The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/grant-hills-response-to-jalen-rose/

“The Fab Five,” an ESPN film about the Michigan basketball careers of Jalen Rose, Juwan Howard, Chris Webber, Jimmy King and Ray Jackson from 1991 to 1993, was broadcast for the first time Sunday night. In the show, Rose, the show’s executive producer, stated that Duke recruited only black players he considered to be “Uncle Toms.” Grant Hill, a player on the Duke team that beat Michigan in the 1992 Final Four, reflected on Rose’s comments.

I am a fan, friend and longtime competitor of the Fab Five. I have competed against Jalen Rose and Chris Webber since the age of 13. At Michigan, the Fab Five represented a cultural phenomenon that impacted the country in a permanent and positive way. The very idea of the Fab Five elicited pride and promise in much the same way the Georgetown teams did in the mid-1980s when I was in high school and idolized them. Their journey from youthful icons to successful men today is a road map for so many young, black men (and women) who saw their journey through the powerful documentary, “The Fab Five.”

It was a sad and somewhat pathetic turn of events, therefore, to see friends narrating this interesting documentary about their moment in time and calling me a bitch and worse, calling all black players at Duke “Uncle Toms” and, to some degree, disparaging my parents for their education, work ethic and commitment to each other and to me. I should have guessed there was something regrettable in the documentary when I received a Twitter apology from Jalen before its premiere. I am aware Jalen has gone to some length to explain his remarks about my family in numerous interviews, so I believe he has some admiration for them.

In his garbled but sweeping comment that Duke recruits only “black players that were ‘Uncle Toms,’ ” Jalen seems to change the usual meaning of those very vitriolic words into his own meaning, i.e., blacks from two-parent, middle-class families. He leaves us all guessing exactly what he believes today.

I am beyond fortunate to have two parents who are still working well into their 60s. They received great educations and use them every day. My parents taught me a personal ethic I try to live by and pass on to my children.

I come from a strong legacy of black Americans. My namesake, Henry Hill, my father’s father, was a day laborer in Baltimore. He could not read or write until he was taught to do so by my grandmother. His first present to my dad was a set of encyclopedias, which I now have. He wanted his only child, my father, to have a good education, so he made numerous sacrifices to see that he got an education, including attending Yale.

This is part of our great tradition as black Americans. We aspire for the best or better for our children and work hard to make that happen for them. Jalen’s mother is part of our great black tradition and made the same sacrifices for him.

My teammates at Duke — all of them, black and white — were a band of brothers who came together to play at the highest level for the best coach in basketball. I know most of the black players who preceded and followed me at Duke. They all contribute to our tradition of excellence on the court.

It is insulting and ignorant to suggest that men like Johnny Dawkins (coach at Stanford), Tommy Amaker (coach at Harvard), Billy King (general manager of the Nets), Tony Lang (coach of the Mitsubishi Diamond Dolphins in Japan), Thomas Hill (small-business owner in Texas), Jeff Capel (former coach at Oklahoma and Virginia Commonwealth), Kenny Blakeney (assistant coach at Harvard), Jay Williams (ESPN analyst), Shane Battier (Memphis Grizzlies) and Chris Duhon (Orlando Magic) ever sold out their race.

To hint that those who grew up in a household with a mother and father are somehow less black than those who did not is beyond ridiculous. All of us are extremely proud of the current Duke team, especially Nolan Smith. He was raised by his mother, plays in memory of his late father and carries himself with the pride and confidence that they instilled in him.

The sacrifice, the effort, the education and the friendships I experienced in my four years are cherished. The many Duke graduates I have met around the world are also my “family,” and they are a special group of people. A good education is a privilege.

Just as Jalen has founded a charter school in Michigan, we are expected to use our education to help others, to improve life for those who need our assistance and to use the excellent education we have received to better the world.

A highlight of my time at Duke was getting to know the great John Hope Franklin, James B. Duke Professor of History and the leading scholar of the last century on the total history of African-Americans in this country. His insights and perspectives contributed significantly to my overall development and helped me understand myself, my forefathers and my place in the world.

Ad ingenium faciendum, toward the building of character, is a phrase I recently heard. To me, it is the essence of an educational experience. Struggling, succeeding, trying again and having fun within a nurturing but competitive environment built character in all of us, including every black graduate of Duke.

My mother always says, “You can live without Chaucer and you can live without calculus, but you cannot make it in the wide, wide world without common sense.” As we get older, we understand the importance of these words. Adulthood is nothing but a series of choices: you can say yes or no, but you cannot avoid saying one or the other. In the end, those who are successful are those who adjust and adapt to the decisions they have made and make the best of them.

