The Seniors That Built Michigan Basketball

What if I were to tell you that Michigan had just fired its head basketball coach?  That neither he nor Michigan had made the NCAA Tournament in over 9 years.  That the basketball program was still shadowed by a scandal that not only removed its most cherished history and success, but fired one of its most famous coaches and plagued the program with vicious scholarship reductions that made the team almost incapable of competing.

This actually happened to Michigan and the year was 2007.  Surprisingly, Stu Douglass was about to commit to Michigan to play for John Beilein.  Beilein had some success over his career, primarily at West Virginia, but had never made a Final Four, nor coached in the Big Ten.  Few, if any, truly believed this coach could change the culture shock Ann Arbor had received from the Fab 5 Scandal, but two little known recruits believed that Beilein could change what had recently been a disastrous run for Michigan.

The task Beilein, Douglass, and Zack Novak (who committed in the beginning of 2008) were undertaking would be pretty substantial.  Somehow, these three had to convince not only recruits, but the entire fanbase and country that Michigan was ready to play basketball again.  From 1998-2007, Michigan's basketball team was, frankly, horrendous.  Not only did they seem incapable of competing at a high level, but they also lost to bad basketball schools and teams on a routine basis.  A return to glory wasn't exactly going to be something easy.

However, Douglass and Novak bought into what Beilein was preaching.  They would not only be Beilein's biggest pickups in his 2008 recruiting class, but they would be the ones that finally restored Michigan to its winning ways.  To be honest, Douglass and Novak didn't exactly excite many in the public.  Few big time programs bought into these two recruits.  In fact, most of the schools that did heavy recruiting on Douglass and Novak were MAC schools.  Kinda surprising in hindsight, huh?

Regardless of their recruiting hype, Beilein bought into these two players.  He recruited and ultimately brought them to play in Ann Arbor  But Beilein had a season to play before Douglass and Novak would become Wolverines.  The season went pretty badly.  Michigan finished with 10-22 and only 5-13 in Big Ten play.  Not exactly a great start for Beilein at Michigan.  However, Douglass and Novak still planned on coming to Ann Arbor, despite this setback.

By the time Douglass and Novak were getting ready to play Big Ten basketball Beilein had been working hard to turn things around.  He had already secured commitments from several plays including a 4* player named Darius Morris and an in-state forward named Jordan Morgan.  Michigan still had a long way to go both on the court and the recruiting trail, but it was at least a start.

That season Michigan would finally turn the corner.  Not only did the team compete, but after eight games into the season, Michigan had already beaten UCLA and Duke who had both been ranked in the Top 5 at the time.  For a program who had not been to a tournament in over 10 seasons, beating two Top 5 teams in eight games was pretty substantial.  Eventually, that same team would finish 20-13 and lose in the 2nd round of the NCAA Tournament.

In just one season Michigan had more than doubled its win total and snapped a 10 season tournament-less streak.  The culture had thoroughly been shocked.  However, Douglass, Novak, and Beilein didn't stop there.    In the 2010 season, the team would not only sweep in-state rival Michigan State, but make it to the 2nd round of the NCAA Tournament in a close battle with Duke.

This year the Wolverines have done even better.  Michigan has been ranked all season, recorded wins over Memphis, Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan State, and Ohio State, and is poised for a great season and tournament finish.  So, what changed?  How did Michigan go from a train-wreck of a basketball program and team to one of the elite teams in the Big Ten competing for a conference title and high-seed in the NCAA Tournament?

Belief.  Stu Douglass and Zack Novak believed in John Beilein and Beilein believed in Douglass and Novak.  The coach and the players took a chance on each other and look how it turned out.  This Saturday will be Senior Day in Crisler Arena when the Wolverines face-off against Purdue.  Something special will be ending in Ann Arbor.  Douglass and Novak should be credited as the foundation of this new basketball program.  Cazzie Russell may have been the one who Crisler was built upon, but the Fab 5' scandal left that legacy in ruins.  Only with Douglass and Novak has that legacy been restored.

Stu and Zack are the ones who have resurrected Michigan basketball.  I'll miss seeing Stu's insane three attempt (that works once in a while haha) and Novak's endless fire and passion.  These guys built this program through dedication, hard work, and most importantly, belief.  Michigan may not win the Big Ten or NCAA Championship this year, but they're going to win a lot of games over the next few seasons and everyone will have Stu and Zack to thank.  We here at Hoke's Mad Magicians wish them the best of luck and thank them for their contributions to rebuilding what is and will continue to be a great basketball program.  It's been a great ride, now beat Purdue!


Photo Credit: ESPN

A Rose Bowl For All?

In a historic move for college football, the Pac 12 and Big Ten officially expanded their Rose Bowl partnership to the regular season.  Rumors about the announcement had circled for weeks regarding all sorts of things including the Michigan - Notre Dame rivalry, the move of Michigan v Ohio State, and about Penn State's Big Ten status.  Although none of these issues were officially recognized, there is no doubt things such as Michigan - Notre Dame will be impacted with these new games.

