Beilein's contract extended through 2015/2016

Submitted by MH20 on
Just saw this on Rivals, it's a freebie article so anyone can read it in all its 4-paragraph glory.

Despite this season's struggles, I still believe that John is the man for this job. I'm glad to see that the AD office feels the same way.

Link: Contract extension

aaamichfan

January 11th, 2010 at 10:49 AM ^

I think it is a good move anyways. But, once Manny and DeShawn are gone, I see this team having a difficult time scoring enough points to keep up with opponents. The addition of a solid scorer who fits well within the Beilein system could go a long way towards making the team successful throughout the tenure of the extension.

CWoodson

January 11th, 2010 at 11:10 AM ^

You'd be crazy not to want Ziegler, and they'll certainly struggle without Manny and DeShawn. But Beilein is bringing in very solid guys, and has shown over and over that he can do more with less. At WVU, after losing 80% of his scoring from the year before, he won the NIT. This is a great decision no matter how you look at it.

His Dudeness

January 11th, 2010 at 11:06 AM ^

I think it is a good move anyways. But, once Manny and DeShawn are gone, I see this team having a difficult time scoring enough points to keep up with opponents. The addition of a solid scorer who fits well within the Beilein system could go a long way towards making the team successful throughout the tenure of the extension.

Don

January 11th, 2010 at 10:08 AM ^

Why would he come to an obviously struggling program when much more successful programs are offering him? It's fine to tout Michigan's academic bona fides, but to your average top-shelf recruit most schools are all the same because they've got their eyes on the NBA, not a degree.

gnrgoblue

January 11th, 2010 at 10:11 AM ^

The jury is still out on Beilein as far as I'm concerned. He's overseen two catastrophic seasons and one decent year.

Strangely, I have more doubts about Beilein's long-term viability than Rodriguez's. Should the football team go something like 7-5 this coming year (I'm guessing seven to nine wins is likely), Rodriguez and Beilein will have roughly equal accomplishments in their time at Michigan. Rodriguez will have improved his record for three consecutive seasons and will have a very exciting and very young team entering the next couple of years. Beilein, meanwhile, is very unlikely, for the remainder of his time at U-M, to have a team with this year's combination of talent and experience. He's turned it into a full season of Yakity Sax.

Anyway, Beilein's first two years were obviously better than Rodriguez's, but I'm not projecting the next several years to play out the same way.

gnrgoblue

January 11th, 2010 at 10:48 AM ^

To be clear, there's no debate that last season was Michigan's best in a decade. But squeaking into the tournament in the last two games of the season and getting flushed in the first weekend--that's merely a decent year. Exciting at the time, naturally, and encouraging because we all thought it meant Michigan was "back." As I said in my previous message, it felt, at the time, how I'd expect to feel about a 7-5 season from the football team in 2010. There'd be some exciting moments and I thing it'd bode well for the future so I'd remember it fondly. But only someone with utterly shattered expectations could objectively call it an extraordinary success especially when, in retrospect, it foretold precisely nothing about Michigan's future under Beilein.

So the last decade of U-M hoops has lowered my standards for what I'll consider entertainment but not what I'll consider accomplishment. The only difference between last year and Amaker's better years (the ones where Michigan was among the first two or three out) was how the chips fell; one more upset in a mid-major tourney last year and Michigan was sleepwalking through another NIT. One less upset in a mid-major tourney in one of Amaker's years, and the NCAA-absence streak would have ended earlier and he'd probably still be Michigan's coach.

If you think last year's basketball season was more impressive than a 7-5 record from the football team or you think 7-5 sandwiched by a pair of unmitigated disasters is worthy of a contract extension, that explains the difference in our perspectives.

CWoodson

January 11th, 2010 at 11:16 AM ^

This just astounds me, though I'll have to chalk it up to a huge difference in opinion. Michigan has not been nationally relevant in a decade, and Beilein gave Oklahoma (a team that only had the nation's best player) a run in the tournament with guys Amaker did NOTHING with. A 7-5 season in football is truly mediocre, especially at Michigan (though I'd kill for it next year, it's obviously a building block). The Fab Five, sadly, is long gone, and we're NOT that program anymore. Beilein is bringing us back up.

