I'll give ManPundit credit for posting a correction to his recent post about Wetzel's now debunked Wooden hit-piece, and linking to Canadian's letter from bluestreet's great post in his blog.

But, I'll just point out that it wasn't exactly a retraction.  

HP basically says, even if not in so many words, that though the details of Wetzel's story have been discredited, the substance of the story remains true.  Specifically, HP says:

There is no doubt that Gilbert was the Bruin sugar daddy for many years (he also was known for helping out USC football players as well).
Is this "no doubt" true?  Does HP have the facts to back this up?  I admit, I'm no expert on the subject.  And I wouldn't be surprised if some of the rumors of Gilbert providing favors to UCLA players were true.  But, at the least, HP stating that Gilbert was a "sugar daddy" as an incontrovertible fact, without specifying what he means by that (I believe purposefully) ambiguous phrase, is troubling.

HP goes on to argue that the "gist" of Wetzel's story is accurate, relying solely upon the website of first year student at UCLA named Mitchell Austin:

Does that mean that the gist of what Wetzel was trying to write was entirely off base? Nope. Anyone who follows the L.A. sports scene and knows Gilbert's history shouldn't be surprised.

HP might as well say:  I still think UCLA cheated.  And then HP wraps up by repeating the same conclusion from his original post that UCLA's basketball program was "absolutely" "corrupt":

Is John Wooden the greatest coach ever? I think so. Was his program corrupt because of the influence of Sam Gilbert? Absolutely. Was UCLA doing things differently than all the other top programs? Probably not.

Change his conclusion?  No.  Just repeat it.  And then suggestively sign off by invoking the sinister "shadows of the banners that hang in Pauley Pavilion."

Listen, HP can say what he wants.  And I'm no sports historian.  But if he's going to say something like this, he should say it with support.  Not just some well-crafted innuendo, a discredited article from a hack Yahoo reporter and a first year college student.  

As HP himself says:

the Gilbert affair is a story that, if it is done at all, needs to be done correctly and fairly. After all, a lot of reputations are at stake.