Michigan4Life

March 16th, 2011 at 3:33 PM ^

for Hill to respond to the Fab 5 documentary especially when Jalen made it clear that he's talking from the mind of his teenage years.

 

Hill was being pompous(for the lack of better word) for stating that he is proud to have beaten the Fab 5, his legacy at Duke and having never lose to Fab 5 in his career at Duke.

Mitch Cumstein

March 16th, 2011 at 4:37 PM ^

Jalen made it somewhat clear that he was talking from the mind of his teenage years, but he definitely didn't make it clear how he feels about Duke and/or Hill today.  He backed off the comments a little, but didn't clarify how he feels now.

 

Also, while it might not be necessary for Hill to respond, I don't see why its not OK for him to respond to a grown man attacking him on national TV through the method of recalling how he used to feel.

 

I also don't see how there is anything wrong with being proud about beating the fab5 and stating it.  If anything it is a compliment to how good the fab5 were.  Also, I don't think we'd complain if Chris Perry decided to state how proud he was of beating OSU his senior year if someone from the OSU team decided to recall how he felt about Michigan growing up on national TV.

MI Expat NY

March 16th, 2011 at 4:50 PM ^

Why should he have had to say what he feels now?  He explained his hatred of Duke at the time, and then said that afterward, they got beat by a better team and he respected Christian Laettner's game.  This wasn't a documentary about evolving views on what it means to be Black in America as teenagers grow into adults, it was about the Fab Five, a two year period in time.

Mitch Cumstein

March 16th, 2011 at 4:58 PM ^

"Why should he have had to say what he feels now?"

I never said he had to. But he probably should have if he didn't want Hill or someone from the Duke community responding to the insults thrown at them in the documentary.  Which is exactly what people are posting here.  "It was 18 yr old Jalen so Hill's response was unnecessary".   You can't have it both ways saying "Hill shouldn't respond b/c Jalen only felt that way as a youth" and saying "Why should Jalen have to clarify how he feels now".  Because Jalen didn't really clarify, I see nothing wrong with Hill's response is my point.

MI Expat NY

March 16th, 2011 at 5:05 PM ^

I wouldn't either if he framed it properly.  But he didn't.  He made it seem that Jalen still has the exact same feelings; i.e. that Hill is a bitch and an Uncle Tom.  Nowhere has it been shown that those were anything but his feelings at the time.  

In my opinion, Hill could have addressed it in two ways: (1) attacked Rose's point that Coach K only recruited a certain type of player, and that Jalen didn't fit that mold because of how and where he grew up, or (2) talked about how unfortunate it is that a young black man could feel that young black men from more fortunate backgrounds were somehow "less black" or "Uncle Toms."  

Hill only brushed on the second topic while he described his impressive family and the great university he went to.

Mitch Cumstein

March 16th, 2011 at 5:13 PM ^

Those are fair points.  I agree with this, especially the (2) point you made.  He should have expanded that point and it could have been a very productive piece.  I'm not sure the responses here in general have your critiques.  To me it seems more like "Hill is arguing against the fab5, so we must find a way to discredit".   But you proved me wrong here, as you bring up good content criticisms. 

m1jjb00

March 16th, 2011 at 7:56 PM ^

I'm sure BlueintheFace you got it.  What's wrong with Grant Hill's piece is that he writes half of it  as if he didn't even get it.  If Rose explained himself it would have been less powerful.  I'm tired of having things explained to me as if I'm an idiot.  How many jokes have you seen in movies ruined by an explanation.  I was capitvated and engaged.  And yes, I was bringing enough effort to figure out immediately what was going on, monitoring my own feelings and was the better for it.  Thankfully, the makers didn't take your advice.

Hill could have made a major contribution to the dialogue about race given his somewhat unique perspective, using the "Uncle Tom" intro.  And, in fact he start to get there in the second part of the piece.  Unfortunately, it's hard to see it given the whiny and rather stupid introduction.  

vegasjeff

March 17th, 2011 at 4:09 AM ^

It was mainly about a false claim that somehow the fab5 was more significant than two title-winning teams because Jalen thinks his team had a more lasting impact and that fans remember the fab5's names but not the full starting fives of the title winners.

The fab5 didn't win the Big Ten or the tournament title and they therefore weren't as significant as Duke, NC (or UNLV). Or Michigan '89.

Period.

King Douche Ornery

March 17th, 2011 at 9:43 AM ^

And they are far more significant outside the Michigan Blogosphere of Groupthink for their cheatin' ways, whether it was one, two or all. They (fairly or not) get tagged with ruining Michigan basketball forever. 

And Hill can respond because, you know, the Fab Five Movie brought them and the people they were involved with back to public awareness. 

Rose's comments were stupid. Duke succeeds because of a LOT of the principles the Fab Five ignored on their way to accomplishing--not much.

SFBlue

March 16th, 2011 at 4:28 PM ^

Hill acknowledges that Rose made the "Uncle Tom" comment in context, but he does not explain what that context is, exactly.  He does not say, for example, that it was how Rose felt when he was 18 years old.  And that he meant simply that Duke shied away from players from rough backgrounds.  To a large extent, this is unfair to Rose.