To argue this year is an "unmitigated disaster" is ridiculous - we were overranked to start the year, though since then we certainly have played very mediocre basketball. But even more than RichRod, Beilein has been successful EVERYWHERE, and showed you some of what he can do last year. Fans of the basketball team are not in a position to look at the last three years and suggest that missing the tournament this year means the sky is falling.

gnrgoblue

January 11th, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^

My opinion of this year's team doesn't weigh the preseason ranking and it's not missing the NCAAs that bugs me (there are a lot of reasons teams qualify and many are outside your control). What's disconcerting is the team being so much worse against solid opposition. I thought, before the season, they were significantly overrated, but I thought the team was good for around 9-3 out of conference and maybe 10-8 in the Big 10, which would make Michigan a very safe bet to make the NCAAs. With even the NIT unlikely at this point (I believe they need eight more wins to qualify and can't find eight wins remaining on the schedule), you have to at least understand my disappointment. If your issue is with my expectations, I really did think they were reasonable, but I definitely acknowledge that I was entirely wrong with most of my assumptions.

I don't exactly like being called "ridiculous" for criticizing Beilein's work at Michigan--especially when your counterpoint is Beilein's work at schools other than Michigan--but I actually do appreciate your perspective. Your first paragraph has me wondering whether I'm wrong about Michigan being a program with a very high ceiling.

CWoodson

January 11th, 2010 at 12:24 PM ^

I completely agree that this has been a very disappointing season (and looks to continue that way). I had basically the exact same expectations you did. It's the unmitigated disaster comment that I thought was a little hyperbolic.

I don't think it's fair to knock Beilein's first season - that was just a bad team that he had nothing to do with. He took those guys and, by any reasonable assessment, had a wildly (and unexpectedly) successful season the next year. I'm just as concerned as you about this season and if it means that the ceiling isn't what it appeared to be. But I don't believe that you win everywhere and suddenly can't do it, especially since Michigan isn't playing any tougher teams than WVU did, and Beilein has been able to recruit better (ranked) guys here.

A 2007 survey of 80ish DI coaches ranked Beilein as the best strategic coach in Division I, and ranked him as the best coach at getting the most wins with the least talent. He's as respected by his peers for his ability as his ethics.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/collegesports200708basketballprev…

That's the kind of thing that makes me VERY optimistic about the future he has here.

gnrgoblue

January 11th, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^

Fair enough. I do tend toward hyperbole from time to time and probably selected my words poorly when I wrote "unmitigated disaster." Something like "extreme disappointment" would have been more appropriate.

Any Michigan fan has heard about Beilein's reputation as a superb tactician and his track record of taking all his previous schools (five, right?) to the tournament. So I'm with you when you say there's reason for optimism. My only issues are with what's happened this season (because, during the season, I care more about the present than I do potential future scenarios) and because, when we talk about what he'll be able to do with Zeigler and Smotrycz, it's worth evaluating what he's done with Harris and Sims (good and bad).

Also, just to be clear, none of my criticism should be read as a verdict and I'm years of sub-.500 records away from suggesting he should be fired (I think, for example, Rodriguez should at least get through 2011 regardless of how 2010 shakes out [barring off-the-field stuff intervening]). This is just me complaining about losses produced by a coach we all agree is much better than this. And complaining about the ways your favorite sports teams disappoint you is, of course, the very reason God invented the Internet.

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 11:52 AM ^

Huh?

RR took a very good football program and made it terrible - the worst in the league.
JB took a mediocre basketball team and made them good (given, still, that this year is disappointing).

Football recruiting has suffered under RR.
Basketball recruiting has picked up under JB.

Then again, we probably have very different definitions of "catastrophic" and "decent". I would apply the former term to RR's football program.

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^

Recruiting has suffered under RR for a couple of reasons:

1. RR has shifted priority to a different type of player. The smaller, RR player, is not as likely to reach the NFL. This doesn't mean we won't send players...but the days of seeing tons of Wolverines (especially WRs and maybe QBs as well) in the NFL might be over.

2. Losing. RR may be great down the line, but he is a loser now. How dare I? I dare because I look at his terrible record. So do recruits.

Had RR adjusted his offense slightly to accomodate a broader range of players, we might be looking at a different result. As is, we lose games and recruits. Hell, even North Carolina seems to gain as much attention as UofM these days. That's just wrong.

BigBlue02

January 11th, 2010 at 9:07 PM ^

If you hadn't noticed, Lloyd's last 4 classes are going to have what looks like a combined 7 or 8 guys drafted and that is only if you include the punter. Even if you throw Mallett and Boren in, you are looking at 9 or 10 in four years. Maybe you really hadn't noticed, but the days of not seeing Wolverines in the NFL started with Lloyd, not RichRod. Also, 3 points:

1)RichRod's first full class was better than all but 2 of Lloyd's classes (as ranked by rivals). I am not sure I understand how recruiting has suffered unless you would like to say that as sophomores they are somehow not performing up to your standards.

