And to add to Coleman, at the time of the Robinson commit, Michigan wasn’t even the favorite for Coleman. We took a skilled 6’7 shooter that will at the very least be a positive contributor.
Matt D, how did Jalen Coleman have no chance to chose Michigan? Please explain how that makes any sense when he was offered the Monday after Beilein's June 15th offer date and was laid to rest as a UM recruit when Robinson committed over a year later.And to Guestavo, multiple reports out of practice/open gym say that he has been one of the best players in the gym and if he were eligible this year he would start. I tend to dial everything back a notch or two when I hear it so in mind mind the kid is no stretch to play at this level and at the very least JB found a productive player for the future
No disrespect intended, but this is rather elementary…Coleman’s camp attempted to set up a visit at which point they were informed that UM was no longer interested, thus precluding Coleman from choosing to attend UM.
So if we’re getting right down to the nitty gritty of it, this means that Coleman had a limited window to commit on UM’s timeframe rather than his own…which isn’t unreasonable considering most highly touted recruits end the process during the November signing period of their senior year. Bottom line is this, the staff liked Robinson and once he committed, they shut the door on Coleman…hence UM chose for Coleman in the same mold that Louisville previously chose for Dozier.
Not addressed to me, but I’ll take a crack anyways - reports out of practice aren’t always true or what they seem to be. Case in point would be Smot a few years back, I remember reports (in addition to seeing it myself) of Smot being significantly improved…only to see him only marginally improved. We heard practice reports that Vogrich had taken a big step forward…only to see him remain the same and even regress in some ways. We heard practice reports that LLP was one of the best PG’s to ever come to UM, only to see him…pretty much be irrelevant. You get the point
And to add to Coleman, at the time of the Robinson commit, Michigan wasn't even the favorite for Coleman. We took a skilled 6'7 shooter that will at the very least be a positive contributor.
Correction - Michigan wasn’t the perceived favorite, the actual favorite during that time period remains a mystery as evidenced by recent context…so that argument holds no weight with me. All of this is just code word for “let’s not question the staff” in my opinion. Bottom line for me is the staff liked Robinson as much, or more than Coleman, hence they weren’t willing to wait it out…
And to add to Coleman, at the time of the Robinson commit, Michigan wasn't even the favorite for Coleman. We took a skilled 6'7 shooter that will at the very least be a positive contributor.Correction - Michigan wasn’t the perceived favorite, the actual favorite during that time period remains a mystery as evidenced by recent context…so that argument holds no weight with me. All of this is just code word for “let’s not question the staff” in my opinion. Bottom line for me is the staff liked Robinson as much, or more than Coleman, hence they weren’t willing to wait it out…
I know I should probably stay out of this discussion since I’m not really emotionally invested in it, but MattD, I think it’s a leap to say what Wolverine3 wrote is “code word for ‘let’s not question the staff’.” Wolverine3 may be perfectly fine with questioning the staff (I don’t know) and still disagree with you about Coleman’s opportunity to commit to Michigan. On the one hand, you seem to be upset with how that went (“this really irks me that Coleman probably wasn’t an ND lean as we all thought, and yet we still stopped the pursuit”), but on the other hand, you’re not too upset (“Coleman had a limited window to commit on UM’s timeframe rather than his own…which isn’t unreasonable”).
And it’s also very reasonable (IMO) that the coaching staff could have objectively rated Coleman higher than Robinson, but still decided to stop pursuing him once they got Robinson. It’s no one’s fault. Just timing.
Matt D. That is recruiting. If Cassius Winston decides to commit to Michigan tomm, then Michigan takes Winston, Thorton losses his potential spot. Thorton had a chance to chose UM. It happens every year with every team. Were you not aware of this?
Your correct, it is very elementary. Coleman set up his visit… Two weeks too late. We offered multiple players at his position, Robinson included. DR wanted UM right away.
Again, you haven’t answered my question. How is it so that Coleman didn’t have a chance to choose UM? He took multiple unofficals during the season (not to UM), he had plenty of time to commit. Your stance is very much of a hurt fan of a particular recruit.
And if you really think I take the stance of “let’s not question the staff”, Can I not turn it right back on you and say, how can you question a staff that has been so successful?
Bottom line. Coleman had over a year to commit, we offered 2-3 others at his spot after sensing JC was going to drag it out a bit more. DR dropped. It will happen again, promise.
Matt D. That is recruiting. If Cassius Winston decides to commit to Michigan tomm, then Michigan takes Winston, Thorton losses his potential spot. Thorton had a chance to chose UM. It happens every year with every team. Were you not aware of this?Your correct, it is very elementary. Coleman set up his visit… Two weeks too late. We offered multiple players at his position, Robinson included. DR wanted UM right away.
Again, you haven’t answered my question. How is it so that Coleman didn’t have a chance to choose UM? He took multiple unofficals during the season (not to UM), he had plenty of time to commit. Your stance is very much of a hurt fan of a particular recruit.
And if you really think I take the stance of “let’s not question the staff”, Can I not turn it right back on you and say, how can you question a staff that has been so successful?
Bottom line. Coleman had over a year to commit, we offered 2-3 others at his spot after sensing JC was going to drag it out a bit more. DR dropped. It will happen again, promise.
You are correct, it is elementary, we offered multiple players for the 2G spot, problem with your logic is that it assumes we will only take 1 player for that spot…when nothing could be further from the truth. We took Robinson, but that didn’t impede the staff from pursuing Dozier who is also a 2…so your logic doesn’t hold weight. The staff chose Robinson over Coleman exclusively…has nothing to do with position, just preference of the staff, which effectively implies the staff made the decision for Coleman rather than Coleman taking too long. Long story short, if Robinson doesn’t come along, we wait it out for Coleman…so this whole Coleman had his chance argument is lacking, the staff simply liked Robinson better, and that’s fine. I don’t agree with that assessment, and I’m sure many others feel the same, but let’s call it how it is rather than how we may want it to be.
