Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 103
  1. #1

    Knight and The Fab Five

    I don't always agree with Bob Knight, but when it comes to his opinion of the so-called Fab Five, I gotta agree -- the single most overrated basketball team in college history.

    Yeah, they played in two straight national title games -- as did Butler in 2010-11.

    But for all the hype, the Fab Five:

    (1) never won a national championship
    (2) never won a conference championship
    (3) never earned college degree (they were 0-for-5)
    (4) took money from a gambler named Ed Martin
    (5) spent all of three weeks at No. 1 (early in 1992-93, before they were whipped by No. 4 -- at the time -- Duke)
    (6) talked a lot of smack and rarely backed any of it up

    I guess their only significant accomplishment was that they popularized baggy shorts.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    I don't always agree with Bob Knight, but when it comes to his opinion of the so-called Fab Five, I gotta agree -- the single most overrated basketball team in college history.

    Yeah, they played in two straight national title games -- as did Butler in 2010-11.

    But for all the hype, the Fab Five:

    (1) never won a national championship
    (2) never won a conference championship
    (3) never earned college degree (they were 0-for-5)
    (4) took money from a gambler named Ed Martin
    (5) spent all of three weeks at No. 1 (early in 1992-93, before they were whipped by No. 4 -- at the time -- Duke)
    (6) talked a lot of smack and rarely backed any of it up

    I guess their only significant accomplishment was that they popularized baggy shorts.
    I know Juwan Howard graduated, I assume King and Jackson did as well.

  3. #3
    And their star player made one of the worst boneheaded plays in a championship environment that "gave" dUNCe a natty. Not to forget that he later admitted taking money that cost Michigan their wins. "Once a cheat, always a cheat" applies to him and that play marking dUNCe's national title forever.

  4. #4
    Agree with the above. They were novel at the time, loud and brash, but when you look at what they really accomplished, it is quite underwhelming in comparison to the hype they received. Products of the media really.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by dukeofcalabash View Post
    And their star player made one of the worst boneheaded plays in a championship environment that "gave" dUNCe a natty. Not to forget that he later admitted taking money that cost Michigan their wins. "Once a cheat, always a cheat" applies to him and that play marking dUNCe's national title forever.
    I love when people say webber gave unc a championship by calling time out. What a joke. He walked and then was double teamed in corner by two of greatest defensive players in history of unc and acc, George lynch and Derek Phelps. What was webber going to do? Launch a three over them? Preparation and execution beat them. Period

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by ClosetHurleyFan View Post
    I love when people say webber gave unc a championship by calling time out. What a joke. He walked and then was double teamed in corner by two of greatest defensive players in history of unc and acc, George lynch and Derek Phelps. What was webber going to do? Launch a three over them? Preparation and execution beat them. Period
    Well, you do have a point about the good defensive play and even the walk no-call. But, most other players in a trap situation close to the sideline will bounce the ball off of the defender out of bounds. Weber did make a bone head play. There is no way to know if Michigan would have won the game or not, but Weber most certainly lost it when he called the TO.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by ClosetHurleyFan View Post
    I love when people say webber gave unc a championship by calling time out. What a joke.
    I agree with you 100 percent. Nobody gave Carolina a championship, they earned it. Duke fans who say Webber gave Carolina the championship sound exactly like Kentucky fans who say Laettner should not have been in the game to make "The Shot." Sour grapes.
    Last edited by Bob Green; 02-02-2013 at 08:24 AM.
    Bob Green

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    If Jalen Rose didn't mention the Fab Five every chance he got they would only be remembered for never winning anything.

  9. #9
    They did play in back-to-back national title games. That's not chump change. OK, Butler did it too - but Butler and Florida are the only two teams to do it yet this century.