These new games have all sorts of implications, but first, let's break down the announcement itself.  While most conferences have been attempting to expand and add more teams, the Big Ten has avoided much of this controversy and has only added one team in more than a decade.  Unlike the Big Ten, the Pac 12 had a significant impact in the conference re-alignments by adding teams like Utah, but never had the massive changes like the ACC or Big East.  Although the Big Ten and Pac 12 haven't been the leaders in conference re-alignment, this new partnership was essentially a re-alignment in disguise.

This was a disguised re-alignment because neither conference wanted to alienate schools and fan bases by changing the regularly scheduled teams, but it still has the same goals and aims of a re-alignment.  This new partnership primarily revolves around 12 Big Ten v. Pac 12 football match-ups by the 2017 season, but does talk about other sports.  Granted, 2017 is pretty far ahead, but this still means that every team in the Big Ten will face a Pac 12 opponent every season and vice versa.  Only one game on each team's schedule will be changed as a result, but it will be the most inter-conference play of any two conferences in college football (assuming no other conferences steal this concept).

I think the concept is a big step forward for college football, but it's essentially a re-make of the Big Ten/ACC Challenge.  The change revolves around a full conference match-up to remove one "cupcake" from the schedule and equalize opponents based on performance.  I say this because the comments from Delaney and Scott (Big Ten and Pac 12 Commissioners) implied that teams with similar performance will be scheduled together.  For instance, Michigan (10-2) is likely to be scheduled against USC (10-2), while Purdue (6-6) will probably get somebody like UCLA (6-7).

Although the advantages are significant, especially for the conferences and college football, there are also some significant problems in this inter-conference partnership.  The loss of a "cupcake" opponent may seem unimportant, but it has significant impacts on both good and bad teams.  For instance, let's look at Purdue and Michigan.  Purdue finished 6-6 this season during regular season play, while Michigan finished 10-2.  At first glance, increasing the strength of schedule would appear to hurt Purdue more than Michigan, but after further analysis, this is quite debatable.

Instead of scheduling a team like Southeast Missouri State (3-8), Purdue would probably play a team like UCLA (6-7) or Washington (7-5).  Obviously, this is a significant increase in opponent quality.  As a result, Purdue 's 6-6 record would have been much tougher to achieve.  Along with this, Michigan would probably be forced to replace an opponent like Eastern Michigan (6-6) with a team like USC (10-2).  Removing a team like Eastern Michigan and replacing them with a quality opponent wouldn't have been that significant to Michigan's chances this season, but Michigan would be forced to play a very difficult opponent, not just a legitimate team.  This would be a very tough game and make seasons such as this year's at-large bid to the Sugar Bowl much less likely.

This is crucial to analyzing this new agreement between the Big Ten and Pac 12 because it's pretty easy to see how quickly it could impact the conferences.  If the new agreement had been instituted this season and Purdue and Michigan lost their match-ups against the Pac 12, the Big Ten would probably have one less bowl team and one less BCS team.  This is pretty unlikely to please Big Ten fans and schools, but the advantages should outweigh these problems.

I believe this because the Big Ten is very unlikely to lose all of the new games with the Pac 12.  In fact, I think the conference will fare pretty well in the long-term against the Pac 12.  Even looking at this season, which was a weak year for the Big Ten, the Big Ten would have had some great match-ups.  Sure, Oregon, Stanford, and USC would have been tough opponents, but I don't think there's anybody that believes Wisconsin, Michigan State, and Michigan would have lost all three of those games.  Along with that, the Big Ten has other teams such as Nebraska (9-4) that could run over teams like UCLA (6-7) or Washington (7-5).

In the long-term, the Big Ten and Pac 12 are probably going to have overall records that are slightly worse than years past, but the increased schedule strength should counter out the losses, especially for teams that win their inter-conference match-ups.  Keeping this in mind, I believe this is a very good change for both conferences and will work to equalize the schedules across conferences.  The only major fallout I anticipate is with the remaining non-conference scheduling.  As discussed in an earlier article, adding tough non-conference opponents in road or neutral environments is not something most schools are going to be excited about.

This concern is one of the major reasons why Notre Dame will be at risk for being dropped from schedules by teams like Michigan, Michigan State, USC, and Stanford.  With one legitimate non-conference opponent guaranteed through this Big Ten and Pac 12 agreement, there is no real reason to keep a team like Notre Dame on the schedule, other than preserving a "cherished" rivalry.  Will Michigan drop the Irish soon?  Nobody can be sure of that, but it at least seems safe for the next few seasons.  However, fans across the country can be excited for every Big Ten team's miniature Rose Bowl during the first few weeks of every season.  While there was typically only one or two match-ups between the Big Ten and Pac 12 every year, there's going to be a lot more from now on, which should make for some great football.

Photo Credit: Danny Moloshok