<p>Its true. Duke is terrible in football, and even its basketball program is second rate when compared to others in the state (couldn't resist). And those are the two biggest sports there are when it comes to college athletics.</p>
<p>When people start referring to a top 10 nationally ranked team as "not that good" or "second rate", that's when you know you have an elite program on your hands. Michigan Football no longer can be considered as such after this year's complete collapse. Michigan is NOT EVEN a good football team, although the school still has a strong football tradition. Duke Basketball is still an elite program and its tradition is arguably as strong if not stronger than Michigan's Football tradition.</p>
<p>Duke is a better football team than Michigan. We went 4-8 while Michigan went 3-9 I believe.</p>
<p>Michigan Hockey? This clown rjkofnovi jokes about about the lack of lacrosse's national appeal and he brings up hockey? HAHAHAHA.</p>
<p>Duke is a better value than Michigan overall IMO and may be worth some extra cost depending on the financial situation of your parents. Like others have said, I would wait till you have the financial packages in your hand.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke is a better football team than Michigan. We went 4-8
[/quote]
I like your spirit. 4-8 is certainly a big improvement over:</p>
<p>1-11 (2007)
0-12 (2006)
1-10 (2005)
2-9 (2004)</p>
<p>
[quote]
This clown rjkofnovi jokes about about the lack of lacrosse's national appeal and he brings up hockey?
[/quote]
Novi has a point. Hockey is a big time sport. There are enough fans to support a 30-team professional league in North America. The NHL has been in existence since 1917. Perhaps you can tell me about a professional lacrosse team?</p>
<p>Furthermore, Hockey is a more thrilling game to watch than Lacrosse. Besides, the Michigan hockey team play 20 home games with an average attendance 6,500 students per game. Duke's Lacrosse team plays how many home games? 12? Maybe 13? And how many students attend those home games on average? 1,500? Maybe 2,000? </p>
<p>Now don't get me wrong, there are many important sports in college athletics. Michigan has its fair share of them, from Swimming to Wrestling and from Gymnastics to Softball. Lord knows I have enjoyed watching Women's Gymnastics! hehe! But when it comes to college athletics, nothing beats Basketball and Football. Baseball and Hockey are also popular. Once you get past those four sports, popularity, spirit and attendance really starts to fade.</p>
<p>ring<em>of</em>fire. Please get over yourself already. Lacrosse has little to no national appea except when a team gets in to trouble for alleged criminal activity. I would venture to say that most people aren't even sure what it is exactly! Then again, I'm pretty sure most people have no idea where Duke is located either. Of course they do know they are traditionally good in BB.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Michigan Hockey? This clown rjkofnovi jokes about about the lack of lacrosse's national appeal and he brings up hockey? HAHAHAHA.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Dude. I don't have much of a dog in this fight--if my kid had a choice I'd probably encourage Duke over U-M, and U-M pays my salary.</p>
<p>BUT. Making this remark about Michigan hockey makes me seriously wonder where you are getting your information. Hockey may not be a nationally popular sport (despite the NHL, which helps at least a little) but Michigan hockey is a hugely good time. Yost Arena is considered one of the best college hockey environments. Yes, Cornell alums, we acknowledge you taught us nearly everything we know about exuberant hockey fandom. Thank you! We took that and ran with it.</p>
<p>As for the Lacrosse cracks from people dissing Duke--what happened to those boys was horrible, and I find it hard to even joke about it.</p>
<p>I am not dissing Duke for what happened to those guys, although I feel the university didn't support them well at all. I agree what occured was horrible and unfair. My point was that the only way college lacrosse would make national headlines was because of this unfortunate incident.</p>
<p>In terms of overall quality, Duke and Michigan are roughly the same. Michigan is is probably stronger academically whereas Duke probably offers a more personalized undergraduate experience. That is not to say that Michigan does not offer a personalized experience or that Duke does not have high-powered academics. The differences either way are marginal. </p>
<p>Duke is a Basketball powerhouse, Michigan is a football powerhouse. Both schools have nice and spirited campuses. </p>
<p>Beyond that, the two schools couldn't be more different. Ann Arbor is a liberal and pleasant college town that loves the University of Michigan. Durham is a conservative and no-so-pleasant college town that does not care much for Duke. Duke has an elitist, greek-oriented, relatively conservative and Southern feel. Michigan has a laid-back, relatively liberal, independent Midwestern vibe. </p>
<p>In terms of graduate school placement, degrees from both schools will be equally respected since both schools arehighly regarded in the academic world. </p>
<p>In terms of professional placement, both schools do well, depending on the region and industry. In the East Coast, South and Souteast, Duke will probably trump Michigan. In the Midwest, West coast and internationally, Michigan will probably trump Duke. I say probably because it depends on the firm and the individual. In NYC and DC, both schools are equaly regarded. </p>
<p>If one school costs significantly less than the other, go for it since it is not worth paying more for one than for the other since both schools are roughly equal. If the schools cost roughly the same to attend (within 20% of each other), then I suggest you go for fit since the schools are significantly different. The notion that one school is a better value than the other school if cost is not an issue is not at all correct. Both schools offer equal quality, albeit differently.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke is a better football team than Michigan. We went 4-8 while Michigan went 3-9 I believe.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>HAHahaha! Thanks for the laugh!</p>
<p>
[quote]
When people start referring to a top 10 nationally ranked team as "not that good" or "second rate",
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I didn't say "second rate", I said "second rate in its state" and that was meant to be a lighthearted jab.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke has an elitist, greek-oriented, relatively conservative and Southern feel.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Duke is not southern at all. Most people in the south consider Duke to actually be an appendage of New Jersey.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Michigan Football no longer can be considered as such after this year's complete collapse.
