Beilein removes all transfer restrictions on Doyle and Albrecht
Not surprised he relented and removed restrictions on Albrecht since he's a grad transfer, but I don't think it's bad form to put reasonable restrictions on a non-grad transfer (i.e. can't transfer to another B1G school).
I wonder if this will be the new norm going forward for him.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
No. That's two years of basketball.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Greenberg went to Northwestern and Golic played at Notre Dame. Gee, I can't imagine why they would have a slanted view toward Michigan...
Golic was actually pretty even-handed. He put it on the Big Ten rule, not Beilein. Greenberg was all over Beilein.
i'm sure john beilein give a flying shit what mike greenberg thinks. honestly.
This is another situation that got blown out of proportion. People calling Beilein a hypocrite because apparently he was the one who took Rudock. Am I glad he changed his mind? Yeah, but he shouldn't have been skewered by the media like he was.
I don't think there's ever grounds to tell a grad transfer that there's any restriction on his destination. Since it's grad school we're talking about, he should have the opportunity to enroll in any program that will have him.
After the last 2 seasons, everything Beilein does is wrong to some people here. If he keeps Spike it's the wrong move because we have 2 PGs already, if he releases him it's the wrong move because we lose an experienced player. If he prevents him from going to a future opponent he's being selfish and if he lets him go to an opposing player he gets criticized for not caring enough about winning. It has made basketball threads here unreadable because nothing will be good enough to some fans until he is fired.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I agree with you to a large extent. However, this series of events does appear quite "Hoke-ish" to me.
The kneejerk whininess by some M "fans" is intolerable. And it's an incredible false equivalence to compare Beilein's last 2 years with Hoke especially when these same fans were front and center for the shitshow that was Hoke's flailing about.
My problem with this whole thing is that neither Ricky nor Spike complained about the restriction. As a matter of fact, Spike said he expected restrictions to be in place.
Beilein's statement includes the following:
"We need to do what is right for Spike and Ricky"
That makes it seems like we were doing something wrong. Nobody actually affected by this had a problem with the restrictions. Media and rival fans did most of the bitching.
Actually most of the bitching was coming from Michigan fans:
http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/pat-forde-beilein-refusing-spike-transfer-r…
Considering Michigan's lack of success the past two years I highly doubt rival rans really cared.
... Spike's father is quoted as saying, "I don't think it's real fair but it seems like the norm." Link - http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2016/03/column_spike_albrecht….
Probably fair to say that's the general sentiment in the Albrecht home but they have great respect and appreciation for UofM so they're not making a big deal of it. Link - http://sports.yahoo.com/news/michigan-limiting-spike-albrecht-s-transfe…
IMO, players should have the right to go play wherever they want to once a team makes it clear to them that they are no longer needed/wanted. I definitley think once they graduate there should be no restrictions on where they go at all. They've fullfilled their "obligation" to the school academically and athletically and the institution should only be interested in supporting them as alumni at that point.
Just because Spike or Ricky didn't complain doesn't mean what was being done was fair or right. I can give quite a few example (all related to politics or region in some way, hence not explicitly mentioning them here) where the involved parties don't complain but the things done to them are not fair or the right things to do.
This is my problem: If the parties involved are ok with the parameters of the transer, why the hell does everyone outside the building feel the need to rake JB/Michigan over the coals.
I know, I know......."Think of the children".
The children, in this case, are fine and don't need anyone speaking for them. On top of that, the Big 10 STILL has a rule prohibiting intra-conference transfers. Where's the outrage?
Here he(?) is. He popped up from under the coach because he heard JB was being treated poorly by the big bad Mike & Ike greeny meanies!
Go Blue!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
He got hammered this morning on Mike and Mike over the stance starting at 7:30 and continuing through the 7:45 break. Then they tweeted out the rant to a shit-ton of people. Not that it matters what they think but I happen to agree with them that it's bullshit to tell a player you have no room on the roster for them but then turn around and restrict where they can go play.
IMO if this was happening anywhere else in the country we would be losing our collectiive shit over it but because it's Michigan we've got our Maize n Blue colored glasses on and think it's ok. Well it's not ok and I'm glad Beilein finally saw that and made the change.
This is pretty simple IMO. If the player requests a transfer (and we want them) we can restrict where they go. But if player WANTS to play for a school and the school says "thanks but no thank" then they can go wherever in the Hell they want to.
I assure you that there isnt one person on this board that would be ok with getting fired from a job and then having your ex-boss tell you where you can go to work next.
I own a company and have all my employees sign non-competes and have been sued by ex-employees when trying to enforce the non-compete several times. I can tell you the courts are pretty damn consistent across the country in this regard:
1. Employee quits or forces termination through behavior considered to be under the "cause for dismissal" (theft, no-show, gross malfeasance, etc): Non compete enforceable
2. Employee is terminated for anything not relating to cause (poor performance, better candidate available, reduction of comp, etc): Non compete NOT enforceable.
Spike clearly falls into category #2 and as such would have his non-compete tossed in a nano-second.
Non-compete clauses do not become unenforceable merely because an employee has been fired without cause. It's not that simple.
There are several issues with this comparison, first and foremost that players are not employees. As far as the "trade secrets" argument goes, I would love to hear what a transfer could divulge that wouldn't be apparent by watching game film from Beilein's more than three decades of coaching. If a coach needs information from a transfer player on that level, he/she probably isn't that good of a coach to begin with.
Spike didn't get fired, he graduated and UM had to recruit a replacement before they knew he'd be eligible for a 5th year. What would fix this whole problem is if redshirts (a limited # of them) didn't count against total scholarship #'s. Then you'd see Spike back at UM for a 5th year, and a younger developmental guy getting redshirted next year to free up space.
Beilein never should have restricted his transfer, but the Big Ten restricts it anyways so whats the big deal? If Spike wants to play in the B1G he will appeal, and win, and this will all end up a moot point. But the PR hit is real.
I actually think Harbaugh or Manuel probably encouraged him to remove the restrictions to put the conference in the spotlight (for having a dumb rule) instead of Beilein/UM for enforcing it. This doesn't make BEILEIN a hypocrite, but definitely runs counter to Harbaugh's approach to the football program.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
But each guy is a completely different case. Ricky sees the writing on the wall and wants a different opportunity. Happens every year throughout the country. Spike said "goodbye" to basketball and Beilein moved on.
I think if the basis for the rule is to keep the better players from jumping to a competitor for any reason, it's pretty weak. One guy is not going to change your fortunes, although the comments here about Max calling out our plays during the game make a strong argument for the rule.
Also, there are non-compete clauses in all types of business if you leave voluntarily. That was the case here. They weren't fired.
Beilein was right to reverse course on this one. The explanations coaches give for restricting transfers in the first place are always flimsy at best (even before you get into discussions of how coaches are free to leave for new jobs at will),and it was an especially bad look putting them on a guy who's graduating.
You're welcome Spike
— Max Bielfeldt (@MaxBielfeldt) April 1, 2016
Not Michigan.
Well per Scout Ohio State has reached out with interest.
I know for a fact Bielfeldt was calling out Michigan's plays when Indiana played Michigan.
Does anyone on this board have any idea the time and effort it takes to change a system? Do U want coaches coaching or looking at a name conversion chart all day! C'mon man!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad