Brownlow's Twitter Mailbag: Back from COVID and ready to dispense answers

By Lauren Brownlow, WRALSportsFan columnist/reporter

After a protracted battle with post-COVID, I am back! And yes, that says POST-COVID. Had the real COVID, it was mostly a bad cold, then after I started testing negative on PCR tests I came down with a hellish cocktail of symptoms including but not limited to dry heaving and hot flashes. Oh, and my mind ... what it did to my brain. I did not care for it. But i am still here, I am feeling more and more like myself every day and after spending a lot of time binge-watching television because I was too dizzy to open my computer, I am ready to answer your questions!

So, without further ado, let's get to them.

As it stands right now, this feels truly like a 50/50 decision. Not just 50/50 in the sense that, like with most things, there are only two options and he could choose either. But there are a lot of pros and cons for Trevor Keels to weight when deciding if he stays or goes. It feels like if it has been close at all between staying or going, at least when it comes to Duke, players have gone. It's understandable in a lot of ways — Duke players usually go pretty high, and often, they come to Duke with the intention of just being in school one year.

A lot is on the line here, obviously. Trevor Keels' physical skills are still raw, but they're there. Duke has already lost Paolo Banchero, A.J. Griffin and Mark Williams to the NBA Draft, and all are projected to go in the top 16 per NBADraft.net. Wendell Moore left too, and he's slotted early in the second round. But the one guy slotted in between is Keels, who NBADraft.net has at the top of the first round but has been mocked in the first by some.

Moore and Williams have done all they can do at Duke. Their value will never be higher. Griffin and Banchero have likely maxed out their value. But Keels? He arguably has a much higher upside. He's a guy that if he is able to harness all of the physical skills he has, he's going to be a no-brainer lottery pick. That wasn't enough to keep players in school BEFORE Name, Image and Likeness, but it very well could be now. Duke is used to replacing a talented roster year after year, but we've seen what a positive difference it can make for even just one player to come back.

Some of it will depend on whether or not he can improve his draft stock and teams decide to take a chance. If he can, he maybe stays in the draft. But I tend to think when he looks at all of his options, he'll work on his jump shot a bit and stay. He can finish at the rim and loves contact already. If he can start to make shots from distance, he's going to be impossible to guard. And he'd have the added benefit of getting paid essentially to stay at Duke via Name, Image and Likeness and potentially becoming the face of one of the highest-profile programs in America. He may decide not to do that, but NIL makes the decision to come back a lot easier if Keels should want to do that. My gut says he comes back.

I love this question! Well, I love the thought behind it. Not sure if it's my lingering COVID brain or just Boston College basketball, but when I tried to remember who their coach was, for a second I thought it was still Jim Christian. When I realized it was Earl Grant, I instead imagined a combination of Jim Christian and Steve Donahue's faces sort of melding together and becoming one. Maybe it is my COVID brain.

One random stat thing I did last year was tally up the average score of the three Triangle teams in the last 10 years against ACC opponents. I was looking ahead a bit to this question too, once Mike Krzyzewski retired. But I was also coming off of having witnessed yet another very good Duke and Virginia matchup, and I was curious what other teams offered sneaky rivals to the Triangle teams.

To be a rivalry that is great, it has to be one people care about. So for instance, even though NC State's record in its last seven games against Clemson is 3-4 and they've been decided by 1.8 points, I'm not sure even Brad Brownell or Kevin Keatts' respective families would be like YES, FINALLY, OUR EPIC RIVALRY RENEWED when the two get together. It has to matter to people outside of the fanbases, or have the potential to matter that much.

(If you're wondering, by the way, the ACC team NC State has had the most success against in recent years AND in the last 10 is Pitt. State is 12-2 in its last 14 against the Panthers with an average margin of +5.71. The team NC State has played the most games against the last few years is Georgia Tech. NC State is just 1-3 in that stretch but have a +1.5 scoring margin since 2019. Go figure.)

As you might expect, Duke has a positive margin of victory against every ACC opponent since 2012 (when I started tracking). I even used a smaller window to get a better idea (2019 to today) and even then, that's true for Duke — with the exception of one time. And yes, dear reader, I am sorry to report that the only team is North Carolina, which has out-scored Duke by an average of 1.8 points in those 10 games.

But who's next? Well, there are only four teams that have kept the margin within five points since 2019 (and only four since 2012, too, although not the same four). And there are only two teams that have beaten Duke more than twice since 2019: UNC and ... Louisville. Yes, Louisville. But it's hard to peg them as the candidate for next coaching rivalry since we know little about Kenny Payne. The other is Virginia Tech. But does

For UNC, they have a positive scoring margin against every ACC team since 2019 except for one: Clemson. But no, friends, Hubert Davis vs. Brad Brownell will not be the new hotness. Their games are closest overall against Virginia, but we've all seen those games. None of them are aesthetically pleasing, not compared to Duke-Virginia. Carolina-Louisville has been tasty the last few years, but again, new coach. Carolina and Miami have been spicy but we already covered Jim Larranaga.

