Rich Rodriguez's defenders generally point to Kirk Ferentz and Barry Alvarez as examples of coaches who were given bad situations, struggled enormously at first, but then were able to right their ships and become highly successful. If we only give Rich Rod enough time, the argument goes, he will surely do the same thing. CRex's recent diary includes a helpful chart comparing the initial records for the first three seasons of various Big Ten coaches. Once again, Alvarez and Ferentz are the only ultimately successful coaches on the list who did about as badly as Rich Rod in their first three years.
If you look more closely at their performances, the comparisons break down. Both Ferentz and Alvarez struggled greatly through their first three seasons, but they took huge leaps forward in year four, something that it doesn't look like Michigan will be capable of under Rodriguez.
Wisconsin under Alvarez
I was a kid in the late 1980s. I remember Wisconsin at the time as an absolutely atrocious team, one of the two worst in the Big Ten (along with Northwestern). They hired Alvarez in 1990, as indicated in bold on the chart below.
In short, Wisconsin struggled for three years, with gradual improvement, then won Big Ten and Rose Bowl championships in year four. They did slide back a bit, with a losing season in 1995, then ramped up in the Ron Dayne years and have been a very good, occasionally great Big Ten program ever since.
Iowa Under Ferentz
Ferentz inherited the Iowa program in a very similar situation to what Rich Rod had at Michigan. He replaced a beloved coach (Hayden Fry) who had done very well but slipped a bit toward the end of his career. If anything, Fry had fallen further than Lloyd Carr did, posting a very bad final season before Ferentz took over in 1999.
The pattern is strikingly similar. Rock bottom start, gradual improvement, then Big Ten champs in year four. In Ferentz's case, Iowa was 8-0 in the Big Ten in 2002. They didn't play OSU, and their only losses were to Iowa State and to USC's first juggernaut team in the Orange Bowl.
So what does it mean?
I confess that I don't know the details about the circumstances at either Iowa or Wisconsin leading up to the hiring of these coaches. If anyone did follow these programs very closely, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on what their situations were like at the time. But I think it's safe to assume that neither Alvarez nor Ferentz inherited much talent. Iowa was in decline prior to hiring Ferentz, and Wisconsin was terrible prior to hiring Alvarez. Yet these coaches, working with much more difficult recruiting situations than at Michigan, were able to turn their teams into Big Ten champs by year four. Does anyone think Michigan will be close to winning the Big Ten next year?
Can you name any highly successful coach who was unable to build his team into a winner by year four? That's not a rhetorical question. I haven't heard any names mentioned. The usual story is huge success in year two. That's what we see in virtually all the most successful coaches from the last decade: Tressell, Stoops, Carroll, Meyer, Brown, Saban. Am I missing anyone?
It's true, none of those coaches began in as bad a situation as Rich Rod did at Michigan. But Barry Alvarez and Kirk Ferentz did. Highly successful coaches seem to have a very swift upward trajectory when taking over a program. Even if you put them in the absolute worst situation possible, they manage to turn things around amazingly fast. Maybe Rich Rodriguez is an exception to that rule. If he is, he is a rare exception indeed.
