Fab Five on ESPN

[PurplePride92]

I disagree. I distincty remember when they were freshmen and when Steve Fisher finally added Ray Jackson to the starting lineup making the Fab Five the starting five. These guys were large on and off the court. The consecutive finals game legitimized the hype IMO. Of course I am just year younger than these guys(and a black Duke fan....yes....they are both factors) and to me they changed the collegiate game. Their influence is undeniable. It baffles me that people think they wouldn't have been relevant without going to the Finals and their tragedies there. That couldn't be further from the truth.

[Hatz]

I disagree. I distincty remember when they were freshmen and when Steve Fisher finally added Ray Jackson to the starting lineup making the Fab Five the starting five. These guys were large on and off the court. The consecutive finals game legitimized the hype IMO. Of course I am just year younger than these guys(and a black Duke fan....yes....they are both factors) and to me they changed the collegiate game. Their influence is undeniable. It baffles me that people think they wouldn't have been relevant without going to the Finals and their tragedies there. That couldn't be further from the truth.

 

Not sure why it baffles you. It's a legitimate question IMO. Style over substance. Without the Finals' appearances that is what they would be. The Fab Five never won a conference title in their time together. They never won the National Title.

 

Did they revolutionize the game more than Georgetown and Patrick Ewing? Defense was an after thought till that crew came around. They were very popular as well in the African-American Community. Plus they backed it up with 3 Finals Appearances in 4 Seasons while winning the National Title in '84.

 

I think the documentary made me appreciate the Fab Five even more.

 

However I ask a question once raised on here years ago: Would you take their class over any other historically?

 

Lew Alcindor, Lynn Shackelford, Lucious Allen, Kenny Heitz. I think I would take that class of '69 over the Fab Five. 3 National Titles, 2 All-Americans and I think all four played in the NBA.

 

Bill Walton, Keith Wilkes, Tommy Curtis, Greg Lee of the UCLA class of '74? 2 National Titles, 2 All-Americans and all four played in the NBA as well.

 

Thanks for the discussion. :thumb:

[Clyde]

Not sure why it baffles you. It's a legitimate question IMO. Style over substance. Without the Finals' appearances that is what they would be. The Fab Five never won a conference title in their time together. They never won the National Title.

 

Did they revolutionize the game more than Georgetown and Patrick Ewing? Defense was an after thought till that crew came around. They were very popular as well in the African-American Community. Plus they backed it up with 3 Finals Appearances in 4 Seasons while winning the National Title in '84.

 

I think the documentary made me appreciate the Fab Five even more.

 

However I ask a question once raised on here years ago: Would you take their class over any other historically?

 

Lew Alcindor, Lynn Shackelford, Lucious Allen, Kenny Heitz. I think I would take that class of '69 over the Fab Five. 3 National Titles, 2 All-Americans and I think all four played in the NBA.

 

Bill Walton, Keith Wilkes, Tommy Curtis, Greg Lee of the UCLA class of '74? 2 National Titles, 2 All-Americans and all four played in the NBA as well.

 

Thanks for the discussion. :thumb:

 

IMO the early Big East , as you referenced, along with ESPN had the biggest impact on college basketball. It changed everything.

 

I'm hesitant to compare classes based on championships won. First, it's a relative measure since the two teams weren't playing the same competition nor in the same era.

 

Fab 5 did have a big impact on the "look" with the shorts and the socks. They had very little impact, if any, on the substance.

[75center]

I'd say getting to consecutive championship games provided a decent amount of go regardless of the path it took to get there...

 

Come on, first loser back to back is no go, not for the amount of hype they had.

[gametime]

Come on, first loser back to back is no go, not for the amount of hype they had.

 

My bad. 2nd in the nation is just an embarrassment...

[75center]

My bad. 2nd in the nation is just an embarrassment...

 

For the amount of hype, not an embarassment but nothing to shout about either. If the Yankees finished second in the world series back to back, think many people would be impressed? I'm just comparing lack of accomplishment to the hype surrounding them.

[Jim Schue]

I can't help but feel there's some arrogance at play in this thread with the running theme that the win over UK somehow "legitimized" them.

 

 

Five starting frosh got to the finals. That never happened before. That legitimized them and made them unforgettable by anyone who was watching then. Getting back to the finals as sophs was icing on the cake, whether it was UK they beat or ever who else it was in the Final Four.

[PurplePride92]

Not sure why it baffles you. It's a legitimate question IMO. Style over substance. Without the Finals' appearances that is what they would be. The Fab Five never won a conference title in their time together. They never won the National Title.

 

Did they revolutionize the game more than Georgetown and Patrick Ewing? Defense was an after thought till that crew came around. They were very popular as well in the African-American Community. Plus they backed it up with 3 Finals Appearances in 4 Seasons while winning the National Title in '84.

 

I think the documentary made me appreciate the Fab Five even more.

 

However I ask a question once raised on here years ago: Would you take their class over any other historically?

 

Lew Alcindor, Lynn Shackelford, Lucious Allen, Kenny Heitz. I think I would take that class of '69 over the Fab Five. 3 National Titles, 2 All-Americans and I think all four played in the NBA.

 

Bill Walton, Keith Wilkes, Tommy Curtis, Greg Lee of the UCLA class of '74? 2 National Titles, 2 All-Americans and all four played in the NBA as well.

 

Thanks for the discussion. :thumb:

 

Yeah but I wasn't around for the UCLA classes of those years but none of those guys played as freshmen correct? The Fab Five was done after their sophomore years. Who knows what they would have accomplished if they would have been together all 4 years. Historically, I think that needs to be presented and truthfully I'll take the 1990-91 UNLV class over anyone(minus the bookie....lol).

