Michigan Hoops Historical Relevance vs. Recent Relevance

The comparison to SMU is silly. Did they win a title (1989 team)? No. Did they have one of the most iconic teams of all time (the Fab Five)? No.

The Fab Five documentary was the talk of college basketball for days after it came out. People remember that team very well.

And unless you have personally spoken to recruits and their parents, how would possibly pretend to know what they think?

In any event, you utterly fail to explain how we landed all our Plan A recruits in the 2012 and 2013 classes (well, I guess we didn’t get Gary Harris, the kid who said at the 2013 Final Four " I guess I should have gone to Michigan"), and how we are right in the thick of things for some very elite 2016 recruits.

We’ll revisit this discussion in a couple years and, if the team continues to advance deep in the tourney and turn out NBA draft picks, I fully expect you to acknowledge the error of your ways. :). And if we start becoming an 8-9 seed every year, and can’t get any top 50 recruits, I’ll acknowledge your views had merit. Deal?

LA - i hate to make this personal, but I’m going to do so, albeit respectfully.

Prime example - you ask me “how could i possibly pretend to know what [recruits] think” if I havent’ personally spoken to them. This is complete hypocrisy/double standard - how do you know if recruits think to the contrary? Point is, you are often guilty of the same logic you accuse of being faulty…just some food for thought for you in the future.

Prime Example #2 - I “fail to explain how we landed all our Plan A recruits in 2012 and 2013 classes” - but yet you fail to explain why we didn’t in 2014 & 2015. Again, you often use these type of convenience arguments but fail to acknowledge the flip side when it is pretty obvious because you are blinded by your inherent bias. Furthermore, from what I can recall Denzel Valentine was a Plan A recruit over Stauskas, Matt Costello was Plan A over McGary until VERY late in the process whe we already knew Costello wasn’t coming here.

The 2012 class is very easy to explain - GR3 was the first domino, and he had a big impact on Mitch and Spike committing…nobody denies that. We did a really good job with being aggressive with Nik and it paid off. But Nik was not our Plan A guy, to say otherwise is just lying and you know it.

2013 - we did a damn good job identifying and securing commitments from some of the guys ranked highly on our board.

Your thing is…let’s talk about it after the fact and give the benefit of the doubt in the meantime…well fine, but that’s not my thing. If we maintain the same type of roster (meaning low on athletes/size/rebounding/defense), I don’t think we can maintain success, but fortunately, JB appears to be seeing things my way and addressing those needs moving forward.

Going forward, I really wish you would just maintain some type of minimal objectivity and acknowledge that we limitations when you post, because you consistently extract the “good” without the slightest mention of the flipside. As you say, that’s being a “fan”, but let’s try to be a basketball mind rather than a “fan”

Gee, I’m glad that JB has come around and “appears to be seeing things (your) way.” Good grief…

Your contributions to this thread reek of arrogance.

Your contributions to this thread reek of arrogance.

Thanks, I take that as a compliment.

MattD - I agree, my assumption that parents and AAU coaches remember Michigan during the 1980s and the Fab Five era has no more evidentiary support than your assumption they do not. As a matter of common sense, though, you seriously think people in their late 30s and early-to-mid 40s who have been basketball fans for a long time don’t have a big memory of the Fab Five? You think it’s some type of mere coincidence that we now see a ton of kids named Jalen? I believe Rick Brunson specifically said he named his son after Jalen Rose. Are you seriously telling me guys like Thornton Sr. (who played for Jeff Meyer at Liberty during the early 1990s) and Rick Brunson, among others, just have no recollection of the Fab Five?

To the next argument, I did give you a very clear explanation as to why we missed out on some of our Plan A targets in 2014: playing time. When Booker committed to UK, the Harrison twins were presumed to be one-and-done guys. When Blackmon committed to IU, there was no one standing in his way. At that time (October 2014), no one had any idea Stauskas would blow up like he did and leave after the season. So, any wing recruit is going to see Stauskas, Irvin and Levert standing in the way of potential playing time.