I caution my fabulous five friends to avoid stereotyping me and others they do not know in much the same way so many people stereotyped them back then for their appearance and swagger. I wish for you the restoration of the bond that made you friends, brothers and icons.

I am proud of my family. I am proud of my Duke championships and all my Duke teammates. And, I am proud I never lost a game against the Fab Five.

Grant Henry Hill
Phoenix Suns
Duke ‘94

Youtube - Jalen Rose responds on ESPN First Take (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brEOkSj92qc)

In summary, Jalen's points were that everything that he said about Grant Hill (entitled, soft, Uncle Tom) were things that he felt as a 17-year-old growing up in a poor inner-city environment.  As an grown adult, he understands why those beliefs were misguided, but that doesn't change the way he felt at the time; back then, he felt that schools like Duke didn't want poor, single-parent blacks like him, but only the privileged high-society blacks from moneyed families like Grant Hill.

His final point was one that I thought was particularly biting: he said that it was kind of silly for Hill (or any other Duke player) to get all outraged about hearing this now, because when they were playing, Rose (and many other players from similar backgrounds) used to say it to their face all the time.

1) Jalen Rose simply doesn't get it. Just because you said it to their face all the time doesn't make it right.

2) That whole documentary was terrible and re-wrote history on every level. The entire thing was fiction.

3) Grant Hill proved the quality of education you get at Duke is higher than you get at Michigan. Hill made his point, came off like an educated adult. Rose sounds foolish on every level and like a kid from the hood who never grew up.

And Rose fails to see maybe Duke didn't want him NOT because of his background but because he wasn't a very good player. That notion is LOST on someone like Rose.

1) It doesn't make it right, but it does mean that Hill shouldn't act surprised to hear it.

2) I disagree with your assessment, but whatever.  A lot of the documentary is "point-of-view" opinions.

3) It's always easier to sound better when you have time to write out a response instead of speaking off-the-cuff while responding to questions from other people.

4) Jalen Rose was one of the top high school recruits in the nation, so I'm not sure why he should believe that Duke didn't think he was a good player.

The documentary flat out lied at times. Like about the "long shorts". They never brought that to college basketball. UNLV did a couple years earlier. The documentary also ignored the fact the Fab Five never won the Big 10. For such a dominate team they should have won SOMETHING!! They won nothing, and it was ignored!  They sat there and made the Fab Five sound like this huge deal, but they never beat Duke, they never won the Big 10, they never won the Tourney...what the hell is so special about them? Aside from the fact they cheated and killed the Michigan basketball program for years to come.

Jalen Rose being a top recruit doesn't mean he was good enough to play at Duke. I'm sorry, at that point in time in the late 80's/early 90's Duke was picking and choosing who they wanted. A guy like Rose in college was good for about 15pts , 3 assits and 4 rebounds. A good player but NOT a great player. He got "his" as they say and did little to nothing else on the floor. A school like Duke or Kentucky or UNC at that point in history wouldn't even consider a Rose and if they did they wouldn't care if they lost him and he went elsewhere. Not to mention he probably wasn't smart enough to get into Duke. Duke actually cares if their players go to class.

And your notion Hill shouldn't be surprised that he is being called an "UNCLE TOM" on national tv is laughable. If Bobby Hurly went on TV and called Rose or Webber a "dumb n word"....hey should Rose be surprised? Would you tell him to just deal with it? Come on thats a laughable point you just made

It's also a joke that we are to believe Rose is now speaking on behalf  of  the black community that they thought all black players at Duke where Uncle Tom's. Who voted Rose the leader of the black community? And what vote took place where it was decided that all duke players that were black were soft and uncle tom's? Seriously,. Rose comes off like an uneducated fool. Don't be shocked if ESPN lets him go in a couple weeks when this dies down or after the NBA season.

It didn't say that they invented it, it said that they popularized it.  In the documentary, the players mention wanting to wear long shorts "like Michael Jordan was."

Because nobody cares who won the Big Ten?  Conference championships in college basketball are the equivalent of division titles in the pros; they mean nearly nothing.  Michigan made not only the Final Four, but the championship game with 5 freshmen starting, and then went back the next year.  There are very few teams that have played in the championship game two years in a row, and none of them started 5 freshmen and 5 sophomores.