Look, to me, I think there's a clear divide between the coaches that this could apply to and the ones it couldn't. Jim Larranaga and Jim Boeheim are too old. Probably Leonard Hamilton, too, but don't let him read this. Because this has to be a *new* rivalry. The other coaches are too nice. Can you imagine Tony Bennett hating anyone? Mike Young? JOSH PASTNER? (Pastner might be hated by other coaches, but he is almost certainly blissfully unaware of this fact.) Even Jon Scheyer and Hubert Davis are two of the nicest people I've ever met. But we've also seen their coaching staffs get into it a bit.

I know it's boring for everyone. But sometimes, the best answer is the right one.

Before I answer this question, I want to explain something. I have never felt as unlike myself as I did for the few weeks I had COVID. It was terrifying. It felt like there was an evil demon inside me that was randomly pulling levers inside my body. I had no idea what was coming next. I had no idea if my symptoms, which were so bad I had to pump myself up for hours to get out of bed, would go away or when. All the physical stuff was bad, of course. But the uncertainty of it all was just as bad. I went to the doctor one day after I'd tested negative on a PCR but could barely move, and I:

1. Pushed the emergency button on the elevator,
2. Didn't notice I had done that,
3. Was super confused when emergency guy came on to ask what was wrong,
4. Went to the wrong floor, and
5. Went to the wrong office and started arguing with the receptionist that my doctor was, indeed, there.

(My office was in the same building but on a different floor.) Once I was asked for my son's birthday on the phone and it took me longer than three seconds to remember. Any of you with kids, tell me how long it takes you to remember your kids' birthdays. And so it was terrifying. I didn't know what was wrong with my brain. I got dizzy any time I tried to type at my computer and focus on the letters.

I could not trust myself to drive. It's hard to explain what I was going through or how confused I felt or how scared I was, and I'm not going to try. But I hated it and would rate regular and post-COVID 0 stars and would not recommend. Oh, and imagine doing all of this while you're getting hot flashes and throwing up or dry heaving every 10 minutes.

Because of all of those symptoms, all I could really comfortably do is watch television. It couldn't be a super complicated show, at least in my mind, in case I fell asleep. Although I never did. But that's another story. So I started first on the Real World: New Orleans reunion show, then went backwards through the other reunion seasons and then The Challenge. I watched it at its inception and honestly don't remember the reason I stopped. But then I got to Battle of the Seasons on my watch/rewatch and realized it got a little shaky for a bit. Anyway, I started with some of the newer seasons 30-32 on Hulu (I think those are what's there), watched 33-37 on Paramount Plus, then started back again with 17 (Duel II) to sort of refresh myself on the various personalities that have been mentioned throughout.

(I, uh, had a lot of free time.)

I consulted my text threads for this, as I've been texting a few select and special friends whenever I want to have Challenge talk. (I usually couldn't handle much more than a text or two, but I HAD to get it out.)

Because I am a spiteful monster, I enjoy when the ball does not lie on The Challenge. When players do something against the spirit of the game and are punished for it karmically. So nothing pleases me more than when someone who either A. Played the game in a blatantly dirty or uncool way or B. Complained about someone on their team dragging them down in a Final being the one to, you know, fail in a Final. I don't think that any moment has topped watching Paulie and Cara's weirdo alliance fall flat on its face in War of the Worlds. I SQUEALED when Kenny had to carry Wes. But my favorite moment is sadly one that I cannot find anywhere online: when Kyle Christie flubbed a challenge where he had to pull off a stunt-driving maneuver and his DAD IS A STUNT DRIVER. The level of fail of that was so funny that I was in TEARS. I'm glad I rewound it a few times now that I can't find it online. But it's towards the end of Total Madness. That was almost as funny as this GIF, which happened just a few episodes later IIRC:

Well, I've been living under a metaphorical digital rock these last few weeks, so I'll try to catch up to answer this question appropriately. But the short answer is yes! Although I won't lie to you: when I saw the words "softball" next to a team out of the PAC-12, my second thought was, maybe not.

For those who aren't aware, Duke softball is a program in its fifth year of existence and if you've paid any attention to Duke non-revenue sports at all in the last decade, it's not a surprise that they're doing well. But now, they've advanced to the first Super Regional in program history after coming back to knock off Georgia in an elimination game last weekend.

Turns out, I was right to be worried about the PAC-12. UCLA has won the most softball championships in NCAA HISTORY. They're an established program, while Duke has barely even been one. Obviously UCLA will have a huge advantage in terms of experience, and being at home. Duke's elite hitting will have to be at its absolute best as UCLA is one of the best pitching teams in the country. I give the Blue Devils like a 30% chance of pulling this off. It's very scientific.