|Nebraska 2007 defensive statistics||Nebraska 2008 defensive statistics|
|Points allowed 455||Points allowed 371|
|PPG 37.9||PPG 28.5|
|First Downs allowed 299||First Downs allowed 228|
|Rush yards allowed 2,786||Rush yards allowed 1514|
|Rush YPC 5.2||Rush YPC 3.6|
|Rushing TD’s allowed 38||Rushing TD’s allowed 24|
|OPP. ATT-COMP-INT 409-236-8||OPP. ATT-COMP-INT 385-222-12|
|Passing yards allowed 2.936||Passing yards allowed 3,034|
|Pass TD’s allowed 20||Pass TD’s allowed 19|
|Pos||2007 Defensive two deep||2008 Defensive two deep|
99 Barry Turner 6-3 250 Jr.
88 Clayton Sievers 6-4 245 Jr
99 Barry Turner 6-3 260 Sr.
Clayton Sievers 6-4 255 Sr
43 Ty Steinkuhler 6-3 285 Jr.
96 Brandon Johnson 6-3 315 Sr.
97 Kevin Dixon 6-3 285 Sr.
43 Ty Steinkuhler 6-3 280 Sr.
93 Ndamukong Suh 6-3 305 Soph.
96 Shurkee Barfield 6-4 310 Jr.
93 Ndamukong Suh 6-3 300 Jr.
56 Shurkee Barfield 6-4 300 Sr
98 Zach Potter 6-7 280 Jr.
95 Pierre Allen 6-5 265 RFr.
98 Zach Potter 6-7 280 Sr.
95 Pierre Allen 6-5 265 Soph.
51 Bo Ruud 6-3 235 Sr.
38 Kyle Moore 6-2 225 RFr.
53 Tyler Wortman 6-3 235 Sr
12 Blake Lawrence 6-2 225 Soph.
13 Corey McKeon 6-1 225 Sr.
40 Lance Brandenburgh 6-1 230 Sr.
52 Phillip Dillard 6-1 238 Jr.
54 Colton Koehler 6-1 230 Jr.
15 Steve Octavien 6-0 240 Sr.
40 Lance Brandenburgh 6-1 230 Sr.
34 Cody Glenn 6-0 230 Sr.
23 Latravis Washington 6-3 225 Soph.
2 Cortney Grixby 5-9 170 Sr.
5 Armando Murillo 6-0 195 Jr.
5 Armando Murillo 6-0 190 Sr.
28 Eric Hagg 6-1 200 Soph
30 Tierre Green 6-1 200 Sr.
9 Bryan Wilson 6-1 205 Sr.
3 Rickey Thenarse 6-0 195 Jr.
33 Matt O'Hanlon 5-11 195 Sr.
9 Bryan Wilson 6-1 205 Sr
4 Larry Asante 6-1 210 Soph.
4 Larry Asante 6-1 210 Jr.
6 Major Culbert 6-0 205 Jr.
|CB||25 Andre Jones 6-0 190 Sr.||21 Prince Amukamara 6-1 195 Soph.|
In 2007 the Nebraska two deep had 5 underclassmen; in 2008 there were 5 underclassmen. The roster was very similar in both seasons. In 2007 Nebraska had a pretty shitty defense composed of mostly upperclassmen, in 2008 with the same amount of upperclassmen there was significant defense improvements. The 2008 defense allowed 84 less points, despite playing an additional game. In 2008 the rush defense improved by 1,272 yards, with the YPC dropping by 1.6 yards.
So what is the cause for this massive one-season turn around? A coaching change. 2008 was Bo Pelini’s FIRST season as head coach. I have been a hardcore Rich Rod supporter so far, but the Penn State game really has me questioning things now. I have been seeing over and over on this site that a coaching change would hinder us for a year or two, rebuild again yada yada but I don’t see why. We are in an almost identical situation to what Nebraska went through this last decade.
In 2007 Bill Callahan’s team went 5-7; in 2008 Bo Pelini went 9-4. I don’t know if I’m ready for a change at HC, but all the transition will hamper us/ we can’t improve talk has to stop. I know that we have A LOT of underclassmen in the secondary and Nebraska didn’t, but those same upperclassmen were terrible for Nebraska then vastly improved the next year.
A big concern seems to be that hiring a pro style coach (Harbaugh) would mean bad things for our offense. I don’t see why this would have to happen; Harbaugh has been running the zone read at Stanford with the top pro prospect Andrew Luck. He actually busted off a real long TD run against USC this weekend off it. Would it be all that crazy that a non spread coach would come in and recognize he has the most explosive player in CFB and run the spread the remainder of Denards career? Devin Gardner also seems like he has the skillset to excel in a pro style system.