If you are going to try to claim that making it to the Final Four (much less the championship game) two years in a row "means nothing," you are going to have to undo a lot of college basketball lore.

That was covered in the documentary.

1) You mean to tell me that the 10th player on Duke's bench is better than one of the top-10 high school recruits in the nation?  Right.

2) Jalen Rose was actually an honor roll student in HS.  You have no standing whatsoever to say that he "wasn't smart enough," other than the fact that he came from a poor, inner-city school.

He should not be surprised to hear Jalen Rose say, "When we were at Michigan, this is what we thought of Grant Hill..." followed by all the things that they told Grant Hill to his face all the time.  If Bobby Hurley was ever stupid enough to call any other basketball player a n***** to his face, it wouldn't be a surprise to hear it now because we would have heard all about it THEN.

What "black community"?  Jalen Rose is speaking from the standpoint of poor, inner-city black youth; a group that he is a member of and had a high level of contact with.  He is in a better position to say what his peer group thought than almost all of the people criticizing him.

Grant Hill showed that he is an educated classy and eloquent human being in the way he responded to what is an obviously media-driven ploy to get yet another sound bite from today's athletes.I was watching the NCAA tournament,and was appalled at how they just HAVE to parade the losing team out at possibly the worst day of their college careers,to a press conference,just so the national media hacks can get their little sound bite.

^^^^someone gets it. Hill showed class and how an educated mature adult should speak and acts. Jalen Rose is a total clown on every level who has re-written history every chance he has gotten to try and paint himself in a better light.

The Fab 5 were a joke in the 90's and a bigger joke after that 2 hour made up movie last week. Celebrating losing and cheating...thats what the Fab 5 is known for!

MikeO, did you enjoy watching last year's Hard Knocks featuring the New York Jets?

I mean, it seems to me that if one dislikes the subject of a documentary, one is unlikely to enjoy the documentary itself unless the documentary focuses on bashing said subject.

deflecting a little here and trying to change the topic? jees!!  I didn't have any hate towards the Fab Five entering that Documentary. But when I watched a bunch of lies and a bunch of re-written history in said documentary then I disliked the documentary and the people who were lying in it. The guy who came out the best might have been Webber. Yeah he cheated and got paid, but at least he didn't go on TV and try to re-write the past to make himself look better

What, specifically, was re-written in that documentary?

You said that they falsely claim to have popularized long shorts in college, and that UNLV did it first.  At the time they started at Michigan, short shorts were still overwhelmingly prevalent.

What other parts of history did they "rewrite"?  What "lies" can you cite?

It's one thing to hear it from an opponent trash talking you during a game, it's quite another to hear it from that same person 20 years later in a 30 versus 30 segment. The fact that Jalen appologized to Grant before the piece aired I think says a lot. It's not like Jalen didn't know what was being put into the program, he had plenty of time to edit out anything he didn't like. And it's not like Grant Hill was the first one to take issue with Jalen, he took a lot of heat from a lot of the media and players over this. I understand that even Chris Webber refused to be involved with the program. I think it's fair to say that Jalen has rubbed a few people the wrong way.

Now having said that, I watched the program and didn't think it was that big of a deal, but of course I wasn't the target of any of Jalen's comments, so I can understand why some would take offense with some of the things he said.

As far as Grant's comments, I think he would have been better off leaving off that last line, other than that, I thought it was well said.

You're presuming that Jalen had the ability to edit the content of the film.  Just because he's listed as a producer, that doesn't mean that he can walk into the film room and start telling the director which clips to keep and remove (and even that is presuming that Jalen even got to see the film before the final cut).

The media and assorted players were not the people hearing this first-hand from Rose's mouth.  Grant Hill was.

Yeah, I think Chris Webber might had had, ahem, Other Reasons why he would not have wanted to revisit that particular era of his life.  You should note that every member of the Fab 5 that wasn't convicted of lying to a federal grand jury about events that transpired during the featured time period DID participate in the documentary.

Also, for a team that supposedly invented long shorts, I seem to see a lot of UNLV undergarments in this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMT8A0DFjBg).

I don't think that's presuming that much. Besides, I haven't seen the comments from Jalen in regards to Grant Hill's comments, but I don't think he was saying anything was taken out of context, only that it was how he felt then as opposed to now. That's pretty much how I took it anyway.

According to Grant Hill he apologized, so it's finished as far as I'm concerned. Not really that big of a deal in the first place.