    The Fab Five were only overrated if we're basing our expectations on their own opinions of their abilities.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Green View Post
    I agree with you 100 percent. Nobody gave Carolina a championship, they earned it. Duke fans who say Webber gave Carolina the championship sound exactly like Kentucky fans who say Laettner should not have been in the game to make "The Shot." Sour grapes.
    Big difference is that Weber and at least one more of those players took money illegally and now matter what else happenned the timeout call looks too suspect coming from a cheater. It would not be the first time that a basketball player threw a game for money. This will be debated forever.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina
    The Michigan 1991/92 and 92/93 teams were noteworthy. There's no legitimate argument to state they were two of the best teams in recent memory...as they proved, they weren't the best teams of 1991/92 or 1992/93. But they are interesting from a sports and cultural standpoint. Culturally, they've over-emphasized the racial aspect of those teams compared to the Duke and UNC teams which beat them. It certainly wasn't Texas Western vs. Kentucky a quarter century earlier. As for the baggy shorts, that was coming along as a popular trend anyway. However, the ability for a group of freshmen to drive a team all the way to the national championship game was unprecedented at the time. It was certainly a major talking point in sports media during the 1991/92 tournament and was considered a pretty amazing achievement.

    As noted above, making it to back-to-back championship games, even without winning, is respectable. At that time, however, it was hardly unprecedented. Duke, obviously, make 3 straight championship games in 1990-1992, and a fourth in five years including 1994. Going back in time, Georgetown made back-to-back championship games in 1984-1985 (and 3 in four years including 1982); Houston made back to back games in 1983 and 1984; UNC in 1981 and 1982. Going forward, Arkansas made back to back games in 1994 and 1995, while Kentucky went to three straight games in 1996-1998. The achievement became more unusual after that Kentucky run, however, with only Florida and Butler accomplishing it since. Early entry, increased parity, and the greater inconsistency of youth-dominated teams probably account for the decrease in frequency of teams making back-to-back championship games. So, while in modern terms, the back-to-back championship games that Michigan accomplished in those two years is remarkable, at the time it was a frequent event. But it had never been done by teams dominated by freshmen and sophomores. That deserves some recognition. Had the "Fab Five" stuck around for another year or two, giving Michigan that upperclassmen leadership that contemporary champions like 1992-1995 champions Duke, UNC, Arkansas, and UCLA enjoyed, perhaps they would have won a championship.

    In my opinion, putting those two Michigan teams in perspective, they were a noteworthy story and announced the increasing importance and ability of young players in the college game. Nothing more, but certainly nothing less.

    Regarding the post immediately above mine: has there ever been an accusation of Weber throwing the game for gambling interests? I've never heard that before.
    Last edited by davekay1971; 02-02-2013 at 08:54 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio

    Fab? Five

    Granted Michigan was a strong team - but there's a limit to how much love for them I can hear being expressed. It's always sort of warmed my heart when I hear The Fab Five praised for what they did - and then I get to point out that from the 90-91 season to the 94-95 season, Duke and Michigan played each other six times.
    We won every game.
    So while I have to admit that Michigan was a good team - I love the fact that we totally owned them.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Brookfield, IL
    Quote Originally Posted by davekay1971 View Post
    As for the baggy shorts, that was coming along as a popular trend anyway.
    Members of the 1989 Flyin' Illini Final Four squad, Kendall Gill & Stephen Bardo, have some remarks about The Fab Five being the first to wear baggy shorts: http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/news/story?id=6218609

    Either way, most of the Illini guys were from Chicago and saw a certain guy with the Bulls who had already been wearing baggy shorts for a number of seasons by the time the 88-89 Illini went baggy.
    Last edited by Blue KevIL; 02-02-2013 at 09:09 AM. Reason: Typo

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Tha Fab Five was a group of talented kids who showed that you could be young, brash and compete at a very high level. Their accomplishment is more than a footnote, but less than the hype.

    I think Bobby is a little over the top here, but I don't like the Fabs enough to defend them really. They were a very talented team that were never coached/focused/lucky enough to win the championship. And do I remember correctly that their conference did not play championship tournaments either back then?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by Matches View Post
    They did play in back-to-back national title games. That's not chump change. OK, Butler did it too - but Butler and Florida are the only two teams to do it yet this century.