 

What freshman class captivated the nation as freshman and then went to the championship game? It has never been done nor will it be repeated. 5 freshman starting and leading a team to the title game? Like I said, the final game appearance legitimized the hype but no team has ever done with 5 freshman what Michigan did.

[Jim Schue]

For the amount of hype, not an embarassment but nothing to shout about either. If the Yankees finished second in the world series back to back, think many people would be impressed? I'm just comparing lack of accomplishment to the hype surrounding them.

 

If the Yankees were WS losers back-to-back with all rookies then all second-year players, then you've got a legit comparison.

[gametime]

If the Yankees were WS losers back-to-back with all rookies then all second-year players, then you've got a legit comparison.

 

Exactly. The Yankees are the worst example possible. They let other teams go through the growing pains...

[PurplePride92]

And for all of those saying the Fab Five was overrated or underachieving.....all last year all we heard about UK's incoming class was are they as good as the Fab Five. Now the Fab Five isn't so good? Huh?:idunno:

 

Did last year not show how hard it is to win with multiple freshman let alone your 5 starters?

[The Professor]

Thought this was very well done. I remember them very well but can't say I was a huge fan. Looking back I appreciate what they accomplished at such a young age.

 

That said, I still come away asking myself: How much is real and how much is hype?

 

They were great and got on a great roll in the tourney their freshman year. The next year they were up and down and never played a complete game until they went against Kentucky in the Final Four. It took a complete game and some help from a Dale Brown injury/ Jamal Mashburn fifth foul to make it back to the title game.

 

I wonder if UK had pulled that game out would the Fab Five be as remembered as they are? :idunno:

 

I like what Jalen Rose said about no one remembers who won but they remember the Fab Five. A lot of truth to the media influence and their appeal for being in the right place at the right time as the wheels of change turned in Collegiate Basketball. :thumb:

 

Mashburn fouling out and Brown's injury is the reason you didn't see Michigan losing to UK in the 30/30 documentary. I believe Kentucky would have finished them off if those two things hadn't occured. It would have also saved Webber the painful memories of calling a timeout he didn't have against UNC in the championship game.

[Hatz]

Great discussion. Found this article this morning from Jason Whitlock. http://msn.foxsports.com/collegebasketball/story/ESPN-The-Fab-Five-documentary-Jalen-Rose-Chris-Webber-Juwan-Howard-Jimmy-King-Ray-Jackson-031511

 

The legacy of the Fab Five is that they were on the cutting edge of America’s unashamed embrace of style over substance.

 

The Fab Five are taking credit for the real accomplishments of John Thompson’s and Patrick Ewing’s Georgetown Hoyas.

 

It was Thompson’s all-black, Ewing-led teams a decade before the Fab Five that shook the foundation of college basketball, changed the complexion of starting lineups across the country, opened coaching doors that had previously been closed to blacks and paved the way for black sportswriters at major newspapers.

 

It’s easy to forgive Rose for his lack of self-awareness. It’s America. In this country, self-awareness and common sense are our most rare commodities.

 

What’s not easy to excuse is the clueless robbery of what Thompson, Ewing, Bill Martin, Reggie Williams, Horace Broadnax and David Wingate accomplished.

 

They won championships — conference and national. They scared and intimidated the establishment. They were the inner-city black kids who left a legacy of jobs and playing opportunities for other impoverished minorities that exposes the lack of substance in the fads popularized by the Fab Five.

 

I wonder if time frame is an issue in the conversation as well. Purple has already shared that he was in college at roughly the same time as the Fab Five.

 

I was in college at the same time as Hoya Paranoia.

 

It might be that both of us are viewing through the glasses of our personal perspective as well. :thumb:

[Hatz]

Yeah but I wasn't around for the UCLA classes of those years but none of those guys played as freshmen correct? The Fab Five was done after their sophomore years. Who knows what they would have accomplished if they would have been together all 4 years. Historically, I think that needs to be presented and truthfully I'll take the 1990-91 UNLV class over anyone(minus the bookie....lol).

 

What freshman class captivated the nation as freshman and then went to the championship game? It has never been done nor will it be repeated. 5 freshman starting and leading a team to the title game? Like I said, the final game appearance legitimized the hype but no team has ever done with 5 freshman what Michigan did.

 

They weren't allowed to play as freshmen. However if they were, you can bet UCLA would have won the title with them playing. In 1966 UCLA played an annual Varsity vs. Freshmen game. That season the defending National Champs (UCLA), returning I think 2 or 3 starters, lost by like 25 points to the freshman class of Alcindor, Allen and company. Walton's class was just as talented. Make no mistake, if you started them as all freshmen, those UCLA squads would have done the same. Jabbar (Alcindor) and Walton are both trump cards whose talent far exceeded anything on the Fab Five. The other pieces like Allen & Shackelford or Wilkes and Curtis pretty much were a little above Webber and Rose and Howard IMO.

[Hatz]

I can't help but feel there's some arrogance at play in this thread with the running theme that the win over UK somehow "legitimized" them.

 

 

Five starting frosh got to the finals. That never happened before. That legitimized them and made them unforgettable by anyone who was watching then. Getting back to the finals as sophs was icing on the cake, whether it was UK they beat or ever who else it was in the Final Four.

 

I don't think beating UK in anyway "legitmized them." I think their runs to the title games did. Like I've said before they had a great run but like Whitlock said, they did not win a single title of any kind.

 

I go back to one of the feels of that era: Style over substance. :thumb:

 

Media drives a lot of things and media drove this machine to be the "impact" team they were. They were awesome, but not the greatest IMO, as they are portrayed in the documentary.