There is no doubt that the Fab Five left their mark on the culture of basketball as we know it today. That's really not even debatable. We see it in the college and high school games today with the baggy shorts, bravado and flashy play.

Anything that Chris Webber, Juwan Howard, Jimmy King, Ray Jackson or Jalen Rose did at the University of Michigan, however, is rolled into a tube in the basement of Crisler Arena. That's not a very indelible mark in my opinion.

Consider this: Upon signing the the Fab Five class, Michigan earned two legally recognized NCAA tournament appearances during the 1990s, and only two of the Fab Five members (Jimmy King and Ray Jackson) participated in both of them. The Final Fours, of course, are in a closet. Also, for all the hoopla and praise -- and, as I've stated before, I actually like the upstart and "showtime" appeal of the Fab Five -- Webber, Rose, Howard and company spent just three weeks of their Michigan careers as the nation's No. 1 team. I found that interesting, especially considering Michigan was the pre-season No. 1 heading into the 1992-93 season.

That's not a very indelible mark in my opinion.

It has been 20 years and the mark is as obvious as it ever was.While the banners are not displayed in the arena, every knowledgeable basketball fan knows what they accomplished on the court. Just because their final four appearances were vacated, doesn't mean fans don't remember that they won their way to the Final Four.

"every knowledgeable basketball fan knows what they accomplished on the court. "

Disagree 100%. Every non-knowledgable fan knows about them, they appealed to the novices because they were "cool" and wore baggy shorts (fucking can we get over the baggy shorts?!) - my dorky college roomate followed Michigan because he thought it was "cool" they started 5 freshmen, he knew as much about basketball as my right pinkie. The knowledgable fan appreciated the real programs at the time. Michigan was very good, but were never at the top. The whole thing was a fabrication, and Rose et. al. trying to make themselves more than what it was establishes how much of a charade it was.

Manhattan Buckeye;729677 wrote:"every knowledgeable basketball fan knows what they accomplished on the court. "

Disagree 100%. Every non-knowledgable fan knows about them, they appealed to the novices because they were "cool" and wore baggy shorts (fucking can we get over the baggy shorts?!)

Two straight final fours is a great accomplishment, especially with five freshmen starters, etc. But it did nothing to change the game of basketball.

I mean, if making a fashion statement is some major cultural impact for a basketball team then I guess Joey Harrington changed college football forever by wearing those different Oregon uniforms around 2000. Look how many colleges are doing the Nike alternate uniforms now. Game changer!

"Two straight final fours is a great accomplishment, "

And two non-descript years, Webber left after his Soph season, the 80% of the Fab 5 did dick after that. This is what gets me, if these guys were really that talented why did they fall off of the map when Webber left?

Michigan basketball itself didn't prosper (post departure) as a result of the Fab 5's presence. Michigan basketball remained a question of "what if". Coach K was speaking of how Grant Hill, Thomas Hill, etc built a legacy that Jay Williams, Chris Carawell, etc continued (which is debatable given the drop off from 1995-1998). But then again, it was only a 3 year skid, one that still had them playing with guys such as Ricky Price, Todd Singleton, Carmen Wallace, and Jeff Capel.

^^^

Don't forget Erik Meek - hard to believe a stiff like Meek was one of their better players back in the day.

Erik Meek and Cherokee Parks were mainstays on the 94 team. I don't think either were there in 95. Going back to look, think Cherokee was there in 95, not sure about Erik.

The lean years 95-97 began quickly with their departure.

I'm pretty sure Meek was there in '95, Parks I think was gone. Meek might have been their highest scorer in '95, I'll do some research.

According to this site, Meek was a captain in '95:

http://www.lostlettermen.com/erik_meek-duke-basketball-acc-p10997/

That was a very rough year for Duke - when Meek and Greg Newton are your go to guys - you're in for a difficult time - '96 wasn't much better but if recollection serves me right they at least made the tournament as an 8 or 9 seed.

Yeah the 96 team was the one I was thinking of primarily, the one with Newton, Taymon Domzalski, and Matt Christensen (lol).

95-96 Gaudet was coach, and I think I, like most Duke fans blocked those years from my memory just like K blocked the losses.

Meek Cherokee were there. Both are great guys, do great things for the Duke childrens classic each summer. Havent seen Erik in years, but he was always a good sport.

Looking back at that 95 year, what could have been. Duke was 9-2 when K bowed out. Things went south quickly.

Manhattan Buckeye;729700 wrote:"Two straight final fours is a great accomplishment, "

And two non-descript years, Webber left after his Soph season, the 80% of the Fab 5 did dick after that. This is what gets me, if these guys were really that talented why did they fall off of the map when Webber left?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they go to the Elite 8 their junior year as a 3-seed without Webber (losing to the eventual champion)? Sorry, but how many schools/classes can claim a career of tourney runs like that? I would call their story "unique" certainly. Just not game-changing.

Well given that they were the second coming of the Messiah according to them, 80% of a team with 3 years of full time experience making to an awesome 3 seed and the final 8 sucks.... if Eric Bledsoe, John Wall and DeMarcus Cousins played to their junior year, a 3 seed and a final 8 experience would certianly be a disappointment, would it not? How about Lamb, Jones and Knight. What would be their expectations if they played two more years together?

These guys were all hat and no cattle, or to put it in "street" sense all baggy shorts and no game without Webber. Jackson and King sucked. They barely sniffed the pros.

Manhattan Buckeye;729782 wrote:Well given that they were the second coming of the Messiah according to them, 80% of a team with 3 years of full time experience making to an awesome 3 seed and the final 8 sucks.... if Eric Bledsoe, John Wall and DeMarcus Cousins played to their junior year, a 3 seed and a final 8 experience would certianly be a disappointment, would it not? How about Lamb, Jones and Knight. What would be their expectations if they played two more years together?

These guys were all hat and no cattle, or to put it in "street" sense all baggy shorts and no game without Webber. Jackson and King sucked. They barely sniffed the pros.

I'm sure it was disappointing, but come on...you are going a little bit far in the opposite direction. There aren't a lot of groups that can touch that tournament career. Also, you keep referring to the 80%, which isn't exactly true. There were still other parts to the team AND losing Webber naturally made a bigger difference than if say, Jackson or King would have transferred or something.

I agree that they benefit from some undue hype, but there's a difference between accomplishments and influence/impact to the history of the game. If you're discounting their tournament accomplishments, start naming groups that have done more.

So if a college player doesn't make it in the pro's....it means they suck? I think I've watched some pretty good basketball players in college who just didn't make it at/to the next level.

That doesn't mean, IMO, that they were horrible players. Just not NBA players.

Erik Meek wasn't Duke's go-to guy in 1994-95. Cherokee Parks was. He averaged just under 20 points per game that season and was a high first round draft pick, just missing out on being a lottery selection.

That, however, doesn't change the fact that the Blue Devils were 13-18 and, after Coach K went down to illness, couldn't win a basketball game on the road if they were playing against fans. I believe Duke lost every single ACC road game in 1995. The Chris Collins era is my first really vivid recollection as a Duke fan and those mid-'90s teams are a cheap bottle of Zinfandel wedged between a myriad of Dom Perignons. It was the 1998 team that built an 18-point second half lead on eventual national champion Kentucky before dropping a heartbreaker in the South Regional final that really put Duke back atop the college basketball world, where it has stayed pretty much ever since. Since those dark mid-90s seasons, Duke has more wins, conference championships and national titles (tied with UNC, UConn and Florida) than anyone in the country. That's really a testament to how great Coach K has been, the ability to span his success at Duke over such a long and impressive time period.

When you think about it, Coach K's first and last national championships are separated by 20 years. Twenty. No other coach in history has approached that kind of sustained level of national championship success over such an extended stretch. Coach K is the only coach in the history of college basketball -- or football, for that matter -- to have won national championships in three different decades. And three of those wins came with completely different rosters from top to bottom. Remarkable.

Manhattan Buckeye;729700 wrote:"Two straight final fours is a great accomplishment, "

And two non-descript years, Webber left after his Soph season, the 80% of the Fab 5 did dick after that. This is what gets me, if these guys were really that talented why did they fall off of the map when Webber left?

Because Fisher was great at finding ways to lose games...for real the guy is a moron. I mean if you watch the UNC-UM National Title the only reason UNC wins is because Dean Smith clearly outcoached him. I mean it was very noticeable watching

The Fab 5 accomplished less than the team that preceded them at UM.