Its a completely different animal comparing Pro Sports, its like comparing Babe Ruth to Barry Bonds, different conditions apply...
what Duke has done in the modern era is just as impressive as UCLA (when only a few teams even played in the NCAA Tourney) UCLA would never have won all those titles in this era...Coach K, has done this with about 10 different core groups of players...If you don`t think Duke is a dynasty your not even paying attention!
what Duke has done in the modern era is just as impressive as UCLA (when only a few teams even played in the NCAA Tourney) UCLA would never have won all those titles in this era...Coach K, has done this with about 10 different core groups of players...If you don`t think Duke is a dynasty your not even paying attention!
JMAN- Your name has been mentioned in this thread........you may want to go defend yourself. LOL!
http://therxforum.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=100090022&f=988094022&m=591105921
http://therxforum.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=100090022&f=988094022&m=591105921
In the USA Today within the last month, there was an article about a Div III swim team that was going for its 25th ? consecutive NCAA swim title.
When the Dukies start approaching the Yankees from the late 40's to the early 60's in terms of championships, or UCLA from 66-73, let me know.
When the Dukies start approaching the Yankees from the late 40's to the early 60's in terms of championships, or UCLA from 66-73, let me know.
I had no idea this was even debatable
this makes absolutley no sense. .youre comparing the most globably recognizble and most succesful franchise in the entire sports world to just 1 part of a college's athletics?! (why god, why?!) the duke football team sucks. therefore "DUKE BLUE DEVILS ARE THE KINGS OF MENS SPORTS OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS HANDS DOWN!" is a false statement.
this makes absolutley no sense. .youre comparing the most globably recognizble and most succesful franchise in the entire sports world to just 1 part of a college's athletics?! (why god, why?!) the duke football team sucks. therefore "DUKE BLUE DEVILS ARE THE KINGS OF MENS SPORTS OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS HANDS DOWN!" is a false statement.
Ok get real here people. Only a total moron would compare college & pro sports together as a whole. The levels are totally different. If you are going to compare these teams, atleast admit that in baseball any given team could win when in college hoops, for the most part it isn't that way.
No team & I mean NO team can compete with a franchise that earned & won 26 TITLES!!! The # is unheard of especially in PRO sports.
Some of the stupidity in this thread is amazing as you probably have a bunch of Yankees haters just going along with anything to support a ridiculous notion to put down the Yankees.
Once again people fail to respect George for putting his money into a product when it is a FACT that alot of the owners purposely pocket money instead of putting the best product out there year in & year out.
Duke is no dynasty even in college hoops. When the man wins 10 or so titles then come back & talk.
No team & I mean NO team can compete with a franchise that earned & won 26 TITLES!!! The # is unheard of especially in PRO sports.
Some of the stupidity in this thread is amazing as you probably have a bunch of Yankees haters just going along with anything to support a ridiculous notion to put down the Yankees.
Once again people fail to respect George for putting his money into a product when it is a FACT that alot of the owners purposely pocket money instead of putting the best product out there year in & year out.
Duke is no dynasty even in college hoops. When the man wins 10 or so titles then come back & talk.
If you want to lower the bar, and say that just making the final four qualifies a team for dynasty status, then why not mention the Atlanta Braves, by winning their division for what 11 or 12 straight years should'nt they be called a dynasty. Of course not, no one would say the Braves are anything close to a dynasty. Why because they can't win it all, which is the same problem Duke has, save 3 times in school history.
wil.
wil.
exactly EGD. and I hear the journalists say "well that was different era, there were only so many good basketball programs you could go to and UCLA was one of them" well if that is true then how come when UCLA won titles they beat a different team in the championship game each and everytime ?! even in '66 & '74 the two teams were completely different.
1975 UCLA def. Kentucky 92-85
1974 NC State def. Marquette 76-64
1973 UCLA def. Memphis 87-66
1972 UCLA def. Florida St. 81-76
1971 UCLA def. Villanova* 68-62
1970 UCLA def. Jacksonville 80-69
1969 UCLA def. Purdue 92-72
1968 UCLA def. North Carolina 78-55
1967 UCLA def. Dayton 79-64
1966 UTEP def. Kentucky 72-65
1965 UCLA def. Michigan 91-80
1964 UCLA def. Duke 98-83
1975 UCLA def. Kentucky 92-85
1974 NC State def. Marquette 76-64
1973 UCLA def. Memphis 87-66
1972 UCLA def. Florida St. 81-76
1971 UCLA def. Villanova* 68-62
1970 UCLA def. Jacksonville 80-69
1969 UCLA def. Purdue 92-72
1968 UCLA def. North Carolina 78-55
1967 UCLA def. Dayton 79-64
1966 UTEP def. Kentucky 72-65
1965 UCLA def. Michigan 91-80
1964 UCLA def. Duke 98-83
whatever! The level of competition isn`t even close! Get real....
And comparing the Yankees of the past 20 years, Duke doesn`t buy up all the great players ..I never compared Duke to Yankees history, I was comparing Coach K to Torre, no comparison, then of course Wilheim and his old school (everything was better 50 years ago mentality jumps me)
This wasn`t even about UCLA, of course I knew someone (cough cough) would have to throw that in LOL! So predictable
And comparing the Yankees of the past 20 years, Duke doesn`t buy up all the great players ..I never compared Duke to Yankees history, I was comparing Coach K to Torre, no comparison, then of course Wilheim and his old school (everything was better 50 years ago mentality jumps me)
This wasn`t even about UCLA, of course I knew someone (cough cough) would have to throw that in LOL! So predictable