When we landed Stauskas and Irvin, that was not an issue. Stauskas walked right into a starting role, and when Irvin committed in the summer of 2012, no one had any clue Levert was going to be so good.

The other Plan A guys were Bates-Diop (committed DURING the 2012 season, so likely saw GR3 as an impediment to playing time, and that was before people were thinking about GR3 as an early entry guy), and for awhile Blueitt. Blueitt, of course, became enamored with UCLA, committed there, and de-committed. There is zero doubt in my mind had we wanted to, we could have jumped back into the Blueitt recruitment. The staff was annoyed that he rescheduled his Michigan official to visit UCLA; much like they got annoyed with Coleman. Oh, and there has been a long-standing rift between the Irvin and Blueitt families, so that’s another reason why he was hesitant to choose Michigan.

Doyle, too, was a Plan A - we targeted him very early, along with the aforementioned guys. So was Chatman - Plan A all along. So in a “down” year, we landed two Plan A guys. Not bad. As far as Wilson, I’d say he became Plan A as soon as Looney dropped us. But if he’s only a “Plan B” guy, I’ll take guys like him all day long, as this staff has proven they can win with recruits in the 50-100 range.

2015? Kennard picked Duke. They’re a great program. Brunson? To me, that’s pretty easy - he sees Walton standing in the way of him starting, while he sees an opportunity to start from day one at Nova. Coleman? We like Robinson, and we got tired of waiting on him. I think we also see him as a pure shooting guard, who is a bit short. Davis was never staying in-state, as has long-been reported, and did not pick MSU either. Who else? Bacon? Kid was never coming here, ever. He went to FSU for a reason, and it’s not because they’re a great basketball program. Barefield? We never offered, presumably because we didn’t like the way he was playing on the AAU circuit, he dropped in the rankings, and then picked SMU. Who else? McQuaid and Ahrens? Never offered either guy, and probably get both if we had (based on their comments).

Let’s see what happens with Dozier - clearly, he’s a Plan A all the way, and the competition is stiff (UNC), like it was with Chatman (AZ). But if we get him, you have to at least acknowledge we got a good Plan A guy, which thus far you have failed to do with Chatman.

Then, there’s 2016. Let’s see how it goes. We’ve already landed Teske, over OSU. That’s a nice start.

As you say, that's being a "fan", but let's try to be a basketball mind rather than a "fan"

The above statement says all.

I will never coach a basketball game and will never recruit a player. I am happy justing being a fan.

Teske was was definitely a Plan A guy for UM.

Just bring Chris Webber back.

I'm not "downplaying" UM, we are simply not an elite program as it stands right now. We are most certainly up and coming, but we have a decent amount of work to put in before we are considered a top flight program for the long run.

LA - I simply don’t understand your inclination to think everything about UM is great. I have yet to see you
agree with a single criticism of any player, coach, or philosophy associated with UM. You overrate our program on every level in my view. Obviously, there is some inherent bias, but you fail to display minimal objectivity. In your world, JB is flawless, recruiting is flawless, our defense is adequate, we are an elite program…basically we’re the best thing since sliced bread.

Here’s a reality check…you’re simply wrong. We are an up and coming program that has experienced rejuvenation in the past 2 years, but are still not on par with elite programs in terms of long term perception and stability. We’ve come a long way, but no way does 2 years cancel the previous 20 regardless of how much you’d like it to be that way. If we were a storied program that won multiple championships and took a 20 year hiatus (think Celtics) it would be different, but we’re not.

How many programs are elite in your view? If you are just talking Kentucky, Kansas, Duke, Louisville and NC then ok, maybe you have a point, but I think we are clearly in that next tier with MSU, OSU, Arizona, Florida, Uconn, etc.