In honor of Halloween and the equally-traumatizing game yesterday, I bring you this week’s recap as told classic scary movie posters. As always, I welcome comments and criticisms of my movie choices (and especially with scary movies, I will sometimes consider the acting quality in addition to the actual conduct when determining the level of terror associated with it)
The Horror in Happy Valley
Coming off two straight home losses and still smarting from last year’s demolition at the hands of the Nittany Lions, Michigan entered Happy Valley the day before with a mission: to exorcise last year’s and win that all-important 6th game and become bowl eligible after two straight losing seasons. And PSU seemed like a willing partner in this bit of history, as the Lions’ numerous injuries turned once-intimidating Beaver Stadium into a veritable . Not only that, but UM fans were expecting their resident Denard Robinson and the rest of the team to benefit from the rest afforded by the bye week. All pointed to a UM victory, which probably should have been a clue that this game was not going to be .
The first two drives were an of what lay ahead, as UM’s questionable play-calling on third down led to a quick three-and-out, followed up by the first (of what turned out to be many) long, soul-crushing drives by PSU. Led by their ginger, walk-on of a QB, Penn St. roared out of the gates, scoring TDs on 4 of their first 5 drives as Michigan’s defense couldn’t stop with a well-timed stop. To make matters worse, a seemingly fell over the offense, as it failed to generate sustained offense beyond two scoring drives, the futility highlighted by a muffed kick return by Jeremy Gallon that the Wolverines deep in their territory. Staring at a 28-10 deficit and PSU getting the ball to begin the second half, UM fans were in .
The situation only got worse as Penn St. took the opening kickoff of the second half straight down the field and tacked on a FG, ballooning the lead to 31-10 and sending even the most faithful fan into a of questions about this coaching staff and this team, highlighted by the lament of “where was this you call a defense and why doesn’t UM have one?” The team seemed , and the two most pressing question became whether this team would win another game all year and if brought on by copious amounts of alcohol would make the game more palpable.
But then a funny thing happened – the offense began to move down the field quickly, scoring on 3 straight drives and pulling within a TD late into the 4th quarter. Suddenly, one could hear of Wisconsin in 2008, when the plucky Wolverines stormed back and ripped victory from the of defeat. All the team needed was one stop, one PSU mistake. And despite a decent return on the ensuing kick-off, PSU was set to start from their own 35 when a went through every UM faithful’s spine: there was a flag on the play, a personal foul penalty that tacked on 15 more yards to the return on the eventual game-deciding FG drive. The offense tried valiantly to score on the next drive, but as a 4th down pass fell to the ground all hope of a comeback was .
That is the question on everyone’s lips once the lights went out in Happy Valley. Behind a beat-up line and a walk-on, first-time starter at QB, Evan Royster ran around, over, and thru UM’s front with little resistance while Matthew McGloin shredded the secondary with impunity. While poor defensive performances were certainly not to followers of this team, the ease by which PSU moved the ball was truly a . And the offense’s performance, despite some success in the second half, was a of the past few weeks – struggling to score until the team fell behind by double digits, then moving the ball reasonably well as they tried to come back.
So now the familiar questions about the coaching staff have returned; will to coach another year, or will to redemption be littered with more casualties. With Saturday’s game representing completion of the middle third of the season, this team’s future will likely be decided in the Horseshoe, as UM ends the season in Columbus against the Buckeyes. Winnable games against Illinois and Purdue loom the next two weeks, and Wisconsin comes to the Big House to end the home slate in three weeks. Will the for RR and/or GERG’s heads continue to get louder until it is a , or what fans the past three games is simply a rough patch for a maturing team poised to make a strong run to end the season? I don’t think anybody knows, even if they might claim a about how the season will end.
And Because You Read This Far, Some One-Liners About Other Games This Weekend
* The MSU Spartans, saddled with expectations for the first time since the Reagan administration, walked into a in Iowa City, as the shook off last week’s tough loss to the Badgers and demolished Sparty 37-6. indeed.
* I could make a snarky comment after Notre Dame’s heartbreaking loss to Tulsa and the even more painful loss of Crist for the whole season, but considering what happened to them this week my thoughts and best wishes go out to them instead.
