jmblue

February 18th, 2009 at 3:11 PM ^

If only they'd had someone to coach up all that amazing talent. This seems like a silly criticism. The Fabs went to the national championship game twice, and three of the five ended up as first-round NBA draft picks (and a fourth, King, was a second-round pick). That wasn't good enough? You could argue that Fisher didn't do as well with the teams that came later, but with the Fab Five, I thought he did an outstanding job.

Joined: 11/07/2008

MGoPoints: 102885

Blue2000

February 18th, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^

The fact that they reached the national championship game twice is fantastic. But I think that was more a result of the team's phenomenal talent (as you note - 3 first rounders and one second rounder), rather than coaching. The team never even won a Big Ten title. Given just how good the individual players on that team were, that's a bit disappointing. Perhaps I am being a bit too harsh. I was at Michigan from 1996-2000, and watched Fisher coach the Taylor-Traylor-Bullock teams in '96 and '97 (I don't recall exactly when he got the boot). Fisher's performance with those teams was abysmal. Maybe that clouds my judgment a bit.

Joined: 01/06/2009

MGoPoints: 7901

jmblue

February 18th, 2009 at 3:27 PM ^

First, I value Final Fours way more than Big Ten titles. (I mean really, how many people remember that the '89 team finished third in the Big Ten?) But even if you're going to complain about the lack of a conference title, note that we went 15-3 in the Fab Five's sophomore year - a record that wins the conference 90% of the time. I fully agree that the later, Traylor/Taylor/Bullock teams were a major disappointment (leaving aside the NCAA issues). But it's awfully hard for me to complain about the Fab Five's performance.

Joined: 11/07/2008

MGoPoints: 102885