February 7th, 2012 at 7:33 PM ^

Glad to see Beilein strongly refute the notion that there are any chemistry issues on the team. Their timing may be off sometimes when running plays, but that doesn't mean the players don't get along or are getting into conflicts either on or off the floor (which is what "bad chemistry" implies to me).

Maybe annarbor.com shouldn't be letting their football beat writer compose opinion pieces about the basketball team.

Wolverine Devotee

February 7th, 2012 at 8:37 PM ^

Michigan still has a chance at the B1G.

Michigan must win out.

ohio beats state at home (giving state four losses)

state beats ohio at home (giving ohio four losses)

That would tie all three at the top, meaning Michigan would have their first B1G Championship since 1985-86.



February 8th, 2012 at 8:56 AM ^

But I saw an article the other day that had me thinking...Is Beilein intentionally ripping on Izzo here when talking about the superbowl coaches? 

“I thought that had two terrific coaches,” Beilein said. “What I like about those two coaches is it’s not about either one of them. They are not out front, beating their breast and saying, it’s all about me. They coach their team. …That’s the type of coach I really love, they coach their team. They’re not ranting and raving on the sideline. You look at those two guys, you see calm, composed guys.”

About the Super Bowl coaches, he continued: “I love their composure. Their players look at those two guys and say, he’s under control. That’s what you want. I’m certainly not perfect in that category, I hope what my players see is a guy who’s not on the officials every minute, not chastising his players every minute. He’s in control, what those guys are like.”  

Obviously we didn't need the article to know this is what Beilein aspires to.  It was obvious on the court from his "yes face" when Novak's missed dunk could have won the Savannah State game in regulation way back when.  My question is: were Beilein's remarks simply an insight into his philosophy, or were they intended to highlight Izzo's shortcomings?

Izzo is obviously well know for throwing officiating tantrums and undressing his players from the sidelines during the game.  Beilein obviously doesn't make the comparison...But just the same, he seems to be painting Izzo's style(I hope what my players see is a guy who’s not on the officials every minute, not chastising his players every minute)  as the antithesis of who he wants to be.  Intentional?  What do you think?