2)Losing has absolutely nothing to do with your argument. Again, most of the guys playing should be Lloyd's players but his MLBs and safeties are getting beaten out by walk-ons. While we are at it, lets blame RichRod for not starting true freshmen all over the defense which I am sure would have taken care of that "losing" that you are talking about.

3)Tell me which offense RichRod could have run with SheriThreet at QB that would have put us in a bowl game? Which broader range of plays would we be looking at different results with? Are you suggesting we would have made a bowl game with Threet in a pro-set? Or are you just saying he doesn't adjust his offense because that is what you heard on the freep message boards and figured it would fit nicely here?

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 9:17 PM ^

Losing has everything to do with poor recruiting!
I'd address your other "points" but someone who doesn't understand the correlation between wins/loses and recruiting doesn't deserve much attention. Feel free to check the recruiting rankings, topped by such terrible teams as Alabama, Texas and Florida.

3rdGenerationBlue

January 11th, 2010 at 10:30 AM ^

The contract extension will provide concrete evidence that there will be long term stability in the basketball program and will help Beilin recruit top tier players like TZ. The approval to build the new practice facility is further proof that Michigan is committed to creating a successful basketball program. Fortunately turn arounds can happen quickly (one year) in basketball with a couple great players. Personally I think this team would be very good if they had one player who could put more pressure on a defense with dribble penetration. Hopefully D. Morris will become that guy soon.

BigBlue02

January 11th, 2010 at 11:29 AM ^

Why does everyone feel like TZ is the only guy Beilein is recruiting that is worth anything? Morris is looking to be a great PG as a true frosh and Smotrycz is a top 50 guy.

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 11:46 AM ^

Don't forget that for next year we also have a strong shot at Horford (to give us much needed size) and already have a commit from Hardaway (who is scored 30-40/game). Two top 50 players (assuming TZ) plus 2 more strong players next year is a great potential class.

Of course, we have a lot to replace in Sims/Harris...but Beilein is building a strong program with more and more high value recruits looking our way each year.

BigBlue02

January 11th, 2010 at 11:55 AM ^

We have seen the potential in Vogrich as well. When we actually get a full team of scholarship players that are not freshman (ie - consecutive full classes of scholarship players) I think we are going to see a big change in production.

Nantucket Blue

January 11th, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^

will also cover the same span of years that renovates Crisler, builds a practice facility, and upgrades other facilities and equipment.

I think that having consistency for a few years between the bball program, AD, and regents is imperative to modernizing the facilities. This in turn helps recruiting, which helps winning, which helps the program.

Sure we're frustrated right now, but I think JB will recruit OK, and win enough. He also won't slap his players, pay them, or recruit deadbeats. And he is the best guy to shepherd the program for the next 5 years, givin the changes afoot (IMO).

Wolverine90

January 11th, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^

I’m still spoiled. My UM undergrad was ’86-’90 and law school was ’91-’94. My core UM years saw us win a Rose Bowl and bball National Championship in the same year in ‘89, a Heisman with Desmond, reach the NC game two years in a row with the Fab Five, and in the budding years after school, the ’97 NC championship, the Woodson Heisman, and I even flew to Madison Square Garden to watch Tractor, Baston, Taylor, Bullock, etc. lead us to an NIT championship back in like ’98 or so (forgot exact year).

How bad is it now, especially in bball, that we celebrate Beilin - a coach with a losing record who hasn’t proven the ability to outrecruit anyone? Who’s purported top 25 team led by studs Harris and Sims coughed up that abysmal first half against a bad PSU last week (great so we came back and won in the second half against a bad team), and this awful game against a bad NW yesterday at home?

When did UM go by the way of the Harvards and Yales of the world where we take comfort in our athletic mediocrity with talk of integrity and character?

Integrity, character and running clean programs shouldn’t be what we as fans hang our hats on to justify/celebrate our coaches and programs. Those qualities should be a GIVEN in every facet of our lives, and in our university and in our coaches. This is UM after all – top 2 academic school in the Big 10, top college football success and tradition in the world. Yet where has it all gone that talk of integrity appears all we leverage?

