Duke is to the ACC, as _____ is to the Big East.
February 10, 2009 9:32 pm by Mister DThink about it.
There’s really only one answer.
OK, class. Pencils down.
If you said “Pitt,” you get +5. If you said anything else, you get F.
As a fan of the Big East, it’s tough comparing the Panthers to the Blue Devils. Really, it is. Nobody, not even ACC fans, likes Duke. But stepping away from your Big East biases and looking at the comparison objectively, you’d be hard pressed to disagree. Duke and Pitt are eerily similar. Let’s stroll through the last 7 seasons.
Regular season conference championships: Duke 2, Pitt 3.
Conference tourney championship appearances: Duke 5 , Pitt 6.
Conference tourney championships: Duke 4, Pitt 2.
NCAA appearances: Duke 7, Pitt 7.
NCAA 1st round losses: Duke 1, Pitt 1.
NCAA 2nd round losses: Duke 1, Pitt 2.
NCAA Sweet 16 losses: Duke 4, Pitt 4.
NCAA Final Four appearances: Duke 1, Pitt 0.
Do I have a case? Or do I have a case?
Like Duke, Pitt is pretty much always going to be in contention for the regular season title. Like Duke, you might as well pencil in “Pitt” in a mid-March bracket (you don’t need to be Joe Lunardi to know this). Like Duke, Pitt is strong in the regular season and in the conference tournament, but has struggled mightily in the NCAA tournament. And like Duke, Pitt will never get blown out because they’re too good…but they sure will choke.
As my colleagues have said, perhaps Blair is the missing piece that helps them “make the leap.” Young and Fields certainly wouldn’t mind. It’s bad enough that they haven’t reached a Final Four. Now some blogger is calling them the Duke of the Big East?
The truth hurts.
For their sake, I hope they prove me wrong.
Categories: Commentary, Mister D, Pittsburgh
5 Comments »
5 Responses to “Duke is to the ACC, as _____ is to the Big East.”
I agree about the records. But in personality, the two teams are completely different.
Though, there’s definitely something to be said about how they “overperform” during the season and choke in the playoffs. Of course, Duke does it through white McDonald’s All-Americans, and Pitt does it through mostly not-so-well-regarded recruits. But I think it has to do with intensity. Both teams are damn intense. Perhaps you just can’t keep that up for so long.
That’s what she said.
My automatic answer was UConn, but you’re right…
Regular season conference championships: Duke 2, Pitt 3, UConn 4, UNC 3.
Conference tourney championship appearances: Duke 5, Pitt 6, UConn 3, UNC 2.
Conference tourney championships: Duke 4, Pitt 2, UConn 2, UNC 2.
NCAA appearances: Duke 7, Pitt 7, UConn 6, UNC 5.
NCAA 1st round losses: Duke 1, Pitt 1, UConn 1, UNC 0.
NCAA 2nd round losses: Duke 1, Pitt 2, UConn 1, UNC 2.
NCAA Sweet 16 losses: Duke 4, Pitt 4, UConn 1, UNC 0.
NCAA Final Four appearances: Duke 1, Pitt 0, UConn 1, UNC 2.
Titles: Duke 0, Pitt 0, UConn 1, UNC 1.
So Pitt : Duke :: UConn : UNC?
Something tells me Dan’l B did pretty well on his SATs…
Gotta love those analogies.
I agree. Good call. UConn and UNC are similar in a lot of ways as well.
Agreed. UNC and UConn have also produced many more NBA players than the other two. By the way, that was the best post I’ve read this year.