In a surprising turn of events, Duke University’s head basketball coach, Jon Scheyer, was overlooked for the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC) Coach of the Year award, with the honor instead going to Louisville’s Pat Kelsey. This decision has sparked reactions from various quarters, including the Duke basketball program, which expressed its dissatisfaction through social media.
Under Scheyer’s leadership, the Duke Blue Devils concluded the regular season with an impressive 28–3 overall record and a 19–1 mark in ACC play. This performance not only secured them the ACC regular-season title but also positioned them as the No. 1 team in the nation according to the AP Poll. Such dominance included achieving 10 ACC victories by margins of 25 points or more—a record number. Additionally, the team led the conference in both scoring offense and defense, culminating in a remarkable scoring margin of 22.1 points per game. Scheyer’s strategic acumen was further evidenced by the team’s highest adjusted offensive rating by an ACC team in over three decades (129.1).
In contrast, Kelsey, in his inaugural season with Louisville, guided the Cardinals to a 25–6 overall record and an 18–2 conference record. This turnaround was notable, especially considering Louisville’s challenging performance in the previous seasons. However, the stark contrast in the teams’ performances has led many to question the rationale behind the award distribution.
Highlighting this sentiment, the official Duke basketball Twitter account drew parallels between Scheyer’s situation and that of his predecessor, Mike Krzyzewski, who also faced similar oversight in ACC Coach of the Year honors despite significant achievements. The tweet remarked, “Haven’t seen a coach snubbed for ACC COTY like this since Coach K didn’t win it once over his final 22 seasons, which included 3 national titles, 10 ACC Tourney titles, 5 ACC RS titles and 11 30-win seasons.”
This incident has ignited discussions about potential biases in the award selection process, often referred to as the “Duke tax,” where coaches from historically successful programs like Duke may be overlooked in favor of counterparts from programs experiencing resurgence. While Kelsey’s achievements at Louisville are commendable, the debate underscores the complexities involved in evaluating coaching excellence across varying contexts within the ACC.
As the postseason unfolds, both Duke and Louisville are poised to make significant impacts, with their respective coaches at the helm. The discourse surrounding the Coach of the Year award serves as a backdrop to the broader narrative of coaching excellence and team success within the ACC.
