Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking)

BOSTON -- Here's Monday's Dear Gary ...

Dear Gary: Great article this morning on Duke. You're one of the best, if not the best, college basketball columnist out there today. Just wondering though, how do you rank Duke eighth ahead of both Clemson and Wake Forest? You even said it yourself in the article; Duke is overranked. You're really telling me they are the eighth-best team in the country? Better than a Clemson team that waxed them by 37? It's pretty obvious Duke will get bounced by a more athletic team in March, but it's people like you who inflate them by ranking them so high. Then again, I can't complain because I'm sure you have more common sense than half these AP voters. Keep up the good work.

-- James

What people don't realize, for whatever reason, is that somebody has to be ranked eighth.

I mean, you can't just go like this (but trust me, I considered it):

1. Connecticut
2. Oklahoma
3. North Carolina
4. Pittsburgh
14. Michigan State
15. Memphis
16. Louisville
17. Duke
18. Clemson
19. Wake Forest
20. Missouri
21. Villanova
22. Marquette
23. Kansas
24. Illinois
25. Xavier
26. LSU

Translation: In order for teams to drop, others must move up. It's simple, really. So I ask, in all seriousness, which teams did you anti-Duke guys want to see make a leap in the Top 25 (and one) that would put them ahead of Duke?

The Clemson team that just lost to Virginia?

Or the Wake Forest team that just lost to N.C. State?

Or the Marquette team that just lost to Villanova?

Or the UCLA team that just lost to Arizona and Arizona State?

Or the Xavier team that just lost to Dayton?

Or the Butler team that just lost to Loyola (Illinois)?

Or the Kansas team that just lost to Missouri?

Or the Utah State team that just lost to Boise State?

Or the Syracuse team that just lost to Connecticut?

Or the Ohio State team that just lost to Wisconsin?

Again, and I can't stress this enough, pretty much everybody lost last week, and by my estimation there weren't many schools that deserved to make huge moves in the rankings, which is why Duke barely fell. Why is that so hard to grasp? And either way, I would encourage any critics to look at Duke's total body of work -- top five RPI; 7-4 record against the top 50; 10-5 record against the Top 100; no losses outside the top 52, according to CBSSports.com's RPI -- and then try to make a case that the Blue Devils don't belong in the top 10.

Despite their struggles, they are still second in what is arguably the nation's toughest league.

That is a statement that cannot be disputed.

So while I see the same flaws everybody else sees -- and wrote about them last night from Conte Forum -- the reality is that everybody outside of the top four (UConn, Oklahoma, North Carolina and Pittsburgh) is similarly flawed, which is why the Blue Devils can hang around the top 10 despite mounting losses, because, again, there isn't really anybody worthy of moving ahead of them.

