Like great empires, great sports programs require constant attention to the things that made them great. They require both a bone deep desire to eschew the glory of the past, but an open and honest assessment of their current capabilities. This ensures that not only will setbacks be temporary and short-lived, but by learning from them the empire will be stronger in the end.

As with any large and complex system, if enough small parts become out of phase with the rest of the system it will begin to collapse. Almost universally there are indicators things are out of harmony; small losses or signs that something must be done to right the ship. This is a diary about inflection points, and how two once powerful nations responded differently when they met theirs.

What exactly caused the fall of the Western Roman Empire is subject to lively debate. (I am positive this audience can go on forever about their favorite ideas). One leading contributing factor that cannot be denied is the weakening of the once vaunted Roman Legions through costly civil wars, and the quality of individual soldiers and units through a degradation of discipline. In 394, when the Battle of Frigidus took place between the legions of the new Western Emperor Eugenius and the Eastern Emperor Theodosius I, the map of the empire looked much like it had for centuries. Within the next 20 years, the Western Empire would be shattered.

None of that could have been foreseen as the battle began on the field at Frigidus, but the battle between the two halves of the Roman Empire was not only a crushing defeat of the army of the West, it was a pyrrhic victory for the East. Severely depleted after the battle, auxiliaries on the frontiers of the empire started being paid in land rather than money, so they focused their attentions on farming. Some standing legions were moved into cities, where the costs to feed and house them was less, but the ability to maintain order and discipline vanished.

 After the battle, the once terrifying legions became a shell of their former glory. While on paper they still possessed superior numbers, weapons, armor, and organization, the Roman Legions of the Western Empire were collapsing on the battlefield. By the time of the sack of Rome, the Legions were almost non existent. The Roman Empire either did not see, or did not fix the lessons from the Battle of Frigidus and its following mistakes, and the Roman Empire as it has been known for generations vanished as a result.

 

After its humiliating defeat at the Battle of Jena–Auerstedt in 1806, Prussia took a long hard look in its Teutonic mirror. What was wrong with the Prussian Army wasn’t evident on paper, you couldn’t point to one single factor and say “this is why Prussia lost”, but there were dozens of smaller ones that all played a part. At the Battle of Jena, the rank and file of the Prussian Army had been good, and their generals were of the highest caliber: individually. But as the sun set on the slaughter of the battlefields at Jena, it had been the leadership’s ability to work together, to share information, and to make decisions quickly that had doomed Prussia.

 Rutgers carrying off our M flag. 

 

Seeing how far their army had fallen since the glorious days of Frederick II, they endeavored to fix what problems they could. Realizing they could not always count on their king being a generational talent military commander, Prussia began fixing its command and control processes to standardize tactics and decision-making.

Unlike the Romans, the Prussians got to work and over the next decades entirely revolutionized how their army functioned. By the time the Prussian Army took the field again, it had forged itself into the greatest land power in Europe. It had fixed its deficiencies, and armies across the globe adopted Prussian methods. The Prussian General Staff concept would go into history alongside the standing army and the phalanx as one of the most impactful developments in the history of warfare, but it took humiliation to get them there.

 

I don’t know what’s wrong with Michigan Basketball, I don’t know that the ship can be righted, and reading Alex’s recap, I don’t know that anyone knows. It just feels like lots of little things adding up to a team that can’t find success on the court. I’m not a basketball expert, so I can’t get into the X’s and O’x, but there seems to be both organizational and personnel problems with the team. This isn’t a “Fire Juwan” post, and it isn’t a “X player sucks”: you don’t lose to CMU because of one player. It is however an honest assessment that while luck played a factor, good teams often make their own luck, and this isn’t a good team, or a good program despite looking like one on paper. Like battle, anything that happens on the court is a reflection of the work that went in prior, to prepare the army or the team for the test. Michigan admissions wouldn’t land Terrance Shannon, the staff failed to restock at the 4, Jett Howard doesn't play defense, we can't rebound, and the Offense might take a long time to learn, but those are all self inflicted wounds. Getting the right people with the right training onto the field where they can contribute is almost more important than the actual tactics themselves. Not that our tactics in the game are any better.

Michigan basketball is at its own inflection point, and I’m curious to see which path they follow. Optimistically I hope they follow the Prussian model, however that manifests itself inside Crisler. I hope that they take a look in the mirror, and fix what needs to be fixed so this season will be remembered like the 2020 Football season was… a painful learning lesson on the path to glory. I am optimistic, which for a Michigan fan, is something new for someone who only last year crawled out of the BPONE. They’ll get it done, they have to. See everyone in the fall!