to steal a game from a much better UNC team, its also what makes them susceptible to upsets in March as one cold shooting night will end their season to inferior teams. Ill take UNC's approach of outrebounding and outscoring in the paint 99% of the teams they play, which is a big reason why theyve never lost before the Elite 8 as a 1 seed and George Mason in 2006 is the only time he's lost to a lower seed before the Elite 8 while at UNC
Wow, I though Duke fans were just messing around when they said y'all counted the 1924 title....I'm curious, why do you count it? I'm serious with this question, not trying to flame.
Take it away. 6-5. Why does it bother Duke fans so much? it's pretty pathetic.
One need look no farther than the first page of their board to see their obsession with UNC. Three threads about us with over 200 pages of posts. We live in their heads rent free.
Nah man, I'm really curious why it would be considered. Do you all really count UK's titles prior to the full integration of collegiate hoops?
Tell me, has there never been a college football champion until the last couple years? Because up till recently, the championship was appointed, games were not played that left no doubt, I would suggest with such a small field that even today college football is not as definitive about who the real champs are as basketball is.
BUT, there was a time that the annual college basketball champs were decided by acclaim as opposed to #1 playing #2. That is how we were named champs for that early title. Do you think Alabama will give up any of their championships prior to the play off system, will ND, will any other football program?
They actually did play basketball prior to the NCAA and there actually were national champions prior to the NCAA.
Ok so you don't consider a National Title then, through the NCAA. Gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. Both UNC and Duke should be proud for what they've accomplished and for what is the best rivalry in sports (even the stats show that).
I consider national titles valid no matter the method of certification at the time. Those football nattys were nattys, ask Socal fans if they devalue them at all even thou no play off system was in place. If all the sports writers come together and name a national champion and that is the system used in that time then the champs are the champs. I think I have been pretty darn clear about this even if I have not said it in the way you wanted me to.
And let the excuses begin.....
Multiple NBA executives concerned about Trevon Duval & his struggles shooting ball. One felt Duke would be better with Tre Jones- this year. ----Jeff Goodman, ESPN
Multiple NBA executives concerned about Trevon Duval & his struggles shooting ball. One felt Duke would be better with Tre Jones- this year. ----Jeff Goodman, ESPN
Tread lightly? I asked a simple question and restated in the way I interpreted it (and he/she then re-clarified). I then paid a compliment to the rivalry. I'll step out - it's apparent Duke fans aren't welcome, peaceful or not.
Why would you think that, when there's a banner for the 1924 championship hanging?
Lets compare both programs. duke has zero nationals until K comes along. Bubas was close but no trophy. UNC won a national under three coaches. Anyone think that Smith or Williams would "borrow" a jersey number that had been retired? To deminish a past "hero" just to entice a newby to come in?
How many highschools players reclassified just to be assigned to the bench?
Then to transfer...
K has five trophies, but how many abused potentials did he have to walk on to fortify his own image? Down deep duke fans, do you really enjoy learning a new set of names EVERY year?
Zig Ziglar said, "People go where there is excitement but stay where there is love". Carolina is just a better program.