    The Fab Five were only overrated if we're basing our expectations on their own opinions of their abilities.
    Back-to-back national championship games? It's happened over 20 times:

    Oklahoma State (nee A&M) - 45-46 -under Hank Iba
    Kentucky - 48-49
    Kansas - 52-53
    La Salle - 54-55
    San Francisco - 55-56
    Ohio State - twice - 60-62 - with Jerry Lucas
    Cincy - twice - 61-63 with and without Oscar
    UCLA - seven times - 64-65 and 67-73
    UNC - 81-82
    Houston - 83-84
    Duke - twice - 90-92
    Mich - 92-93
    Ark - 94-95
    Fla - 06-07
    Butler - 10-11

    Three in a row?
    Ohio State
    Cincy
    Duke
    UCLA - five times (seven years in a row)

    sagegrouse
    'First time through, from memory, I missed Kansas, La Salle, Houston, and Arkansas and was shaky on the years pre-1964'

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Lewisville, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by davekay1971 View Post
    The Michigan 1991/92 and 92/93 teams were noteworthy. There's no legitimate argument to state they were two of the best teams in recent memory...as they proved, they weren't the best teams of 1991/92 or 1992/93. But they are interesting from a sports and cultural standpoint. Culturally, they've over-emphasized the racial aspect of those teams compared to the Duke and UNC teams which beat them. It certainly wasn't Texas Western vs. Kentucky a quarter century earlier. As for the baggy shorts, that was coming along as a popular trend anyway. However, the ability for a group of freshmen to drive a team all the way to the national championship game was unprecedented at the time. It was certainly a major talking point in sports media during the 1991/92 tournament and was considered a pretty amazing achievement.


    In my opinion, putting those two Michigan teams in perspective, they were a noteworthy story and announced the increasing importance and ability of young players in the college game. Nothing more, but certainly nothing less.
    Yeah, that seems about right to me.

    And they never beat Duke. Love that.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    DC and DE Beach

    Ah, yes

    Quote Originally Posted by Matches View Post
    The Fab Five were only overrated if we're basing our expectations on their own opinions of their abilities.
    Isn't this the real point??

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by westwall View Post
    Isn't this the real point??
    Agree. On a larger scale, what irritates many of us about the Fab Five is the same thing that irritates us about Harrison Barnes nicknaming himself and creating his own brand logo--or why Joe Flacco took so much heat a little while ago for saying he thought he was the best quarterback ever. On the one hand, we want our athletes to be confident, and they need to believe in themselves pretty totally to compete effectively at the highest levels; on the other hand, we want them to be, or at least appear, humble and and even modest about their abilities/accomplishments. It's a tough line to toe, and the Fab Five stepped over.

  19. #19

    Just a few observations

    1. While I agree that Webber made a boneheaded play, why was he bringing the ball up? I don't remember Laettner, for example, doing it. So it's probably more accurate to say that Steve Fisher made a bonehead call, or that he didn't school his players properly.

    2. I find it unusual that the Fab Five still generate that kind of hype considering all the teams around the same time that were the real deal (UNLV, Duke, and Georgetown for starters).

    3. Jimmy King needs to learn the value of silence. From the comment he made at the time that Hurley was an average player (presented at the end of the documentary on the 91-92 Duke teams) to his observation in the Fab Five documentary that he was probably one of the best players never to make the NBA, I have a hard time following his reasoning. I am probably one of the worst players to never make the NBA, and I have the same career stat line as King: 0 games, 0 points, 0 rebounds.

    4. Some people got mad at Rose for some of the comments about Duke that he made in the documentary, and he got a well deserved smackdown from Grant Hill. Nevertheless, I found the whole thing to be rather sad because it seemed to me that his problem was that he wanted to be and deserved to be like Grant Hill. They were both gifted basketball players with fathers who were successful professional athletes, but Grant came from a great family and grew up under ideal circumstances, while Rose didn't even know who his father was and was really hurting as a kid. That's really tragic.

    5. No matter what you went through as a kid, if you make over $100 million playing ball as Rose did, you really have to stop whining.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/.../roseja01.html

  20. #20
    I am very surprised at the Fab 5 bashing on this board. While I hated them at the time, I have grown to appreciate what they brought to the game. They were fun to watch, they worked very well together, and let's not forget that they were all freshman. That is pretty amazing when you think about it.

Similar Threads

  1. Coach K, Bob Knight One-On-One
    By AlaskanAssassin in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-14-2010, 10:46 AM
  2. K and Knight on Losing
    By BlueintheFace in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 06:02 PM
  3. Pat Knight
    By DukeFencer in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-02-2009, 09:09 PM
  4. Brandon Knight
    By gotham devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-08-2007, 01:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •