Duke FB
- Thread starter Bwm57
- Start date
And they are athletic. And physical. With middling recruiting classes. But transfers from big time programs. NU has no chance if they can’t get transfers in this day and age of college football.
Last edited:
I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a late-hit targeting ruled ‘after the play’ - I think Clemson got jobbed there. (Certainly, the defensive player thought the play was in progress.)
But with the interception just thrown, it’s immaterial.
But with the interception just thrown, it’s immaterial.
Last edited:
Huge win for their program. To answer your question: no, we were clearly better than them for a long time.
I’m thinking that usually this occurs not on 4th down, and/or the runner has made the first down before the hit, and/or the targeting occurs before the runner is actually down. Any of those would result in 15 yards being tacked on for the offense. I’m sure we will hear about it if someone finds out indifferently from the NCAA rule book.
The conclusion I had come to was that at one point Fitz had built something that seemed to be working to bring Northwestern into the realm of respectability, but not ultra-competitiveness. That was just fine for most people associated with NU. But the game kept evolving and Fitz didn't. And soon, what was working, no longer did. I am sad things ended the way they did for Fitz and the program (we are going to be really bad for at least the next 5 years now). But, based purely on performance, it was clear that it was time to move on from Fitz. Just not like this....
NU football was superior to Duke football for quite some time. The worm has turned. They certainly have an easier time getting players in but the differences go well beyond that at this point.
Duke made the difficult decision to fire their beloved longtime coach who, despite all those positive memories, was clearly behind the times and wasn’t going to rekindle that magic.
Northwestern, meanwhile, was unwilling to face the facts that the rapidly-changing game — both on the field and off — had passed their coach by.
It seems to me that that’s the key difference, right?
Duke/Clemson was the clash of underrated versus overrated. Both may end up having decent (~8-4/9-3) type seasons, but neither is elite this year.
Duke didn't just win; they looked dominant. And they weren't even playing NU this time.
I'm pretty impressed. I think there's a decent chance they play in the ACC Championship.
I would love to be wrong.
We were better when Mike Hankwitz coached for us. Not so much afterwards
A rapidly changing game has passed their Coach by? How about a rapidly changing game had passed the entire University by?
We haven't beaten Duke since 2016. Cutcliff had no trouble winning against us.
Kind of the same thing, right?
Fitz could have asked the Ryans to put some of their nine-figure stadium investment into an NIL program. Their names are everywhere already.
I'm going to echo a sentiment I shared in another conversation on the board...Duke's success last season and now came fast, and just serves as very tangible proof of how quickly in this day and age a program - even one with Duke's (our) academic standards, can turn around.
Elko inherited Duke after Cutcliffe left with three consecutive losing seasons on his record. There was no reason to expect Elko would have nine wins including a bowl game last year, or beat Clemson on Monday.
Again I'll say I'm not holding my breath for Northwestern to match that with whomever we eventually bring in...but six wins in 2024 isn't some unattainable goal, as evidenced by Elko and Duke.
Elko inherited Duke after Cutcliffe left with three consecutive losing seasons on his record. There was no reason to expect Elko would have nine wins including a bowl game last year, or beat Clemson on Monday.
Again I'll say I'm not holding my breath for Northwestern to match that with whomever we eventually bring in...but six wins in 2024 isn't some unattainable goal, as evidenced by Elko and Duke.
3 things
1. No evidence that Duke’s academic standards for FB/BB recruits are similar to NU’s.
2. Duke is in the South, in the footprint of the most fertile recruiting territory.
3. Duke, because of men’s BB, has a higher athletics reputation with the casual fan or the high school kid who hasn’t done much college research.
smh...wouldn't describe myself as "confident" we'll hit six, I'm saying Duke is evidence that turnarounds in CFB don't necessarily need to take a decade like they did once upon a time, even for the smart schools - not some unattainable goal. 18 year olds/short memories, transfer portal/start immediately, play in one of the Big 2, coast to coast, 1-2 boosters who want to sweeten the honey pot regardless of what the university says...
but hey, fans who snuggle into doom and self-righteousness about like a warm blanket...you're cool, too. please be sure to start every response with "actually..."
#1 no evidence either way
#2 true on both accounts
#3. Because of basketball, Duke athletics has a better brand name recognition
Last edited:
Actually, I think a lot of changes need to be made before we can expect a quick turnaround, but hey, it’s NU so I am sure anything is possible.
