1999 mentioned in ESPN's biggest upsets

[tcf15]

Honorable mention.

March 29, 1999 -- national championship game

No. 1 Connecticut Huskies vs.

No. 1 Duke Blue Devils

Closing line: Duke minus-9.5

In the past 20 seasons, the biggest underdog to win a national championship game was Connecticut in 1999, when it snapped Duke's 32-game winning streak as a 9.5-point underdog. UConn did not trail for the final 14:25, winning its first national title behind 27 points from Richard Hamilton. The Huskies were underdogs twice all season in 1998-99 -- by 9.5 points against Duke, and by 11 points against Maryland earlier in the season. Both times they won outright.

Final score: Connecticut 77, Duke 74

http://espn.go.com/chalk/story/_/id/14991087/the-10-biggest-ncaa-tournament-upsets-20-seasons

 

[SubbaBub]

Yeah, the team was ranked #1 for the most weeks in 1999 won the game. Huge upset. History is sometimes written by the stupid.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Let them think what they want. The truth is, if we played them ten times we win seven or eight games.

 

[swami7774]

Let them think what they want. The truth is, if we played them ten times we win seven or eight games.

We win all ten.
The 98-99 team was tougher than an overcooked hanger steak. Duke was stocked with girly men.

 

[Dove]

That Dook team was quite a "trip".

 

[Jimbo]

They can think what they want, but that doesn't entitle them to make up their own facts. We didn't even play Maryland that season. And if we had, they never would have been favored against us.

 

[swami7774]

They can think what they want, but that doesn't entitle them to make up their own facts. We didn't even play Maryland that season. And if we had, they never would have been favored against us.

You know, you're right. That Maryland comment didn't ring true with me but I didn't check it.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I felt that entire season that we were clearly better than Duke (who for some reason the pundits knighted as an all time great squad). One thing that made me cringe afterwards (and unfortunately he said it a lot) was JC saying "Maybe they (Duke) are the better team and will win 99 times out of 100. We'll, that was the one game". I never understood why he played into that and wanted to tell him he was dead wrong in that assertion. About three years ago I did see him say publicly that he knew we were the better team. I met him at a meet and greet a little less than a year ago and mentioned that. He laughed and told me "It sounded better in those interviews when I said it was a one in a million shot that we won".

 

[Waquoit]

We were the better team. Langdon shot out of his mind to keep it close.

 

[Kitaman]

No upset just two heavyweights battling it out for the title. Sad that they want the narrative to be David and Goliath. For the older generation it was Ali vs Frazier.

Two evenly matched teams in a colossal bout to the end. I remember every key possession, every key bucket, and practically every major moment of that game. Sure partly because UConn won, but how we won!

Lets just say if we were to win our 1st Championship, that dook team was the right fertilizer for our future.

It was a good damn game, and wished they had HD back then, because I would still be watching it continuously.

 

[Tenspro2002]

I think it's only considered an upset because of how big the point spread was.

The line probably should have been Duke -2.5 or so. The fact that it was -9.5 doesn't mean this was a big upset -- it just means Vegas was way, way off.

 

[swami7774]

Without Ricky Moore, this thread doesn't exist.

 

[aceboon]

where in the hell did they come up with that Maryland comment from?

 

[Inyatkin]

They can think what they want, but that doesn't entitle them to make up their own facts. We didn't even play Maryland that season. And if we had, they never would have been favored against us.

Was racking my brain trying to remember a Maryland game. This was when I went to every home game and was if anything even more of a fanatic about the team, and I was pretty sure we didn't play them that year.

 

[arch]

That team should have been undefeated.

 

[BoatShow]

I read that article expecting to see something about 2006...pleasantly surprised

 

[Gurleyman]

Was racking my brain trying to remember a Maryland game. This was when I went to every home game and was if anything even more of a fanatic about the team, and I was pretty sure we didn't play them that year.

Three years later, we played them early on with Caron's team when we probably would have been 11 point dogs. And we lost.

Four years earlier, we beat Joe Smiths team in the Sweet 16.

Possible we were underdogs at Stanford after our injuries, but it wouldn't have been 11.

 

[BoatShow]

That team should have been undefeated.

That one loss to Miami. ..

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Three years later, we played them early on with Caron's team when we probably would have been 11 point dogs. And we lost.

Four years earlier, we beat Joe Smiths team in the Sweet 16.

Possible we were underdogs at Stanford after our injuries, but it wouldn't have been 11.

Stanford was what I was thinking as well and the injuries would have made us underdogs but there is no way it would have been double digits.

 

[CallMeBruce]

I feel like they must have meant the Stanford game? That was a road game against a top-5 opponent. In either case, they're going purely by point spread, so this isn't revisionist history. According to nearly every pundit, including those who had picked us to win before the season started, Duke was the better team by a mile. Turns out everyone was wrong, but that doesn't mean it wasn't an upset.

 

[Jax Husky]

There are few things that enfuriate me more in sports than the characterization of that game as an upset. That '99 Husky team was the best "team" in the country, all season.

 

[geohusky]

Don't forget that Duke team was the best college basketball team of all time

 

[jleves]

If I recall correctly, UConn and Duke played three common opponents that season and UConn beat each team by a wider margin. That's one reason the spread made no sense.

 

[Inyatkin]

There are few things that enfuriate me more in sports than the characterization of that game as an upset. That '99 Husky team was the best "team" in the country, all season.

I'll never understand this line of thinking. The fact that Duke was as good as they were makes our win better. If Duke was your average No. 1 seed, it would've still been great. But the fact that they were considered historically great (and, come on, they were really good) makes our win even more satisfying.
It's like people want to retroactively downgrade Duke to somehow prove we were better. Why? We proved it on the court.

 

[MattMang23]

How big of an upset could it have been if we were wearing white for that game?