You can certainly turn it back on me…I have no problem expressly admitting that I question the staff, regardless of very recent success. I evaluate individual moves irrelevant of historical success or failure…to do otherwise flaws the evaluation in my opinion, but that’s just me.
Do we know why the staff was no longer interested in Coleman? It’s pretty tough to question the staff or hold them accountable when we don’t have all the facts. They do have the facts and we don’t…so maybe that’s why some people (including me) don’t question the staff.
Of course you have every right to question them, we all do, but can your claims be substantiated or are they just hearsay or a collection of random statements from unknown sources? Perhaps that’s why some take offense when you blame the staff for not brining on a recruit when we only have half the information.
Chazer - in the same mold that it’s tough to question the staff, then it’s also tough to question why Coleman “took too long”. I didn’t “blame” the staff, I simply said we chose Robinson over Coleman, which appears to be true. Do you have anything to substantiate the contrary view, or are you simply relying on hearsay or a collection of random statement from unknown sources?
Perhaps that’s why I take offense when some give a presumption in favor of the staff as opposed to making a judgment on the merits independent of the past success/failure.
As a fan and a valued contributor to this site, I think MattD has a viewpoint to be respected when he offers that he evaluates staff moves individually. I do however think there is a defining reason that this staff moved away from Coleman and unto Robinson. We will never know what that truly was, but they feel comfortable with it and it’s over. Speculation and conjecture are part of a good forum, but this horse is dead and buried. Let’s leave the “grave” alone.
I didn't "blame" the staff, I simply said we chose Robinson over Coleman, which appears to be true.
Well, what we really know is that they chose to offer both and Robinson chose us first and then they chose to stop recruiting Coleman.
I didn't "blame" the staff, I simply said we chose Robinson over Coleman, which appears to be true.Well, what we really know is that they chose to offer both and Robinson chose us first and then they chose to stop recruiting Coleman.
So, to put this in mathematical terms that are objective…of the relevant pool of discussion, we will be offering 3 prospects for two spots at the 2G. By virtue of Robinson’s commitment we will still have one spot left for the 2G…and told Coleman to take a hike while still recruiting Dozier…seems pretty clear to me the staff simply preferred Robinson over Coleman.
The way I read the situation. I don’t think the decision makes it clear that they preferred Robinson to Coleman. I think it just shows they liked Robinson enough that they weren’t willing to let him go on the gamble they would get Coleman. The whole bird in the hand thing.
It shows that they felt it was either or for Coleman and Robinson and that Dozier is the clear favorite. With Robinson in the fold they are willing to let Coleman go to put the full press on Dozier.
(just my take, not trying to be contentious, there is much greater basketball knowledge on this board than I have)
I didn't "blame" the staff, I simply said we chose Robinson over Coleman, which appears to be true.Well, what we really know is that they chose to offer both and Robinson chose us first and then they chose to stop recruiting Coleman.
So, to put this in mathematical terms that are objective…of the relevant pool of discussion, we will be offering 3 prospects for two spots at the 2G. By virtue of Robinson’s commitment we will still have one spot left for the 2G…and told Coleman to take a hike while still recruiting Dozier…seems pretty clear to me the staff simply preferred Robinson over Coleman.
Well, what seems clear to you is not so clear to me. I would argue that the staff felt they needed to fulfill two distinct skillsets, not two players for one distinct position. It’s very possible they thought Coleman’s skillset overlapped Robinson’s much more than it overlapped Dozier’s. I would also argue that they aren’t concerned with labeling a player a 2G. But I could be wrong.
Well if Coleman ends up at Illinois (latest buzz), we should have a great opportunity to judge everyone’s progress over the next few years 
Yeah I think this has more to do with Dozier being a totally different player than Coleman. Dozier has more size, athleticism and ball handling ability whereas Coleman is primarily a shooter (a very good one at that, but still a very different player than Dozier).
Staff wants someone to complement their shooter (Robinson now) and so they are pursing Dozier hard. The skillsets fit well together.
All good points and discussion. I can’t wait for the season to start and to get away from the recruiting issues. I think I read the first practice is 45 days before the first game…can anyone confirm?
Well if Coleman ends up at Illinois (latest buzz), we should have a great opportunity to judge everyone's progress over the next few years :-)
A day ago the buzz was UNLV. Which is perhaps a small window onto why the coaches did not wait on him and took Robinson. Certainly Coleman knew about the developing recruitment of Robinson. If Coleman really wanted Michigan, that would have been the time to say so. The fact that the Colemans set up all of their other visits and then called for a date with Michigan, and were surprised to find the offer gone, tells you that there had not been much communication between the staff and the Colemans in the recent past. Now, if someone believes that Robinson is not a high D1 caliber player - and a couple on here do believe that - then waiting for Coleman to decide, even though an iffy situation at best, might have been the way to go. IMO, Robinson can play at this level and fit very well into what we like to do.
The rest of the B1G is having great success with this 2015 class.
.@takhtehchianmd I love Jalen Coleman as a point guard. Acknowledged as great shooter but pg skills under rated.
— Jerry Meyer (@jerrymeyer247) September 19, 2014
@THEREALPCHAP @illinois247 @UNLV247 The intel I'm receiving says Illinois.
— Jerry Meyer (@jerrymeyer247) September 19, 2014
Amazing.
The rest of the B1G is having great success with this 2015 class.Good.