U of M thread (in the Lions Forum) :)

[*JD*]

You have to admit it's pretty silly to accuse MSU of being dirty all based on Cleaves being in the early stages of Unlce Ed's grooming process, a UofM booster, no?

To me it's not a question of whether spartie is dirty or U of M is dirty.

I believe Ed Martin gave money to a lot of Detroit area kids. Some who went to Michigan and some who went to other schools. I'd guess Voshon Lenard probably got some money and/or clothes too.

I don't know when Chris Webber got his money- before, during or after the '93 Title game. I also believe it's doubtful that Martin gave $300 that night to Traylor, Taylor and not Mateen. That's possible but doubtful.

I've read that Steve Smith was also connected to Martin but haven't found any major articles.

[Kstat]

I'd love to know where Chris Webber was hiding that 50 grand during his 2 years at Michigan. All I can remember is wondering why a star player liked him dressed and carried himself like a normal teenager.

I'm not saying i don't believe he took money, but if he did take that much, he never spent it on himself.

[*JD*]

As for Fisher, I don't know if he knew or not. I suspect he might just have not noticed and maybe didn't look too hard to find out if anything was going on.

It's not like a Bud Middaugh/U of M baseball situation.

[*JD*]

I'd love to know where Chris Webber was hiding that 50 grand during his 2 years at Michigan. All I can remember is wondering why a star player liked him dressed and carried himself like a normal teenager.

I'm not saying i don't believe he took money, but if he did take that much, he never spent it on himself.

I think Mitch Albom's take is probably accurate, that Webber took the big lump of money once he decided he was going pro.

While he was a player at Michigan, he probably only got some small handouts like Jalen admitted to taking. $20 here and there.

[nhwbrooklyn]

To me it's not a question of whether spartie is dirty or U of M is dirty.

I believe Ed Martin gave money to a lot of Detroit area kids. Some who went to Michigan and some who went to other schools. I'd guess Voshon Lenard probably got some money and/or clothes too.

I don't know when Chris Webber got his money- before, during or after the '93 Title game. I also believe it's doubtful that Martin gave $300 that night to Traylor, Taylor and not Mateen. That's possible but doubtful.

I've read that Steve Smith was also connected to Martin but haven't found any major articles.

I think it's pretty clear Martin was a UofM booster.... Maybe he courted players who eventually went to MSU but I really don't think thats on MSU in any way what so ever.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I know the fab five were always driving pretty decent new cars.

[Kstat]

of course you don't.

[nhwbrooklyn]

I think Mitch Albom's take is probably accurate, that Webber took the big lump of money once he decided he was going pro.

While he was a player at Michigan, he probably only got some small handouts like Jalen admitted to taking. $20 here and there.

Seems like a whitewashing to me but coming from an MSU fan maybe that won't mean much to you.

[chemiclord]

All I know is that if wasn't for a Grand Jury banging on Michigan's door demanding all their records of Ed Martin, those Final Four banners from the Fab Five era would still be hanging proudly in Crisler Arena.

[gjdodger]

All I know is that if wasn't for a Grand Jury banging on Michigan's door demanding all their records of Ed Martin, those Final Four banners from the Fab Five era would still be hanging proudly in Crisler Arena.

How do you know that?

[chemiclord]

Because they were hanging proudly in Crisler Arena until the Grand Jury started banging at Michigan's door?

The U-M didn't do shit about the Fab Five until they had no other option. That's pretty much fact. They would have been more than willing to look the other way until the end of time.

[gjdodger]

Because they were hanging proudly in Crisler Arena until the Grand Jury started banging at Michigan's door?

The U-M didn't do shit about the Fab Five until they had no other option. That's pretty much fact. They would have been more than willing to look the other way until the end of time.

I'm sure it's occurred to you that everything you offer on this matter is post hoc reasoning. But that's OK; this is a message board, and you are entitled to your paranoid, alternate fantasy world opinion. However, I did want to point out the following contradiction:

...they slap themselves harder after they've been caught.

...don't pretend Michigan is any better than anyone else.

You yourself just said they do something with more vigor when accosted. Then you said they're no better than anyone else. Surely slapping oneself harder is "better"?

[chemiclord]

Do I view a criminal who robs a store then turns himself in only after police have surrounded his house to be better than one that has to be drug out in handcuffs?