When it comes to college bball if it isn’t obvious, a great recruiter/modest coach will beat a great coach/modest recruiter almost every day. No organized sport is more reliant on raw individual talent like bball (Lebron/Cavs anyone?). And to this day, Beilin has not impressed whatsoever as a recruiter. Just one of a dozen examples, but wasn’t it frustrating to watch Novak miss that easy 3 inch put back in the last minute? Give me any front court player on MSU’s team, and that rebound ends up a dunk or sure make, instead of a bad miss akin to what I used to see every day at the IM building by tall white kids… And Stu Douglas turning the ball over in the last minute with that errant pass? How can we call Beilin such a great coach with the endless blunders down the stretch yesterday like that one, or the five second out of bounds penalty? Apologists will point to Crisler Arena, to the facilities, etc., as the reason our otherwise five star coach can’t land real recruits, but that is a garbage argument given that (a) our facilities are not really that bad relative to MSU’s, and (b) this is UM after all and there are a million other selling points.

Point being, I wrote off UM basketball for the year thanks yesterday’s game, and next year won’t be any improvement. In fact, I expect next year’s team to look a lot like NW’s team yesterday – a team that started 0-2 in the Big 10 and will be lucky to win 5 conference games.

Defend Beilin all you guys want, I remain your brother and I bleed Blue, I just see UM athletics from a spoiled prism of yesteryear, and am troubled at how agreeable our fans and programs appear to have become with all of this mediocrity.

gnrgoblue

January 11th, 2010 at 7:53 PM ^

Cosigned. I cringe to think this community will divide, like the RCMB in its heyday, into camps of "sunshine blowers" and "demand excellencers," but there does appear to be a frustrating acceptance of crummy performance. See above where I was negged and criticized for characterizing last year's 9-9 Big Ten team as "decent."

Maybe I'm wrong to think U-M has a high top end as a basketball program, but I've always thought it has nearly every advantage the football program enjoys and even some it doesn't (an elite in-state recruiting base, for example).

Beilein does a lot of things well and should feel a lot of job security, but everyone is eventually evaluated on their performance and not on their background or ethics. Three years in, Beilein is accumulating a lot of data points on the wrong side of the ledger. With Harris and Sims gone next year and a postseason berth extraordinarily unlikely as a result, we're suddenly talking about year FIVE of the Beilein regime without any sense that he's re-established Michigan as even a league power, let alone a national one.

He seems like a really great guy and I hope he works out. Either way, I'll follow and support the team. I'm just much less convinced of his greatness than many on here and don't believe that lowering my expectations to match his output is a reasonable resolution to the current disconnect.

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 3:08 PM ^

Many of the top 20 recruits are paid in some manner during the recruiting process. It might be $2K to an uncle, friend, mentor...just to take a phone call. Another $1K to read a letter. $3K to take a visit. Etc. This is the current state of bball recruiting. Super dirty. OSU leads that pack. That's why they have so many top recruits. It's also why the kids leave after one year. I wish we had another Fab 5 class, but that's nearly impossible these days without some serious violations.

BigBlue02

January 11th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^

One of your reasons for disliking Beilein is because he apparently can't recruit himself out of a wet paper bag. This is as far as I got. You are exactly the reason RichRod isn't being accepted - you have your preconceived notions of what "UM" is supposed to be and you won't be happy until Bo or Fisher are back at the helm. There are forward passes now in football and also a 3-point line. Join the present day...it isn't bad to revisit and look back fondly upon your time in AA but it does you no good to live in the past and bitch about the present.

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 3:18 PM ^

You're right in defending Beilein's recruiting. It just takes a quick look on Rivals to see that many highly ranked recruits are considering UofM. That has not been the case for years. Much of that praise should go to Asst Coach Mike Jackson (who is the reason that Sims and Harris stayed), but kids respect Beilein and the talent is coming.

You're wrong in relating any of this to RR. I am an alum - '95. My freshman year was the Fab 5. Desmond made the catch before my freshman eyes. We were great. We maintained the history of the football program. We grew the basketball program...yeah, slight hiccup there...but the student section went from the floor to the roof...not just ten rows up.

RR, however, is the opposite of the winning tradition. He is the opposite of the history. Why make shitty comments about "forward passes" and "3-point line"? That's not the difference. The difference is that our D-line belongs in the Big East; we lose to Toledo; techno music is piped-in during games. I'd much rather remember the past then watch our team lose to Illinois while Neil Diamond sings about Sweet Caroline.

