Records don’t always indicate the success of a coach. JB is a rebuilder of programs and teams that were in dire need of leadership and cultural adjustment. At every stop he’s taken over programs that have been a train wreck, from Canisius and Richmond, to WV and now Michigan. He typically doesn’t stay more than 4-7 years because he’s proven he can get the job done. He’s never had the opportunity (until now) to recruit elite players so I don’t put much emphasis on his overall record. There we many very bad teams he inherited that were very good when he left…just like Michigan today!
I for one, hopes he finishes his career in Michigan.
I’m not even going to debate JB as a coach, because it’s a no win situation on this board. I can present all the objective data in the world, and it simply won’t matter…and I realize that. The man has done an amazing job the past few years, but the notion that comparing JB to Hewitt/Davis is absurd…is absurd within itself when looking at the objective data…I’ll leave it at that.
Your objectivity is appreciated MD. But fans by their very nature are emotional and passionate about their team! Look at the current status of the football program…lots of emotion.
Of course emotion plays a factor, but it shouldn’t to the extent that it does at times on this board. I’m sure some potential posters simply refrain from doing so because a lot of people on the board are very defensive in nature when it comes to JB and critique. As I said, there is no denying the man has done a superb job over the past 2-3 years (depending on how you define superb for the third year), but whether that means he is a great coach, or UM is on the national scene, remains to be seen in my view…pending the next 2-3 years where we have a 5 year period to really evaluate whether “we’re back” or not
Longtime lurker, didn't really want to get dragged into posting but I can't resist.
You guys are setting yourselves up for disappointment. There simply aren’t enough creators from the wing on the roster going forward and Duncan Robinson is not going to remedy that. At best, he’s a redundant offensive talent along the lines of Irvin who has shown no evidence of being a capable enough athlete to defend athletic wings in this league. We needed someone like Jalen Coleman or Prince Ali and we struck out. Now it’s down to MAAR and Chatman who can create off the bounce on the wing. They’d better both pan out and stay healthy. That should be a cause for concern unless you take the “who are we to question Beilein!” approach. All too reminiscent of the shouting down of anyone who dared to point out that Hoke’s highly ranked recruiting classes were filled with redundant talent that was short on fast-twitch playmaking the past few years.
When did Hoke lead Michigan to a National championship game or multiple Big Ten titles? I’ll wait while you tell me the years… I’ll take my chances with Beilein and his staff, some of you are blowing things out of proportion.
“Beilein can do no wrong!!!” Great argument.
It’s not that he can do no wrong… Hell, I have been as hard as on Beilein as anybody over on the scout board and nobody is asking you to be a Beilein d*ckrider. All im saying is you would think after a National title game appearance, 2 big ten titles in the last 3 years(easily could have been a 3rd had Morgan’s tip in gone in), as well as an elite eight appearance just last season that Beilein and his staff would have earned the benefit of the doubt when it comes to recruiting, player development, and putting together a championship quality team. The comparsions between Beilein’s staff and Mark Dantonio’s staff are eerily similar, I don’t see this program slowing down anytime soon.
Should Georgia Tech fans have just given Paul Hewitt the benefit of the doubt after their national title game appearance with Jarrett Jack? Should UW have put blind faith in Lorenzo Romar after he had them tasting success with Spencer Hawes and Nate Robinson? Should Mike Davis have been unquestioned after 2001-02 at Indiana?
We’ve had a few good years, teams rise and fall all the time. Too many around here are starting from the premise “UM is good at basketball now” and molding the abilities of the players in their minds to fit that narrative instead of honestly looking at the talent and skillsets of the players on the roster. I hope the Beilein/Dantonio analogy holds, but as coaches get older, they also tend to settle in recruiting because they don’t have the energy to go compete on the recruiting trail anymore (see Lloyd Carr and Joe Paterno). It’s certainly possible that success has made Beilein comfortable, he’d be far from the first to fall victim to his own success. When I look at taking Duncan Robinson instead of fighting for Jalen Coleman or finding another athletic wing, that’s the first thing I think. I look at the roster in the next few years and I see a lack of penetrators. Beilein must address this or we will be a bubble team going forward.