Not really. They are both criminals; one merely accepted his punishment after he had no other options.

What Michigan is really good at is figuring out about what the NCAA's punishment is going to be and slapping themselves with it... but only after they have no other choice. I'm sorry that I don't find that particularly admirable like you do.

Michigan is great at selling the illusion of integrity, but that's about it.

[gjdodger]

Do I view a criminal who robs a store then turns himself in only after police have surrounded his house to be better than one that has to be drug out in handcuffs?

Not really. They are both criminals; one merely accepted his punishment after he had no other options.

What Michigan is really good at is figuring out about what the NCAA's punishment is going to be and slapping themselves with it... but only after they have no other choice. I'm sorry that I don't find that particularly admirable like you do.

Michigan is great at selling the illusion of integrity, but that's about it.

Here is the problem I have with your allegory, and indeed with your entire argument. You keep saying "Michigan" as if was some monolithic machine, instead of an institution with many employees. What you are saying, if I can turn your argument around, is that no person--no one person in the chain of command at the University of Michigan--would turn in the program if he or she were to discover a misdeed independently. That is a very skewed view of human nature. I have reported my own errors, as have you. I've taught my family likewise. To suggest that no one at the University of Michigan would have done so is to say there are no people employed there who place the truth above short term gain. I don't believe that about Michigan, Miami, the United States Government, Ford Motor Company, or any other institution. I believe there are some places where there is top down discouragement of such reporting--even stifling of it, and we've had a graphic example of that in Columbus in recent days. But that depends on who's at the top; I've mentioned before my respect for Mary Sue Coleman. I don't think Michigan is that place.

[chemiclord]

Here's the problem I have with your interpretation of what goes on in the U-M chain of command, and why I accepted that what happened with Charles Woodson doesn't apply to the argument.

We're not talking about a situation where the infraction occurred two weeks before a kid was about to declare himself a professional.

This is a situation where Martin's direct ties to the University of Michigan begins in 1989. He had been offering gifts and benefits to coaches and players at about that time. But let's just say even in the sake of the Fab Five, it was still five years before the U-M distanced themselves from Martin, and only because he refused to cooperate with Federal investigators and a Grand Jury.

How could someone at the school not have known that something illicit was up for that long? If no one had spoken up by then, I think it's fair to say no one was going to.

I hold Coleman personally responsible about as much as I hold Ghee personally responsible for what happened with Tressel's boys; which is to say very little. I hold the university, and everyone within its administration, responsible for these things occurring on their watch, but not for the acts themselves.

There's this fellow who was never a student or had any prior association with the college until he starts hanging around with the head coach, and he's funneling talent into the program at a rather obscene rate... and nobody asked any questions? Nobody said, "Ya know... we should look into this?"

Do you honestly believe that?

Maybe someone did, and they were told to keep quiet. Maybe it was understood that you see no evil, hear no evil, or speak no evil. Neither scenario paints the university's environment in a good light. But there really is no way that the entire leadership body was completely ignorant.

That the university showed outrage at Martin's actions only after they couldn't avoid it any longer doesn't earn them any admiration in my book. By that point, the damage had been long done. I'm sorry, but I'm just not impressed by that.

There's really only one way something like this can stay quiet for so long; willing obstruction by someone with the authority to keep the bloodhounds off.

Was it Coleman? Was it one of the regents? Was it the AD? The Assistant AD? Who knows? Answer is; we don't, and we probably never will. I don't point specific fingers because if I knew who was specifically responsible and could prove it, I would have said so and made big bucks off the scoop.

For what it's worth, I don't believe Coleman had anything to do with it, like you.

But the end result is that someone with the authority to stop it looked the other way. That's nothing particularly unusual; every major university has that sort of moment... where you choose money and wins over rules and integrity. They weren't the first to choose money and wins, and they won't be the last.

That's what makes them no better, and no worse, than anyone else.

These aren't leaps in logic here, dodger. I feel its safe to infer several things from the evidence at hand that you are clearly reluctant to do; and if this was a court of law, you'd win hands down.

You have this idea that I hold the U-M in some specific contempt. I don't. I'd have the same ire for Michigan State if it came out tomorrow that a booster was paying kids under the table to play for Dantonio. I'd say the same thing if I learned GVSU (my alma mater) had manipulated test scores to keep their football players on the field.