mrjama Since: Dec 3, 2006	Posted on: February 20, 2009 9:10 pm The problem is you are biased You show favoritism towards Duke. Period. Show me one other team that has lost 4 out of 6 that is still in the top 10. Heck, even in the top 25? The problem is you think Duke should be better. With all those high school all-americans and talent, they surely must be better than this. But any other team you judge by their performance. With Duke you judge by what you think they are, not what they actually are. You even said it yourself - you think they will beat Wake Forest this week. Your validity as a pollster just went to zero with that statement. You don't rate any other team by what you think they will do. You give Duke special treatment. Read your own words. Besides, you think the ACC is "arguably the best conference"? C'mon. I mean c'mon. Georgetown is what? 12th in the Big East? and it took a bunch of joke calls for Duke to beat them? Look - the ACC is clearly #2 this year, and its a solid conference. But these comments from ACC bigots like yourself and Coach K are just embarassing. Even Coach K, when he said the ACC was the best - he said it was because the ACC had 4 top ten teams. Duh! Check the pools lately? And I wonder what he would say if the ACC had FIVE teams in the top 12. C'mon Gary. Please. [ Reply to Comment ]
Nova85 Since: May 14, 2007	Posted on: February 20, 2009 2:40 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) Gary, you seem very well-versed on hoops, but, like many national-level writers (and broadcasters), you just refuse to acknowledge what is plainly obvious to us "great unwashed" that have watched college hoops for over 30 years: Duke is simply not that good. You can toss all the RPIs at us you want, all the "toughest conference" puffery (I'm sorry, but are you really gonna tell me the ACC is as deep - and, after that UConn-Pitt game, as tough - as the Big East? I'm not buying it), but Duke simply hasn't impressed. What "good" wins do they actually have? Let's try and count them... Purdue? I'll grant you that one. Nice W. That's 1...even if it *WAS* back in December. Michigan? You mean a 10-loss Wolverine squad...that they also lost to? Uh-uh. Sorry. Can't give you that one. Xavier? The Musketeers have (like Duke) lost 3 of their last 4. And do you consider the A-10 a top-notch conference this year? I sure don't. But I'll give it to you anyway...so 2. Davidson? They've gone 2-2 in their last 4 - in the Southern Conference...a conference that would make the A-10 look like the ACC. Nope. Next... VA Tech? NC State? GA Tech? Virginia? Maryland? (snicker) Yeah...big wins there...in that so-called "toughest conference". Please. Georgetown? St. John's? C'mon now...wins over the 10th place and 14th place teams in the Big East? Yeah, major victories there. 24 losses between them, too. Try again... So what's left? Miami & Fla St.? Nice Ws, but not "top 10 quality", you'd have to admit. And the rest are the type of early season dreck EVERYONE plays. So what of Duke's season has been so "special" that they deserve Top 10 status? Even if we grant those 2, it totals out to only 4 "good" wins. Freakin' Penn State and Northwestern have more than that! You ask for other Top 10 options. How about Marquette? Villanova? Missouri? Even Purdue deserves - right now - to be ranked ahead of Duke, their December loss to them notwithstanding. And I can assure you that if any of them lost 4 out of 7, no matter the quality of opponent, they'd be vaporized out of the Top 25 instantly. Ask Syracuse or Notre Dame about that... Duke's got no inside game, very average D, and had trouble putting away a mediocre St. John's team last night. As has been noted by others, the first team that "bodies up" on them - like Clemson did - will maul them. That is not the makings of a Top 10 team. Period. And no amount of Dickie V or Bobby K puffing them up will overcome that. [ Reply to Comment ]
nate488 Since: Mar 5, 2007	Posted on: February 17, 2009 4:40 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) Fair enough. Looking at this week's rankings from the "total body of work" perspective is a legitimate one. However, the reason the polls change from week to week is that teams trend up and down. See where I'm going with this? Duke's overall body of work is fine, but the Blue Devils have lost 4 of their last 6 games, falling to Wake, Clemson, UNC, and Boston College. Intermittent wins against Miami and Virginia are hardly enough to offset this. Even by Duke's general February swoon, this is a pretty major collapse that frankly is not reflected in the polls. [ Reply to Comment ]
wiggity6 Since: Mar 8, 2008	Posted on: February 17, 2009 10:57 am Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) Gary I think that you should've posted your poll as you listed above. As a Michigan State fan, I keep watching their games thinking, "there is now way that this is the 5th or 6th best team in the nation, maybe 10th" but then i look at the standings and can't figure out who necessarily should be above them. It just seems that as much as teams are beating up on each other this year, very few teams appear to be truly elite. So yeah Duke lost a few lately and so have a lot of other teams but really there don't seem to be true contenders nipping at their heels. [ Reply to Comment ]
jgibbs25 Since: Oct 19, 2006	Posted on: February 16, 2009 10:09 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) why wouldn't you include missouri on that list..they have actually won 5 in a row.. [ Reply to Comment ]
aztec506 Since: Feb 24, 2008	Posted on: February 16, 2009 8:06 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) I have plenty of problems with Duke being ranked 8th. There are better teams out there - Villanova, Louiseville, Michigan State and otheres. Duke loses twice and the all might pollsters drop them 4 slots. UCLA loses twice and they drop them 10-15 slots. I'll be grinning when Duke gets beat the first weekend of the tournament no matter what their unworthy seed it. [ Reply to Comment ]
BigNav96 Since: Jan 27, 2009	Posted on: February 16, 2009 3:11 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) *Wake was 1-1 last week, I mistyped. I still think the argument is valid. But I won't argue it because I can't really argue with your logic behind ranking Duke at 8. [ Reply to Comment ]
BigNav96 Since: Jan 27, 2009	Posted on: February 16, 2009 3:09 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) But to be clear, I could make an argument for why Wake (who was 2-0 last week) should be ranked at least as highly as Duke (who was 0-2 last week), since Wake beat Duke (and also beat UNC and BC, who both beat Duke). Which in turn would make me 2 for 2 in challenges to your rankings, since you conceeded last week that Missouri should have been ranked higher than LSU after I laid out the facts. [ Reply to Comment ]
BigNav96 Since: Jan 27, 2009	Posted on: February 16, 2009 3:02 pm Dear Gary (on Duke's ranking) That's as good an explanation as anyone should need. [ Reply to Comment ]

Games

See All Games

Visit App Central

Fantasy News and Analysis

Gary Parrish

Parrish: The Thoughts