Ivy Athletics: Can they be relevant again in the major sports?

[k_amp_s]

<p>

ESPN would disagree with you.
Counting down the most prestigious programs since 1984-85 - Men’s College Basketball - ESPN.</p>

<p>In the 64-team era that started in the 1984-1985 season, Duke has been the most dominant college basketball program period.

</p>

<p>Outdated (and only takes into account a time period favorable to Duke) - w/ its most recent national championship, UNC has TWO more than Duke, and has won 2 since Duke won their last one.</p>

<p>

Um, except the rest of the Duke student body constitutes a top 10 national student body academically so we can cut the athletes some slack.

</p>

<p>Um, what Stanford and NU do w/ regard to recruits is “cutting athletes some slack”, what Duke does for men’s BB and FB is embarrassing.</p>

<p>And oh, Stanford and NU also have “top-10” student bodies.</p>

<p>

Everyone has their slumps. People forget how god awful UNC was in the late 90s and how bad Indiana and Kentucky have been for god knows how long and these are supposed to be “basketball powerhouses”.</p>

<p>Even in the past 5 years, which is arguably the worst stretch in Duke bball history, Duke has made it to 3 Sweet 16s. Not too shabby.

</p>

<p>A slump lasts for maybe 3-4 seasons. Duke has had one really good season this decade (aside from their national championship in 2001) and even then, they lost to a lower-seeded team.</p>

<p>“Worst stretch in Duke BB history” - LMAO!!</p>

<p>From 1970 to 1974, Duke just barely had a winning record and from 1925 thru 1928 had a losing record.</p>

<p>And oh, in 2007-8 IU was 25-8, 21-11 in 2006-7 and played for the national championship in 2002 - so I don’t know where you get the idea that the Hoosiers have been “bad for so long.”</p>

<p>[Do you really have clue regarding what you are talking about?]</p>

<p>

Are you honestly this dimwitted? If a team is ranked first going to the tournament, HOW IN THE WORLD IS IT SUPPOSED TO BEAT A HIGHER RANKED TEAM? 1 IS THE HIGHEST SEED. That takes away 4 of those seasons by that logic. The remaining 4 seasons don’t really follow a pattern and it’s tough to live up to expectations when you are seeded #2 and #3 as well. The 2007 tourny result was just a monumental collapse. Hey, it happens.

</p>

<p>Talk about dimwittedness - lol!</p>

<p>I’m talking about repeatedly LOSING to lower seeded teams; and besides, Duke in HALF of those years during that 8 year stretch was NOT seeded no.1 - and really, not beating a team seeded higher than 5th in 8 years is pretty sad.</p>

<p>

Basically, you picked an arbitrary set of data points to prove that Duke is overrated. Epic fail on your part. How about the 2001 season when Duke WON THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP? Conveniently forgot about that didn’t you.

</p>

<p>Uhh, maybe you should get better reading comprehension.</p>

<p>I stated that Duke has been overrated **THIS decade<a href=“how%20is%20that%20arbitrary?”>/b</a> since the 2001 season (and I’m not the only one who thinks so - so does the NYTimes); I wasn’t talking about Duke during the 1980s-1990s.</p>

<p>Btw, I did mention Duke’s 2001 season, so once again, you’re wrong.</p>

<p>

Who cares? We’re still better at Northwestern in everything. Remember when our football team embarrassed your at home? HAHAHAHA.

</p>

<p>Nothing more needs to be said other than you’re WRONG again, but that’s hardly surprising.</p>