Friday, March 17, 2006

Suck (My Tourney Brackets Edition)

It seems to happen every year, but day 2, and I lose. Big. In every pool...(Not technically true. In the one I care most about, all I need is for North Carolina and Washington to net two more wins over the remaining 4 rounds than do Texas, Gonzaga, UW-Milwaukee and NW St. And I need who knows what else to happen...)

I thought I had dodged my "team that I overrate due to a strong conference tourney performance" bullet when BC managed to win...Not so much. Thanks, Jayhawks. Also, since Alaska is "Pac-10 country", I got to see zero minutes of Albany taking it to the UCONNvicts until the Huskies were up about 11. Probably good for me, because I might have tossed a nutty if I was forced to watch Marcus "Laptop Lightfingers" Williams win the game single (left) handedly. So, thanks CBS, wonderful job, per usual, getting us to the intereting games just in time for the commercials.

But, in a positve note, there is at least one ally in the fight against DDS (Duke Derrangement Syndrome):
After consulting with noted basketball scholars such as Bernard Lewis and Fouad Ajami, however, I can offer a fuller and better explanation of anti-Dukism. It isn't really about Duke at all. Instead, it is a dangerous intersection of three forces. First, anti-Dukism reflects the natural envy felt by the unsuccessful towards the successful. The rest of the basketball world needs to find some way to reconcile their own manifest backwardness and inferiority - particularly galling given that many of them have glorious pasts which make it hard to accept their current plight. Second, there are cynical and opportunistic leaders who deflect attention from their own failures by blaming Duke. Rather than address their own failings or reform their own programs, they direct the anger and rage of their fans and alumni towards a convenient stalking horse. And finally, there is a dangerous and unprincipled media environment, which sees nothing wrong with bashing Duke at every opportunity, making it socially acceptable and encouraging others to express such sentiments. This toxic brew - and certainly not anything intrinsic to Duke or its foreign policies - explains anti-Dukism. There is no reason for Duke to change, therefore; it should ignore the craven and cynical opportunists and their culture of hate, and do what it can to help them improve themselves rather than begin to doubt itself.
If aardvarks have tongues, his is firmly in cheek. If aardvarks have cheeks as well, I suppose. (via Drezner)

4 comments:

demimondian said...

When we liberate Duke from the dominion of its tyrannical Duke-tators, the students will welcome us with flour, you know. Whether that's rye flour or not, however, I'm not sure.

Kaiser said...

Anti-Dukism can be explained in two words:

Christian

Laettner

Pooh said...

You're probably right, and if so that is an enormously stupid reason...

XWL said...

When you look at the NBA careers of ex-Dukies, Coach K seems to have done a lot with a little.

(or he's smart enough to recruit players that fit the college game, and keep them there for all four years of their eligibility)

The lesson of that list I linked above, never waste a lottery pick on a white player from Duke, you'll be very sorry.

(and that goes for Reddick, too, he'll be a good pro, but no lottery pick caliber player or perennial all star)