[/quote]
My only comment to this is that App State has a literal shrine to the victory over Michigan in their student union, which I found rather hilarious.</p>
<p>Duke has a Southern feel. 15% come from NC, another 21% come from the Southeast and another 15% come from the DC, VA, MD and MidAtlantic area.</p>
<p>I also just wanted to add to whoever said college lacrosse isn't a big deal...
After the football bowl games, the NCAA Men's Lacrosse Finals are the most highly attended collegiate championship games. And if you've ever been to one of these games, they are more fun and more exciting than any basketball game I've ever seen.</p>
<p>Eliza, they may be well attended but you' won't see these lacrosse games on television. There is no consumer demand for it.</p>
<p>Eliza, I have attended several Lacrosse games when visiting friends of mine at Johns Hopkins and Syracuse. When I attended Cornell as a graduate student, I went to several Lacrosse games. They are boring. Even my friends who attended those schools thought as much. The only reason the attendance at the Lacrosse NC games is high is because they are played in NFL stadia that generally seat 60,000+ spectators. Hockey and Basketball arenas cannot seat more than 40,000 spectators. But if you were to survey the nation, interest for college Lacrosse would not surface. Basketball and Football would be the two 800 pound gorillas in this domain, and Baseball and Hockey would be solid runner ups. All other sports would trail significantly.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke has a Southern feel. 15% come from NC, another 21% come from the Southeast and another 15% come from the DC, VA, MD and MidAtlantic area.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Even if 36% of its students come from the southeast, that means that 64% don't. Most schools with a "southern" feel have a much higher percentage of people from the southeast.</p>
<p>Also, for the record, not too many people in the south consider DC, Maryland, and the Midatlantic area to be "southern" anymore. Virginia is an exception.</p>
<p>I seem to recall a game hockey game played outdoors in Spartan Stadium back in 2001 between MSU and U-M that drew over 75,000 spectators. It was just a regular season game too I might add.</p>
<p>Point is Michigan has better sports than Duke. Duke has 9 championships in all sports combined. I'm pretty sure Michigan's football team has more championships than that.
There's no contest here. Duke's basketball team has been consistently overrated the past couple of years, as evidenced by their several no-shows this season</p>
<p>I think the difference is more clear if you look at their bottom programs. :) Michigan's are still semi-decent but Duke's (swimming/football) are awful. </p>
<p>Academically, it depends. You will be with higher concentration of classmates with higher test scores and more impressive HS resume at Duke. On the other hand, Michigan's departments are highly ranked across the board; Duke's departments are less strong. I wouldn't pay more than 20K extra to go to Duke when money is an issue.</p>
<p>Cuse0507, northern Virginia and Hampton Roads have changed significantly to the point that the populations have more Northern transplants than native residents. </p>
<p>I agree that western and southern Virginia are the only true regions left with a southern heritage. North Carolina is going through this same transition too. Why do you think VA and NC turned blue last November?? :)</p>
<p>The Cold War game in 2001 still holds the attendance record for any hockey game ever. It's likely to get broken in the next few years, since there have been rumors floating around about a number of possible outdoor games in the not-too-distant future (Michigan/Michigan State and BC/BU doubleheader at Fenway Park, Michigan/Red Wings double-header, Wisconsin has expressed interest in hosting a game at Camp Randall with Michigan as the leading candidate).</p>
<p>The NCAA Men's hockey Frozen Four next year has the potential to beat the lax finals in attendance, since it's being held at Ford Field (home of the Lions). How well it ends up panning out depends on the sightlines/placement of the ice sheet, pricing of tickets, and honestly whether or not Michigan/Michigan State make it that far. It's been said the event would be "priced to sell out", so hopefully that means tickets are going to be a little cheaper than the usual $80 for the semifinals+finals. I think it's also worth pointing out that even with last year's Frozen Four being out in Denver, every single school with a Division 1 team had at least one person visibly representing their school.</p>