In no way, shape or form are we in the next tier with MSU, Uconn, OSU, UA, or Florida. Several of those teams have national champ banners and their consistency over the past 10 years far exceeds anything we have done. If you want to limit the discussion to the last 2 years then fine, but 2 years doesn’t establish a team as an elite program in my view. Anybody can be really good for 2 years. Hell, if that’s the case Butler, VCU and George Mason are elite

MattD - since we have four national title appearances since 1989 (with one title), and OSU has exactly one (which they lost), I’d completely disagree on OSU. Again, I have no idea why you limit your horizon to ten years, except to discredit Michigan. As a program, OSU has been placed on probation twice (once under Ayres, and again under O’Brien), and each time it set them back at least a few years. (But of course if I suggested they pulled some strings to get that Oden/Conley class, you’d adamantly dispute that, right, even if they’ve been caught cheating twice since the 1990s?).

But forget about all of us on the board who you perceive to be biased. ESPN just ranked our program #10 overall in college basketball. Unless some former Michigan grad was doing those rankings, that’s at least one credible, objective source that ranks us right there with the next tier.

As far as UConn, we’ll see what happens in the near future. Calhoun built that program, and last year was one of the flukier championship runs I’ve ever seen. I mean, there’s no doubt they earned it, but no one in their wildest dreams saw that coming, and I’m skeptical if Ollie can sustain Calhoun’s program.

Seriously, since when did ESPN become credible as a source for ranking programs? That network is one step away from TMZ these days. ESPN was promoting (until last year anyway) that LB was the greatest basketball player ever and also picked Miami to win the trophy last year. So, my response to that is this - who gives a shit what ESPN says. And, furthermore, nobody gives a damn about what UM did 25 years ago. This is the reason UM has such a hard time recruiting and those other programs don’t. The last 5-10 years is the representative sample that recruits look at. Do you honestly think any recruit is saying “well gee, they were good in 93 so that means there is a correlation to 2016.” How misguided is that?

Let’s focus on the relevant time period here folks and admit the fact that UM has simply not performed on par in relation to these programs and put our love for UM to the side.

That’s funny, whenever we talk recruiting rankings, you hold out ESPN as the best and continually bash Rivals. But I guess their rankings don’t support your agenda this time, so now ESPN is not credible?

In any event, you again act as if the players themselves are making the decisions without any input from family members and AAU coaches, all of whom are old enough to remember the Fab Five, and the Michigan teams from a few years before that. And you also act like Michigan’s academic reputation means nothing when, in fact, recruits and their parents have mentioned it as a positive.

I’d also call it a fallacy that Michigan “has such a hard time recruiting, and those other programs don’t.” Again, we’ve landed plenty of very talented players over the past several recruiting classes - Morris, Hardaway/Smote, Burke, Robinson/McGary/Levert/Stauskas, Walton/Irvin, Chatman/Wilson - all top 100 players other than Levert (who clearly had top 100 talent regardless of ranking). Other than maybe Kentucky, what other school has a class with four future NBA talents in it like our 2012 class did? Maybe Duke or Kansas in a given year?

We play in the best conference in the country, and we are holding serve with every other top team in that conference.

Even if the “second tier” of schools like Florida, Louisville, and the like are ahead of us as programs, at worst that makes us at least a top 15 program.

Let’s name them:

First tier: Duke, Kansas, UK, UNC

Second tier: UCLA, Arizona, UConn, OSU, MSU, Syracuse, Louisville, Wisconsin.

Even if all those second tier programs should be ranked ahead of us - and I think some of them are questionable - that puts us at #13 on the list. Do you have a real argument with that?

Or do you also think schools like Georgetown, Gonzaga, Oklahoma State, Indiana, Pitt, Nova, Texas and Cincinnati should be ahead of us as well?

In no way, shape or form are we in the next tier with MSU, Uconn, OSU, UA, or Florida. Several of those teams have national champ banners and their consistency over the past 10 years far exceeds anything we have done. If you want to limit the discussion to the last 2 years then fine, but 2 years doesn't establish a team as an elite program in my view. Anybody can be really good for 2 years. Hell, if that's the case Butler, VCU and George Mason are elite

Ok fine. Lets use your NC champ criteria and we are still a top 15 program. That sounds pretty “elite” to me.