If you think that Beilein and/or his staff has let up in recruiting or any other way, you haven’t really been following Michigan basketball in recent years.
Didn’t say they have, I said Duncan Robinson is one data point that would suggest that. If a slew of others follow, then that holds more merit than the Dantonio analogy.
You suggested that Beilein’s slowing down in his “old age.”
No. Again, I didn’t. I said Duncan Robinson is one data point that suggests that. Then I said if a slew of other plan B/C recruits follows, then it would lead me to believe that he’s headed for a Lloyd Carr/JoePa end of career (scandal not included) instead of a Dantonio trajectory.
Lol @
He flies thousands of miles to watch recruits work out. He does his due diligence. He watches hours of video on prospects. He takes full advantage of the open periods during AAU ball. Hev evaluates a mind boggling number of players.
You must be right, because there’s no way Paul Hewitt or Mike Davis ever did that. They probably recruited at the Y.
Records don't always indicate the success of a coach. JB is a rebuilder of programs and teams that were in dire need of leadership and cultural adjustment. At every stop he's taken over programs that have been a train wreck, from Canisius and Richmond, to WV and now Michigan.
You should check out what Siena and Georgia Tech were like before Paul Hewitt arrived. Man, some of you guys really live inside of a Michigan vacuum.
No place was worse than WVU when Beilein took over. When you compare career records, as you all are doing, you have to look at their careers - where they’ve been and what they started with at each and every stop. I notice that you dropped Davis from the conversation.(Ironically, when Davis was canned, Beilein was at the top of IU’s list but they balked at his buyout.) As for Hewitt, he brought back GT but only had one winning record in ACC play in 11 years. Never came close to winning the conference, which Beilein has done two of the last three seasons. Five NCAA appearances in 11 seasons for Hewitt. Beilein has 5 in 7 years including the last 4 in a row. Beilein has rebuilt, not one, but two high major programs and not one, but several low to mid major programs. Those are facts, not spin. Yes, the comparison is absurd.
Pumpkin, the point about how hard Beilein is working addresses your suggestion that taking Robinson and dumping Coleman might be a sign that Beilein has lost his mojo. Nothng to do with Hewitt or Davis, both of whom are much younger than Beilein.
I ask again, would any of the three of you trade Beilein for Hewitt or Davis? When you guys are done patting each other on the back for your objectivity, maybe you’ll answer that question.
You should check out what Siena and Georgia Tech were like before Paul Hewitt arrived. Man, some of you guys really live inside of a Michigan vacuum.
I’m not sure I live in a vacuum but what about Canisius and Richmond? Were they a train wreck before he took the team? You have selective reasoning. As for Siena, they’ve always been one of the better teams in the MAC or the NE region compared to Canisius.
You should check out what Siena and Georgia Tech were like before Paul Hewitt arrived. Man, some of you guys really live inside of a Michigan vacuum.
I’m not sure I live in a vacuum but what about Canisius and Richmond? Were they a train wreck before he took the team? You have selective reasoning. As for Siena, they’ve always been one of the better teams in the MAC or the NE region compared to Canisius.
Canisius was 8-22 the year before Beilein arrived. They were 23-8 in his first year. Richmond was 8-20, 8-20 and 13-15 in the three years before he arrived. They were also 23-8 in Beilein’s first year there. So, yes, they were train wrecks. You must live in a vacuum not to know that. If Siena was always one of the better teams in the MAC compared to Canisius, then it appears that a train wreck Canisius program would be a tougher turnaround than a train wreck Siena, no? You kind of blew right by what Beilein had when he got to WVU. Much tougher place to recruit to than GT, as well. Just ask the current coach. Just as bad a situation if not worse than GT.
I would in a heartbeat - does that answer your question or make you feel better?
You would take Hewitt and Davis over Beilein?
7 days a week and twice on Sunday. Does that answer your question. Unlike you, I don’t think John Beilein is a deity reincarnated on Earth. Good enough for you?