RR isn't accepted because he has cheapened the football program. He isn't accepted because he loses games that should be won. He isn't accepted because he values his system over the program. Even living-in-the-past alums like me gave RR a chance (or three) to get it together, but if we all need to change for the sake of RR, maybe he needs to change for the sake of Michigan.

panthera leo fututio

January 11th, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^

You write both about your experience of the glory years under Fisher and the fact that integrity/the absence of venality should be a given. This seems odd to me. Consider the guy who replaced Beilein at WVU, Bob Huggins. Huggins will out-recruit Beilein more often than not, but I'd take Beilein in a coke-fueled heartbeat.

Speaking of recruiting, I think you're seriously underestimating Beilein's performance; last year he got a top-75ish point and a top-125ish 2-guard, this year he has a top-50ish 4 and a top-150ish 2-3 and a very good shot at a top-25ish 2-3, and already for next year he's got a combo-guard (for whom he beat State head-to-head) who's easily in the top 100. These aren't top-tier classes yet, and maybe such classes never will come. But count me as impressed.

chitownblue2

January 11th, 2010 at 8:29 PM ^

You realize that those basketball teams that "spoiled you" sentenced Michigan basketball for more than a decade in the wilderness, right? Our basketball was thrown into turmoil - turmoil that existed before I even set foot on campus 14 years ago - by that team, and you're holding it up as your STANDARD?

Chris Webber was paid, alot, to come to Michigan, and he ratted out the program at his first opportunity. The 2nd generation of "good" Fischer basketball were a squad of drug-abusing, paid players who burned a swath through town, beating the shit out of fellow students and being generally reprehensible human beings.

This is the Michigan basketball you pine for? Manny may have a questionable jump shot, Novak may be undersized, Douglass may be too slow, and DeShawn may be lackadaisical, but these kids aren't doing that shit. I'd much rather claim this team as "Michigan Basketball" than the Fab Five any fucking day.

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 9:25 PM ^

You think that Webb was "paid" to go to Michigan? By Michigan? No. And who were the "drug-abusing paid players who burned a swatch through town, beating the shit out of fellow students"?

I guess if you knew some of the people you're talking so much shit about, it would make a difference in the way you speak about them. Jimmy King a paid drug-abuser? Juwan? And, since you know so much...what drugs? And what felonious assault took place? Who did the beating? You speak in the plural, so feel free to list names rather than talk shit.

I'll claim both programs as UofM basketball. I see a lot of Webb in DeShawn. I see some Jalen in Manny. The Fab Five was one of the two most exciting teams in the history of the game. It was great watching them. It's also nice to know that they're good guys, no matter how much shit people talk about them.

OMG Shirtless

January 11th, 2010 at 9:38 PM ^

I'm not positive, but I believe when he was talking about drug abusers curb stomping students he was referring to the Tractor Traylor/Bullock era following the Fab Five, because he did refer to the second era of good Fisher teams.

I assume you think that OJ Mayo, Reggie Bush, and Joe McKnight aren't going to end up hurting USC because USC didn't technically pay them to go to USC right?

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 10:34 PM ^

Of course the Mayo, Bush, etc scandals may hurt USC. They may hurt in a similar manner to the difficulties following the Fisher era (although I think we would have rebounded faster without the Ellerbe/Amaker days). As I said, I understand anyone being upset about the fallout from that era...but that doesn't mean it's ok to make things up about those athletes.

I'm not sure what "drug abusers curb stomping students" you are referring to. No sarcasm there...I'm not aware of whatever you're referring to. The notion, however, that Webb ratted out the program at the first chance...when he was actually indicted for FAILING to admit to the allegations...is retarded.

dahblue

January 12th, 2010 at 12:16 AM ^

Curb stomping is certainly a vivid term...but ChiTown's rants about Webber appear as factually flawed as his allegations that the "next generation" were drug abusing violent criminals. One would think that if that were true, we'd hear about it every day from the MSU folk (especially after the Potluck Massacre).

chitownblue2

January 12th, 2010 at 9:05 AM ^

dahblue, I don't know how old you are, but the flow of information was differing in 1996-2000 (the Traylor, Taylor, Bullock days) than it is now. There weren't huge message boards like this, and there weren't blogs, and if there were, most people weren't on them because we all had dial-up.

What I'm saying is that there wasn't nearly the network set up that lets us know that Just Feagin was arrested before the media does, and there wasn't a source for rumor-mongering.

