What nonsense! Michigan football makes so much money, the AD could fund anything for any sport.
Almost every big school's athletic department makes money for the parent University. Almost every state tax-supported school builds new facilities from donations, without incurring debt.
I'm too lazy to research the proof because I don't care enough. However, a self-serving quote off a Michigan blog isn't exactly proof of anything.
Don't take this personally kgh10 and welc ome to the board. But I know you know that Michigan, as one of the oldest, biggest and most athletically successful schools in the country, member of the wealthiest athletic conference, has advantages that most schools can only dream of.
If you fail to compete any more in hoops, it's likely because of athletic department incompetence.
No worries, I don't take online forums too personally and I appreciate your response. I'm actually a Michigan fan/student, but I love all college sports (especially football in all conferences). Also, I don't really understand what you meant by calling Mgoblog a "self-serving blog" in this specific instance, but you should def. check the site out (shameless fanatic plug:
www.mgoblog.blogspot.com). Its analysis is probably the best out of any college sports blog out there. But whatever...call me biased! haha.
Basically, that still has nothing to do with the fact that the Michigan AD is completely responsible for the facilities at Michigan. Much of the facilities race in college hoops started in the early nineties into present times, which is smack dab in the time period of the Michigan bball sanctions. Why would our AD at the time put money to enter the facilities arms race when we were sanctioned? It'd be a waste and wouldn't be put to use until years later. As time went on, we found other things to take care of, including updating football facilities (we'll always be a football school). I couldn't say for sure whether or not how many ADs around the NCAA do what Michigan does and you could very well be right...but my point in posting that quote was to show that, no, you don't just need the AD to make a program thrive, you just need a leader, someone to trust and believe in.
Trust me, I've never been to fond of our AD Bill Martin, but much of the heat
has to go towards incompetent and careless coaches like Turtleneck and Ellerby. Our baseball program is the perfect example of how a coach can make or break a program, including its facilities. Rich Maloney didn't just donate money to the program, he raised SUPPORT for the program, he marketed it as an up-in-coming power in college baseball, and people literally and figuratively bought into the program. He inspired people to get involved with his team and most importantly, he won games and proved his worth at the university. If he could do it with our formerly crappy baseball team, a strong and inspiring basketball coach at Michigan could sure as hell do it and bring back a team that, at one time, was very successful.
Also, it's understood that Michigan has tradition and great advantages in terms of wealth and so on, but I also would like to sadly say Michigan isn't what it used to be, our basketball program is the glaring example of this. I'm not saying the AD should take no blame, but to remove blame from a coach, a man who devotes his time and efforts to a
specific program, is unfair to the athletic department. An AD can pour money into a program all he wants, but if the coach doesn't win and develop talent (our talent as of late is actually formidable enough to win big games but hasn't), doesn't inspire fans/alumni, and doesn't
market his own team as something to rekon with, nobody will give a crap, including the athletic department. It goes both ways, and in my opinion, it's been coaching failures and lack of true leadership and devotion to his craft that have plagued Michigan's basketball program.
