Besides a surprisingly good run in the late 1980s and the early 1990s, Michigan has fielded an awful basketball program for a school with such an esteemed athletic tradition. U of M has never won the Big 10 conference tournament and has only 1 NCAA tournament championship, 2 title game appearances and 4 Final Four appearances in the program’s history. More recently, Michigan hasn’t made the Sweet Sixteen since 1994 and has only made the NCAA tournament twice in the last 15+ years.</p>
<p>
The last time these two teams played was in 1978 so there really isn’t any overlap at all. A football game between Duke and Michigan today would be very competitive. Lets see how the Wolverines do against Virginia Tech in the Sugar Bowl. Duke only lost 14-10 to the Hokies and played a lot of games close this year versus good ACC teams to emerge just short nearly every time. </p>
<p>Besides, Duke holds a winning record against Arkansas and Nebraska, does that mean its a better program?:D</p>
<p>Duke Football has been downright awful for the past two decades but in the context of history, it is an ok program. Duke has been to 2 Orange Bowls, 2 Rose Bowls, a Cotton Bowl and a Sugar Bowl. It has beaten Arkansas, Alabama and Nebraska in the Cotton, Sugar and Orange Bowls respectively.</p>
<p>More importantly, Duke has won 17 conference championships, has produced 53 All-Americans and has had 10 ACC Players of the Year (the most in the ACC) and has 3 Pro Football Hall of Famers associated with the program.</p>
<p>Duke has been stronger in Football historically than Michigan has been in Basketball.</p>
<p>fwiw, out here on the West Coast, I have never heard any negative talk about Duke. Many people do not know exactly where it is located. I have heard it referred to as the Stanford of the East Coast, because it is seen as the best private non-Ivy Division 1 university on the East Coast (mirroring Stanford).</p>
Uh no, reread what Bay posted again. He said Duke is seen as the best private non-Ivy school in the East Coast according to Californians. That doesn’t really imply that all 8 Ivies are seen as better schools, just that at least 1 or more Ivies are seen as comparable or superior universities to Duke.</p>
<p>I agree with this. In fact I’ve heard of the Duke/UNC rivalry as mirroring the Stanford/Berkeley rivalry. Both rivalries consist of a famous private school and a nearby state school. And both schools of each rivalry are regarded as academically prestigious.</p>
<p>I should have written it as “the best private Division 1 scholarship university on East Coast (mirroring Stanford).” I did not mean to imply anything with regard to its standing in comparison with the Ivies.</p>
<p>M go blue has been dominated of late by the Spartans in basketball, and The Ohio State University in football(excluding this year). With Urban Meyer as the new football coach and the power-house hoops team in Columbus the wolverines and their fanscan only hope. Imo there are 3 great schools in the Midwest-UChicago, Northwestern, and ND. The ND Victory March is also the best fight song. Duke has a lot of academic and athletic rivals-Michigan isn’t one of them.</p>
<p>“M go blue has been dominated of late by the Spartans in basketball, and The Ohio State University in football(excluding this year). With Urban Meyer as the new football coach and the power-house hoops team in Columbus the wolverines and their fanscan only hope. Imo there are 3 great schools in the Midwest-UChicago, Northwestern, and ND. The ND Victory March is also the best fight song. Duke has a lot of academic and athletic rivals-Michigan isn’t one of them.”</p>
<p>To quote bclintonk who I completely agree with:</p>
<p>“Speaking only for myself, I’d add: It’s partly the whiny-ness of a certain number of Duke students, alums, parents, and supporters–surely not all, probably not even most, but a particularly vocal minority who do a lot to create a public face and a public voice and, consequently, a public image for the university. Whiny-ness accompanied by arrogance, I might add, a singularly unpalatable combination.”</p>
As far as I know, only three colleges have finished a season undefeated and unscored upon – Colgate, Duke, and Tennessee. </p>
<p>Sure, the relevance of the relative success of Duke’s football team 60-70 years ago is pretty questionable, like Chicago’s boast about being the only team undefeated by Notre Dame in its heyday decades ago. Nevertheless, Duke football was a team to be reckoned with in its prime.</p>
<p>I stand corrected warblersrule. Actually, Chicago was a football power at one time. They won a national championship back in the early
1900’s and had one of the most famous football coaches of all time, Amos Alonzo Stagg.</p>
<p>This is exactly the reason, esp. here on CC.</p>
<p>When schools like UChicago, Cornell, JHU, etc. have been discussed here, who have been among the most vocal posters denigrating the academics, prestige, etc. of those schools? (You all remember those discussion about Cornell, don’t cha?)</p>
<p>Duke boosters</p>
<p>Even when non-HYP Ivies like Penn get talked about, the Duke boosters go all out to make it seem like Duke is the better choice.</p>
<p>And when schools HYPSM schools get mentioned, the Duke boosters are all desperate to get their school included in the discussion.</p>
<p>Now, all in all, there isn’t much diff. btwn all these schools and these schools are better and weaker than the others depending on what area one if focusing on - and there really aren’t any clear cut answers to which one is “better”, but still, the Duke boosters try to promote a strict hierarchy based on the world according to Dookies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Amaker failed miserably at UM and while upon getting the job at Harvard, dismissed the entire team except for a few players like Jeremy Lin and in recruiting players, has dipped into a pool of players that previously would have been academically off-the-radar (guess Amaker brought over some of the practices from Duke regarding recruits).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As stated, UM BB has largely been medicore, but even so, UM has done more in BB than Duke has in FB.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Most people on CC don’t care much about sports; don’t see posters nashing on Stanford for 2 BCS bowls in a row, much less ND for their tradition and history in FB, granted, it’s been a while since ND has been relevant in being a national contender.</p>
<p>Otoh, the Duke boosters almost always seem to bring up Duke BB and Duke sports overall in the discussions about schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>1st off, the transitive property doesn’t work, and no, UM would beat Duke on the field 9 times out of 10.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Also not true.</p>
<p>UM BB has been to the Tourney 22 times, been conf. champs 12 times and overall has a .596 winning %.</p>
<p>While Duke FB has 17 conf. championships, 10 came when Duke was a part of the Southern Conf. which included schools like Wash & Lee, VMI, The Citadel, Davidson, Richmond, W&M and VATech (back then, VT was nowhere close to being a FB power), since 1962 has been to a whopping 2 bowls and has an overall winning % of .491.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, so was Northwestern FB back during the early 1900s, but even then, the “prime” of these schools didn’t compare to the likes of Harvard, Army, Minnesota, etc. who won numerous national titles.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Goergetown is a bit overrated (particularly by the East Coast posters), but Duke isn’t - most people have Duke with the non-HYP Ivies and a no. of other top privates whic isn’t an overrating.</p>
<p>There are, however, those Duke boosters who “overrate” Duke and try to affix Duke to the HYPSM schools.</p>