Then again,  "Uncle Tom" is a powerful term, and people will not understand, or acknowledge, the context in which that term was used. 

MGoVillain

March 16th, 2011 at 5:06 PM ^

that was a pretty Uncle Tom response by Grant Hill.  

 

JK JK JK JK JK JK JK JK JK not funny not funny not funny not funny stop it stop it omg omg

 

seriously folks, i didn't see anything wrong with what Jalen said.  he felt that the whitest black players were all Duke wanted.  he contextualized it and it made sense.  whether it's true or not is up for debate.  Duke can recruit whomever they want but Jalen has a right to that opinion.  doesn't mean it's true- just means he felt that way.  

SFBlue

March 16th, 2011 at 4:31 PM ^

Yes, it is.  Hill intentionally gives a misleading interpretation of what Rose meant, when he knows that Rose had something different in mind.  Hill uses what the term "Uncle Tom" means to him as a touch stone, when that is not what Rose meant.

Hoken's Heroes

March 16th, 2011 at 8:04 PM ^

..blacks in this country would be better off. Their sense of entitlement, laziness, anti education, and self destruction (ie fatherless kids and the disintegration of the black family) is the problem. I have seen in where I live, at U of M when I was there when the FAB 5 was getting started and everywhere I have interacted with Americans that just happen to have dark skin. They only have themselves to blame even though many will continue to blame slavery until they die.

yahwrite

March 16th, 2011 at 9:23 PM ^

If more kids had parents like Grant Hill's, regardless of race, they would be better off. Saying blacks only have themselves to blame ignores a lot. On an individual basis it makes some sense, but in general, attitudes built and confirmed over generations of denied opportunities due to actual racism change slowly. People really were killed in the 1960's for trying to vote while black.

Cope

March 17th, 2011 at 1:49 AM ^

You're right about the whole fatherlessness and role-modelessness. It's destructive and crappy for any kid not to have a good sense of himself and direction.
Then you stray a bit from normalcy when you BLAME BLACK KIDS FOR NOT HAVING FATHERS.

(apologies to any offended by the use of caps- the author felt it was warranted; unless the offended has no father, in which case he or she should suck it up and stop blaming others)

Jinxed

March 17th, 2011 at 5:48 AM ^

You're an idiot and clearly not aware of what many black families have to go through on a daily basis. Most blacks in this country still don't get a fair shot at life because cultural oppression is STILL alive and well in this country. Set them up for failure, wait until they turn to crime, and lock them up. That's what we do here.

Hannibal.

March 16th, 2011 at 3:31 PM ^

Hill is basically making a completely unnecessary argument.  Rose made it abundantly clear in the documentary that this was his attitude as an 18-year old.  He also insightfully pointed out that this was because he was jealous at the time because Hill's dad was active in his life.  I don't think that he feels that way anymore. 

WolverineHistorian

March 16th, 2011 at 4:13 PM ^

Indeed.

But the entire response from the media in regards to the Fab Five documentary in general has been completely unnecessary.  Yet they won't let it die.  Why is it so damn important to get the Duke players response to how Jalen & Company felt about them?  So they hated them.  Who cares? 

The media is acting like it's this HUGE shocking revelation that somebody actually hates Duke.  95% of the country hates Duke!  Asking somebody if they hate Duke is like asking somebody if they would hate being set on fire.  It's pretty obvious.

And now the media is drooling over the possibilty of us playing Duke in the second round if we can beat Tennessee despite the fact our current squad has nothing to do with the Fab Five.  It's so stupid.  If we do end up playing Duke, I can just picture the announcers spending more time talking about the Fab Five and those Duke squads than what is actually going on out on the court.  That's not really fair to our current team. 

Shakespeare

March 16th, 2011 at 3:30 PM ^

for not seeing the link in Brian's UV. I just found the article and wanted to share it ASAP because I thought it was interesting. Also, just because Brian linked to it doesn't mean we can't have a discussion about it on the board.

mrider

March 16th, 2011 at 3:36 PM ^

Grant Hill was trying to take the high road then dished out a cheap shot at the end. That says all we ought to know about Grant Hill.

 

He's entitled, his feelings got hurt, he's well educated, lets let him whine in the NYT. This pretty much proves Jalen's point. Grant Hill is a soft bitch.

Mitch Cumstein

March 16th, 2011 at 3:40 PM ^

Its an interesting feeling to be on this side of this type of exchange.  Where the classier, more eloquent and more intelligent side of the argument is coming from the party not associated with Michigan. 

I would say before you condemn Hill for technicalities, or for the response being unnecessary b/c it was "18 year old" Jalen talking in the documentary or for being pompous because he has pride having beat the fab5, imagine this was a response written by a former Wolverine to a former Buckeye.  This seems to fit a lot more, and I'm sure a lot of the responses would be different.

All I'm saying is it is interesting being on this side of the exchange, and interesting to see our own fans' defensive reactions reflect that.