I would in a heartbeat - does that answer your question or make you feel better?
You would take Hewitt and Davis over Beilein?
7 days a week and twice on Sunday. Does that answer your question. Unlike you, I don’t think John Beilein is a deity reincarnated on Earth. Good enough for you?
No need to get emotional, Matt. I’m just surprised at your response, even as an inveterate Beilein detractor.
I’d take Beilein over Hewitt and Davis, but until he proves this recent success isn’t a flash-in-the-pan, that’s just my speculation. In order to sustain recent success, he needs better players for the 2016 season than he currently has, and even 2015 is looking more bubbly than anything else right now. I get the sense that most here would take Beilein over Matta, and some would take him over Izzo right now, both of which to me are just laughable. Beilein simply isn’t a great recruiter and I think that will always hold him back from reaching that top tier.
If you want a comparison from me, I’d say Beilein is about on par with Rick Barnes. Both have completely different styles (Beilein far superior x’s and o’s, Barnes the far superior recruiter), but I see Michigan settling in about where Texas is for the duration of Beilein’s time here. They’ll be a middle/upper tier Big Ten team that makes the tournament more often than not, but doesn’t make many deep runs or win many conference titles.
Matt would definitively take Hewitt and Davis over Beilein.
can you give some reasons they would be better in your view? Not looking for more numbers as they can be skewed by either side to fit the narrative. What makes Hewitt better than Beilein and what makes Davis better than Beilein? Honestly just trying to gain insight into your thought process here…
I would guess style of play, offensive and defensive approaches, and recruiting approach are some of your reasons, but those are just guesses.
If you say you don’t have time for this - well I don’t believe you because you post way more than anybody else on this board…humor me - just trying to understand your opinion better.
I'd take Beilein over Hewitt and Davis, but until he proves this recent success isn't a flash-in-the-pan, that's just my speculation. In order to sustain recent success, he needs better players for the 2016 season than he currently has, and even 2015 is looking more bubbly than anything else right now. I get the sense that most here would take Beilein over Matta, and some would take him over Izzo right now, both of which to me are just laughable. Beilein simply isn't a great recruiter and I think that will always hold him back from reaching that top tier.
While I prefer Beilein over Izzo in terms of character (I view Izzo as a whiny, disingenuous, attention whore), I will admit that a lot of that is due to the Maize and Blue goggles I wear. Looking at it without bias, I would put Izzo above Beilein on the whole, but for me it’s not a big gap.
With Matta, it’s closer to a draw, but the edge goes to Beilein. The main thing Matta does better than JB in my opinion is recruiting. And who knows by which methods OSU gets recruits…that school has never been afraid to break the rules. He definitely has a knack for coaching defense, just as JB is very good at teaching offense. Matta’s in-game X’s and O’s are laughable in comparison with JB. I’d give Beilein a slight edge overall, so laugh away I suppose.
It was obvious sarcasm on my behalf, I would actually choose JB over Hewitt or Davis. The reason I went so extreme is based on Sane’s ridiculous theory that it is “absurd” to even compare those 2 with JB. The career records/% are almost identical when looking at blind resumes as it relates to 2 of the coaches. So, in terms of objective data you can’t really make a claim that one coach is vastly superior to the other. You can talk about the inherited situation and interpret that all you want, it’s subjective at best. I’m not going that route because the raw numbers paint a more objective picture in terms of blind resumes. The whole point is that the bias around here is damn near vomit inducing because it’s so far away from being reasonable it’s unreal.
Honest opinion - JB is a good, not great coach. He is a good teacher and average/below average salesman/recruiter. Overall he’s a bit ahead of the typical coach - you give him good talent and he’ll give you a good team. You give him shitty talent and he’ll give you a competitive team. 2 problems with JB - not a very good recruiter, so that means he will have problems assembling the raw talent, and he’s not good defensively. He’s able to compensate playing gimmick ball with the 3 on offense, and it’s fun to watch and wins games, but not championship worthy. JB is the Mike Antoni of college ball.