And where are you getting 2 years from? We were conference champs 3 years ago. You sound like a self-hating fan to me.

Is the Michigan basketball program (right now) perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit? Not yet.

Should the Michigan basketball program (right now) be perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit? Absolutely yes (but we are not yet)!

Should we have faith that Michigan basketball will be perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit after success this year and next? I beleive so, yes.

Isn’t it sort of obvious that Walton, Caris, Irvin, Chatman, Doyle, Spike, Donnal, MAAR, Dawkins and Wilson are going to hit it out of the park!!! What exactly are you guys arguing about?

In no way, shape or form are we in the next tier with MSU, Uconn, OSU, UA, or Florida. Several of those teams have national champ banners and their consistency over the past 10 years far exceeds anything we have done. If you want to limit the discussion to the last 2 years then fine, but 2 years doesn't establish a team as an elite program in my view. Anybody can be really good for 2 years. Hell, if that's the case Butler, VCU and George Mason are elite

Ok fine. Lets use your NC champ criteria and we are still a top 15 program. That sounds pretty “elite” to me.

And where are you getting 2 years from? We were conference champs 3 years ago. You sound like a self-hating fan to me.

I mean seriously, in what world does a conf champ followed up by a 1st Ed exit qualify as an elite season? Nobody cares about that

Is the Michigan basketball program (right now) perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit? Not yet.

Should the Michigan basketball program (right now) be perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit? Absolutely yes (but we are not yet)!

Should we have faith that Michigan basketball will be perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit after success this year and next? I beleive so, yes.

Isn’t it sort of obvious that Walton, Caris, Irvin, Chatman, Doyle, Spike, Donnal, MAAR, Dawkins and Wilson are going to hit it out of the park!!! What exactly are you guys arguing about?

These are the type of insights that make the bias very obvious. Nobody in their right mind expects us to “hit it out of the park” this year, especially in the context of referencing Spike, Doyle, Donnal, and Wilson

Is the Michigan basketball program (right now) perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit? Not yet.

Should the Michigan basketball program (right now) be perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit? Absolutely yes (but we are not yet)!

Should we have faith that Michigan basketball will be perceived as elite by the average 5 star recruit after success this year and next? I beleive so, yes.

Isn’t it sort of obvious that Walton, Caris, Irvin, Chatman, Doyle, Spike, Donnal, MAAR, Dawkins and Wilson are going to hit it out of the park!!! What exactly are you guys arguing about?

These are the type of insights that make the bias very obvious. Nobody in their right mind expects us to “hit it out of the park” this year, especially in the context of referencing Spike, Doyle, Donnal, and Wilson

Nobody expected us to do it last year after losing Trey and Tim, and then McGary to injury. I like hearing low expectations. Keep it up. I simply don’t make predictions - of grandeur or failure. Just enjoy watching it unfold.

LA - I prefer ESPN over Rivlas for recruiting, but what exactly does that have to do with my contention that ESPN isn’t necessarily credible in terms of ranking an entire college team? So, in other words, because I prefer ESPN for recruiting necessarily means I must like them for all things sports related? Didn’t know my world was that limited.

I actually think UM’s academic rigor is a negative to some recruits. Furthermore, I don’t think parents weigh the fab 5/glory days 25 years ago as a significant factor when aiding in their child’s life altering decision. If you think so, fine. As someone that is currently dealing with the process (albeit on the girls side), my family and I have never sat down and said “Lousiana Tech was great in the 80s so they deserve a good look” - what a given program did that long ago is absolutely irrelevant to us, and I can confirm that other parents have the same approach.

Not saying that we haven’t landed talented players, but the point is we landed those players because we were the best offer in most cases and none of the elite teams wanted those kids. We only beat out elite teams for Mitch. Point is we simply aren’t going to win a head to head recruiting battle with elite teams because we aren’t perceived as being elite…and that is the true definition of perception. So you can mention all the “positives” you want, actions speak louder than words.

If you really want to see where we stand in the pecking order, compare our record to the rest of the field for the last 5 - 10 years. It’s really the only objective approach