My comments about the conduct of Taylor, Traylor, and Bullock are partly based on things I saw with my own eyes (the fighting), their academic record was plain to anyone who had a class with them, and the drug abuse is a matter of public record:

In the early morning of February 17, 1996; a Ford Explorer driven by either Taylor or Traylor, depending on the source,[1][2][3] went out of control while returning along M-14 from a party in Detroit, 40 miles (64 km) east of Michigan's campus in Ann Arbor.[1] Among the passengers was high school star Mateen Cleaves, who was on his official recruiting visit. When an investigation revealed that the trip included a visit to Ed Martin's home, the University investigated his relationship with the basketball program.[2] Martin was reportedly returning to Ann Arbor from Detroit with Traylor, Taylor, Cleaves, Willie Mitchell, Bullock, and Ron Oliver after a party that included drugs, strippers and alcohol.

dahblue

January 12th, 2010 at 10:30 AM ^

I was a freshman with the Fab 5. That's how old I am.
I'm also old enough to laugh at your post that begins saying how "the flow of information was different" and then continues to quote a News story about the very public drunk driving car wreck involving the players you accused of (unreported) violent crimes and drug abuse.

A party with drugs, strippers and alcohol is...a party. That doesn't mean the kids were drug "abusers" or violent criminals. Were they "alcoholics"? The article lists alcohol as well, doesn't it? Looks like you would say the majority of college students are alcoholic drug abusers. As to violent crimes...If you witnessed them taking part in violent attacks, maybe you should have reported it instead of complaining about it a decade later.

My basic point is that I can understand frustration with the sanctions and trouble with our bball program, but defaming the players of that era is a pretty shitty thing to do.

chitownblue2

January 12th, 2010 at 12:37 PM ^

You're missing the point. I saw, myself, with my own eyes, three of the players in question beat the shit out of students on at least 2 occasions. That's not "defamation".

dahblue

January 12th, 2010 at 4:49 PM ^

So you saw but failed to report, on "at least" two occasions (really, you can't remember how many times?), multiple basketball stars commit violent assaults...?

Even if that were true (and it might be, but hard to believe you if you can't remember how many times this happened), how in the world does that prove they were drug addicts?

Calling someone a drug addict without a drop of proof is defamation. One car accident does not mean anything about addiction to drugs.

What's really the deal? Why are you so angry? Did they beat you up to steal your money and buy lots of drugs? C'mon dude...

dahblue

January 11th, 2010 at 9:37 PM ^

One last point...Webb "ratted out the program at his first opportunity"??? Really...in 2002 he was indicted for perjury for failing to admit to loans from a booster when he was 14. 2002??? That's "first opportunity"??? And if he lied to cover for the program, how the hell is that "ratting" out the program?

I can understand your being upset about the sanctions, but your argument carries no weight when it's bullshit.

chitownblue2

January 12th, 2010 at 8:56 AM ^

First, your post assumes that Webber stopped taking loans at 14? No - he took them all the way through his time at Michigan - nearly 7 years worth of them. It's one thing to say "He was just 14!" and another to say "He was just 21!".

2nd, I know the Webber, Rose, King, Jackson, and Howard largely didn't have any discipline problems (other than the massive amount of money Webber was making for playing hoops for Michigan) - my behavior point related more to to Fischer's 2nd era of recruits - Taylor, Traylor, Bullock. I don't know when, or if, you went to Michigan, but I coincided perfectly with those guys - they were widely reviled around school and did nearly all of what I wrote in my post. It rarely made the paper, but it was well known. The poster longed for the days of Fischer - I'm reminding him of what Fischer was:

A poor in-game strategist who couldn't win an NCAA tournament with 3 NBA lottery picks on his team, a coach who turned a blind eye to at least 5 different players getting paid, and taken to coke and hooker parties in Detroit by a bookie employed by the mafia (admittedly, most of this does not apply to Webber other than just getting paid by the bookie). I'm saying that it's idiotic to pine for the days of Michigan basketball that CREATED THE HOLE FROM WHICH WE'RE TRYING TO EXTRICATE OURSELVES.

Finally, if you don't think that WHO was paying them (again, a bookie associated with the mafia) doesn't at least suggest that some of these teams weren't shaving points (combined with the 2nd fab-five's constantly lackadaisical play), you're extremely naive.

dahblue

January 12th, 2010 at 10:21 AM ^

Problem is that you are still faulty on facts.
You said Webb ratted out the program at the first chance. Ok...how old was he in 2002 (~30) when he was indicted for perjury. That means he DID NOT rat out the program (and certainly not "at the first chance"). That's the opposite of your false accusation. Seems you agree with his perjury. That's your call. Maybe both of you are guilty of lying.

Second, if the "crimes" of the 2nd era were so commonly known...why no press? Why no charges? Many players before and after them were charged with crimes (and splashed in the papers). I'll stick with facts instead of making things up.