[B-ball fanParticipant]

Honestly, I don’t think he benched Burke too long in the 1st half. Burke wouldn’t have just stopped Hancock from making those threes and Michigan’s offense was excellent without Burke. In fact, the offense was best in the 1st half, so I’m not sure Burke playing more in the first half would have made a difference.

What I think really hurt Michigan was their pick and roll defense. They needed to start having harder hedges earlier and helping more from the weak side, just defending more aggresively, but some of that is more on the players.

[B-ball fanParticipant]

Honestly, I don’t think he benched Burke too long in the 1st half. Burke wouldn’t have just stopped Hancock from making those threes and Michigan’s offense was excellent without Burke. In fact, the offense was best in the 1st half, so I’m not sure Burke playing more in the first half would have made a difference.

What I think really hurt Michigan was their pick and roll defense. They needed to start having harder hedges earlier and helping more from the weak side, just defending more aggresively, but some of that is more on the players.

[DolanCareParticipant]

I’ve always been a big Beilein fan ever since the Pittsnogle days at WVU. Good coach.

After this game though, seems like a lot of people are looking at him sideways. I wanted to start a thread on what the forum thinks about how he handled the National Championship game. IMO the main problems boiled down to Burke/McGary foul problems whereas Hancock and Dieng should have fouled out but got lucky breaks where the refs gave the PFs to other teammates. Oh yeah, and Louisville rebounds 3x better than UM. Behanan was the main separator in this one. So I’m not saying Beilein should be dogged. Just want to hear thoughts….

Questions to consider:
1) Did he bench Burke for too long?
2) Should he have played Hardaway more?
3) Should they have feed McGary more?
4) Was his late game management too suspect to bear?

[BigMac12111Participant]

I thought he did a perfectly fine job managing the game. If I’m honest, I think Burke should’ve stayed on the bench a little bit longer after his 1st foul. I think if he stays out longer, even if he gets another foul after he comes back into the game, he can play the whole half. So I really don’t think he benched Burke too long after the 2nd foul especially when you consider the way the refs were calling the game.

I think Stauskas should’ve came in as the SF to finish the half though. Hancock was getting anything he wanted and whoever was guarding him (Hardaway, I believe) couldn’t force him to get away from the 3-ball. Though I don’t think Stauskas is a defensive-stopper, he does have the length and defensive principles to try to stifle Hancock. At the very least, he would’ve made sure to try to get Hancock to make a different shot.

Pretty much, I’m not in love with his game management but it could’ve been a lot worse. Think he might’ve been a bit too aggressive in the beginning of the 1st half and then went too far the other way towards the end of the half. All in all though it was a fine coached game by Beilein imo.

[ReactionParticipant]

I don’t believe that Burke should have been benched that long. However, the real turning point in the game was the foul that Burke was called for that was actually a block. The officiating of this game was absolutely horrendous and seriously could have resulted in several injuries. When I watched all the times Burke fell over from fouls and just getting hit with no calls, I was actually worried he would get injured. Louisville played an amazing game and deserved the win but I really hope the NCAA never uses those refs again.

[DolanCareParticipant]

The foul call on Burke’s block was horrendous. But was it really a turning point? He didn’t really sit too much after that. But perhaps you could argue that he was less agressive. Either way, horrible call.

Like I mentioned above, Hancock should have fouled out that game. He undercuts a Michigan player as he drives to the rim, causing the ball handler to go flying. (Sorry don’t remember who it was). They give the foul to Blackshear who just stood there, barely grazed him. That foul would have been Hancock’s fourth with 8 plus minutes to go…. difference maker in my eyes.

On a similar note, Siva is a great on ball defender but he was slapping everyone’s forearm in that game. He got called for about a seventh of them.

[kingofbumsParticipant]

these after the fact reasonings are stupid. this isnt the first time a debate has come up of whether you sit or play your star with 2 fouls in the first ten minutes of the game. by the way the refs were calling fouls and not calling them you wouldnt know what the hell could happen. i dont think its that big of a thing to complain about…had the cards made that run late in the first half over a 5 minute span and he never put burke in then theres an argument but it happened in like 2 mins lol

[DolanCareParticipant]

Just to play devil’s advocate….

It happened quickly, no doubt. But Michigan had timeouts, I would have halted things after Luke hit his 2nd three and I’m not just saying that in hindsight. Louisville is a good team, and even when you’re up you need to put in your game manager. Someone who can grind out production, not just got hot from three. While I don’t blame Beilein, he rode too hard on Spike’s boom in the first half. Spike is a contributor who stepped up at the right time. He is not someone you keep in for an extended period of time once he lights up. Not only did he have some defensive lapses, but he turned over the ball several times.

[FastAndFuriousParticipant]

I mean Michigan still was winning with Burke on the bench, so I can’t really fault Beilein, but at the same time, it’s Trey Burke’s last game as a Wolverine and it’s for all the marbles so I think I would have kept him in.

But I really can’t look at Beilein sideways he did a tremendous job all year, and has brought Michigan back to being a powerhouse team, or at least a household name once again.

[SiggyParticipant]

Beilein is an awesome coach and I’m glad he made it that far. Tactically he made some errors, the late game foul situation being the most egregious, but that doesn’t diminish his ability to coach at all. I hope more talented recruits took note of the way that Michigan plays. Looks like a fun style to play and players are guaranteed to learn and improve under him. He’s a tremendous teacher and sounds like a great guy. He sounds practical, cerebral and encouraging. He used to have a rep as a Herb Sendek type coach. Half court, ball control motion…stuff that kids find unappealing and boring, but he’s shown that he will open things up and adapt to his personnel.

[Author]

Posts