CHICAGO - In my 21 years of life, I'm fairly certain I have never been colder than I was this past Saturday.
I had a ticket to see Illinois play at Northwestern for the right to the final Sweet Sioux Tomahawk, the trophy presented to the rivalry game's winner for more than 60 years and the latest casualty to political correctness in college athletics.
The game-time temperature was slated at 30 degrees, but if there's anything I've learned from growing up in Chicago, it's that meteorologists, although well-meaning and generally good-natured people, are liars, and 30 could very well mean 20 or 10 with wind chill.
Not even three layers of clothes, a scarf wrapped around my face or my Eskimo hood could shield me from the sheer misery of this game, from the pitiful play on the field to my paranoia that my toes would get frostbitten and consequently require amputation.
No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't shake the cold.
But I also couldn't shake the memory of a warm autumn night in Durham, either.
In the rare moments of this mediocre 27-10 Wildcat victory when I wasn't fixated on my own survival, my thoughts drifted to the Blue Devils-their past, present and future-and an early-season game that pitted them against the Big Ten team from my hometown.
Back in September, I covered Duke's 24-20 loss to Northwestern at Wallace Wade Stadium. I firmly believed then, as I do now, that the Wildcats should not have left Durham with the victory. Duke looked dominant through four quarters of play and was a holding call away from the winning score, a 2-0 start and the confidence of beating a major conference opponent so early in the season.
And here was Northwestern, beating last year's Big Ten Rose Bowl representative right before my eyes-the same Northwestern that should have lost to the Blue Devils just more than two months ago.
In the bitter Chicago cold, I found a warm hope for Duke's football future.
I saw what the Blue Devils could be Saturday afternoon at Ryan Field. I saw what I consider to be certain truths that make me think it might not be that long until Duke gets to emerge from the cool ACC cellar.
Because if Northwestern can do it, with its size and its level of academic excellence, why can't Duke?
The Wildcats finished 9-3 this year, including five wins in a Big Ten that is much tougher than the ACC. Duke, meanwhile, has notched four wins while losing three games by two scores or fewer.
Even now, even with the Blue Devils still playing primarily with Ted Roof's recruits, the gap between the two teams is not so wide.
Sure, Northwestern went to five bowls between 1996 and 2005, including a Rose Bowl. And sure, Duke didn't. But, when it comes down to it, what has been the real difference between these two programs over this stretch?
The answer is simple: coaching.
Randy Walker and Gary Barnett, though it pains me to give any sort of credit to the latter, were solid football coaches. Walker led the Wildcats to a conference title in 2000. Barnett led Northwestern to two conference titles in his tenure in Evanston.
These men did with their teams what Steve Spurrier did with the Blue Devils in 1989, when they won the ACC. It's not impossible for Duke to win. It was just impossible for the most recent coaches at Duke to do so.
I don't know whether David Cutcliffe can do what Spurrier did nearly 20 years ago. I don't even know if he can do what Northwestern did this year.
All I know is that in September, Duke should have beaten Northwestern and that this year, there's a possibility that Northwestern will be playing on New Year's Day.
There has to be something in that, right?
After that disappointing loss to the Wildcats in September, Cutcliffe was asked what his team needed to do to get better.
"We've got to just keep doin' what we're doin'," he said. "Keep doin' what we're doin'."
For the program's sake, I hope he's right.
I don't know how much longer I can stand the cold.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.