Fair enough. It’s not a discussion I really want on a Michigan basketball forum haha. And obviously entirely subjective. But the whole #1 thing was only ever really a big deal for a couple years when Braylon made it a big deal. And by now it’s pretty much lost all it’s meaning to this point.
For basketball #3 doesn’t have that history at all, and most HS recruits don’t even plan on being their for more than 2 years so restricting a number for upperclassman doesn’t benefit anything. I mean Trey Burke was never an upperclassman
Memories are faint, but didn’t David Terrell earn it? I don’t recall. I do recall there was some talk about turning #2 into the same thing for Woodson, but that was before Dave Brandon and all that, and obviously Harbaugh has his own way of using numbers for motivation, and, well, enough said about football. I support discussion of the football team as long as it’s quarantined in a separate thread or limited to nonsense like number choices. Do I get to make the rules? If so I’d love to have that confirmed.
Honestly I would rather talk about Michigan football with Michigan basketball fans than with Michigan football fans who lack the ability to appreciate what we have over here on this side of things. But I can really appreciate the need to keep this as a safespace too.
This interview with John Beilein kinda squares with my thinking about the team not being motivated or playing hard against MSU; I just don’t think that’s usually the case, whatever Isaiah said (and I respect Isaiah). Other team has a plan, yours prevails or theirs does, you get down, stuff happens. . . not wanting it enough or being as up as your rival is. . . maybe not so much.
In another article from the same source, Michigan Director of Player and Personnel Development Jay Smith says on a call with Jimmy King that he’s “hopeful Brooks could return as soon as Friday.”
There is definitely a spin to this that Juwan is motivating his team to gear back up for the tournaments by holding back a little in that last game after they clinched the outright title (as far as the Big Ten is concerned). Not sure I agree with that approach or believe if it was in fact done, but that is a possible motivation tool that is available now and the players seem to be responding to the idea.
If Eli really is back on Friday, there is a chance they come out hungry like they haven’t been since that Iowa game. I don’t see Juwan as the type of coach to rest up for the NCAA tournament, but I could be wrong about that.
I think we’re past it by now, but this feels like the final nail in the coffin of feeling like Illinois was cheated in any way, shape, or form by the Big Ten’s criteria for determining a champion this year:
Hey I figured out why Underwood is moaning and groaning so much about thinking Illini was cheated out of B1G season championship. A big $$$$$$ incentive for winning it.
Mark Few will never say this, but I bet a part of him wished BYU had finished the job yesterday. The undefeated record is an extra burden on top of the pressure to win it all. And now they’ve got to do both.
As the linked article implies, US HS and college rules are the only rule sets in the world that prohibit the numbers 6 through 9. FIBA (international rules) officials use two hands to signal numbers when necessary. It’s very simple; no Chinese modifications required. The US rule is an archaic one that the NCAA and NFHS simply haven’t bothered to change. There’s nothing at all confusing about expanding numbering to include all two digit numbers.
So, there definitely is some reading between the lines that you need to do here but it seems to me Ryan’s column is directly contradicting what Whitman is saying. The column says:
ADs vote unanimously in November and decides winning %
ADs reconvene on 2/26 and unaninmously affirms November decision
Subsequently Whitman starts raising the issue and campaiging for a co-title
Whitman’s letter says “By mid-February, my DIA colleagues and I saw this possibility on the horizon. I first raised the concern with the Big Ten weeks ago”
These two don’t line up. If Whitman was aware of this possibility in mid-February, why would he go along with a unanimous vote on 2/26 to affirm winning %? I think there are two main explanations but open to what others think:
Whitman is full of it and Ryan’s reporting is essentially accurate
Whitman did make a big stink about this but did it behind closed doors and when the B1G rejected him he agreed to go along with the vote for some reason
Very likely #1. Whitman was fine with the rule, only to be caught off guard by the fan outcry. He then tried to ride the wave of anger for his own advantage (writing the letter) - but was foiled by Ryan’s reporting.
Great and valuable reporting from Shannon Ryan. It’s interesting that the league kept it very tight to the vest that they decided to go with winning percentage. I’m sure they had their reasons, but it’s just notable that that’s a bit of information they did not want to share and that they went back and reaffirmed that decision in a democratic process amongst teams.
Would love to know if there were abstentions or votes against, but at least the AD in question here certainly was not one of them and gets a big fat GFY from me, personally.