I've heard the issue with Chris Webber is actually Jalen's. In the program he mentions that he wasn't too happy with what Chris Webber testified to. Not sure if Chris was even asked to be included in the program or if he was asked and refused. Either way it's pretty clear that the relationship isn't today what it was then.

College kids say and do dumb things.  Rose is just being honest about his feelings at the time.  He wasn't right to think that way, but he did, and this is supposed to be a tell-all documentary, that reflects reality.

Rose can't edit the film, so if he explains himself now, I don't think we should hold it against him.

He didn't have to edit the film, all he had to do was edit himself.  If he would have prefaced his comments in the film with "What I thought then was...but now I realize how foolish I was", then it would have been completely different.  He didn't say that.  He didn't say that until after he started taking heat for his comments and then he backed off what he said. More is being made of his comments than really deserves to be made, but Jalen should have known how it was going to sound as well. If he did say it that way and they took his comments out of context than he should have come out and said that and been enraged over the fact that they made him look bad on film. He didn't do that.

I'm more than willing to cut him a little slack, but you're cutting him too much slack.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Jalen Rose's production company MADE THE FILM!! So yeah, he could edit the film

I don't think he has to edit the film anyway.  I think he was just being honest about how he felt at the time.

I am not really giving Rose a break.  I don't even know anything about the guy.  I just think that we hold these guys to too high a standard.  He is probably an idiot who doesn't have a lot of training in having to speak intelligently about racial relations.  He didn't know that what he was saying was going to cause a stir.  But I don't think it makes him a bad guy, either.

Jalen Rose did not direct the film.  He could not have edited it.

Not that I really have a dog in this fight, but you say that as if it was set in stone.

I hate to belabour the point, but I think it's rather naive to think that Jalen Rose wouldn't have had any say in what was in a film that he was producing about his own life and actually contained footage of interviews with him in it. C'mon man. He knew exactly what was in the film and I'd be willing to bet he was asked if everything in the movie was agreeable to him. If he wanted something changed, I'm sure it would have been, he wouldn't have actually had to do it himself. He produced the film. He was interviewed for the film. The film was about him. This was not just some random movie that he helped produce. Hell he even apologized to Grant Hill before it was released so he knew darn well what was in the film and that Grant might be a bit displeased with him. Let's get real here for a moment, shall we?

Another thing to consider... If this 30 for 30 piece "didn't" have Jalen Rose breaking out the Uncle Tom label for Duke, then the entire movie would have generated about as much buzz as a laxative commercial.

This is an interesting view on the way documentaries work.  You've seen other entries from ESPN Films' 30-for-30 series, right?  I emphasize ESPN Films because they are the company whose name is actually on the film.

What kind of director do you think allows his subject to dictate to him what will and will not be in the documentary?  The fact that Rose apologized to Hill before the movie was released effectively proves that he didn't have control; if it was something he felt sorry about, by your logic, he could have simply had it removed!  And again, based on the way Rose has handled further interviews, he has consistently maintained that he was only expressing his feelings as a teenager at the time (something that was not sufficiently conveyed in the film).

To me, it all seems to fit together: he didn't have creative control, the editing was done to emphasize his negative statements (for shock value) while minimizing the context, and because he didn't have creative control, he didn't see the film until it was finished, at which point he apologized to Hill because of the way his statements were portrayed.

None of this is necessary in a scenario where Rose has creative control and can simply add video of himself saying "But this is only how I felt as a teenager" at any time.  Why would he release an apology before the movie came out for content that he purportedly had full control over?  That makes no sense.

^^^little naive aren't we

Yeah, you're right.  Let's try the old Occam's Razor:

a) The director (i.e. not Jalen Rose) had editorial control of his own movie, and put in the parts he thought would be most entertaining

or

b) Rose had editorial control of the movie, and chose to put in that part, then apologize for it before anyone had seen it, then defend his statements with reasoning that he also could have included in the movie (because he had editorial control)

But yeah, maybe the heads of Disney planned this all from the start so as to get maximum exposure!  I mean, since you've got your hand in the conspiracy cookie jar, why not grab a handful?

I'll admit that I don't know a thing how documentaries work, what I know is how business works. It's not what you know it's who you know. If you are the producer of a film, you know the director. Probably even talked to him once or twice, possibly even about what should be in the film and what shouldn't.

You're assuming that because he apologized to Grant Hill that he didn't want it in the film. My whole point is that he did want it in the film, exactly the way it was and he knew that Grant wouldn't like it. He apologized to Grant, but only to Grant, he wanted the rest of us to know how he felt. I get that.

Let's just agree to disagree.