Lack of depth, high variance offense, lots of reasons get tossed out for the condition of our team. So let’s take a moment to look at history:
|Coach||School||B10 Record First Three Years|
|Kirk Ferentz||Iowa||7-17 (ED: WOW)|
|Danny Hope||Purdue||6-5 (Note: only in second year)|
I’m going to say we end this season 7-5. Giving us wins over Illinois and Purdue. I’m going to be generous because even with that generosity RR comes in at: 6-18 in three years of B10 play.
Guess where that puts you on that chart? Tied with Tim Brewster and ahead of Indiana by one win. Drop the Illinois game and you’re tied with Bill Lynch at the very bottom of the pile. High variance. Lack of depth. Every single B10 coach faced a myriad of problems and with the exception of Tressel they had an inferior brand and facilities. Yet every single coach, barring Lynch, did better in their first three years than RR. Fire Rich Rodriguez.
[Edit: Went back and did some more coaches.]
|Coach||School||B10 Record First Three Years|
|Jon L Smith||MSU||11-13|
|Terry Hoeppner||IND||4-12 Only coached two seasons|
I’m watching the Walking Dead right now, but I’ll try to figure up a response after that. As for maintaining Carr’s offense, I make no claim my actions were good ideas. I’m not an HC after all. Perhaps I should have kept my mouth shut.
I’ll simply say this. In my view I look at those two tables and I have a hard time seeing how everyone but Ron Turner, Terry Hoeppner, Tim Brewster, Bill Lynch and Barry Alvarez inherited programs in worse shape than Michigan in 2008. Alavrez is the only name on that list that went on to have success, so far as least.
Also I moved these charts to the top and you can stop reading here as some people have deemed my other ramblings worthless. Just let the data speak for itself. Or read on if you are so inclined....
Ladies and Gentleman of MGoBlog: We’ve all read the posts calling for patience. Talking about the youth of the team, how bare the cupboard is and the need to let RR build depth before we judge him. Today I am going to do my best to prove those claims are false. Well no false is too strong of a word, there is definitely a lot of truth to them. However I maintain they are overstated and the way in which RR has handled the depth he did inherit provides sufficient grounds to judge him.
Let’s begin with the offense. Our memories of 3 and 9 focus around two quarterbacks running around in terror. Both lacked the legs to be effective mobile quarterbacks and the arms to pass off as an efficient passing game. Threet and Sheridan were synonyms for Three and Out. We watched them run around, we shook our heads and said “Well you have to have the right personnel for RR’s offense to work.” This is definitely true considering the impact Tate and Denard have made. Yet some of us also found ourselves asking “Why aren’t we running Carr’s offense?”
Threet was basically the second coming of John Navarre. Projected to live and care free life on the depth chart. Navarre plugged into our offense and worked. Taking us to #4 in his senior year and our last win over tOSU. Today at ASU Threet has 137.56 passer rating, 62% completion rate and 14 TDs to 13 INTs. The situation RR came into was one where he had access to Carr on a daily basis and likely Carr’s playbook. Imagine the result of having spent his first offseason working with Threet and on Threet’s mechanics (Threet was prone to overthrowing at Michigan). Imagine for a moment an offense with Threet as a QB with a rating of say 100 and the ability to at least sustain a drive for a few minutes and let the defense rest.
That at least is an offense capable of scoring more than 10 against Toledo in the Big House (we lost 13-10). We didn’t get that though. We started “installing” the spread. 3 and 9 was the sacrifice RR needed to “install” an offense that was good for 5 and 7 the next year, with 4 of those wins coming against non B10 teams.
Also keep in mind no system has really involved so much as we relied on Tate’s abilities for 5 and 7 and Denard’s abilities this year. We don’t have a consistently dominant running game or even an offense that is really consistent in B10 play. We tend to go through periods of being flat followed by a scoring frenzy that starts in the 3rd or 4th quarter when Denard hits the “Extra Dilithium” button and becomes a one man army. So think about 3 and 9 and ask “Did we really gain anything from that sacrifice?”
Now on to defense. Our cupboard was not bear on the defense. When we faced Wisconsin we turned the ball over three times on our side of the field. Schafer’s defense comes out and holds Wisconsin, a ranked team, to two FGs and one blocked FG. That’s a good defense. Start three times on our side of the 50 and only let them get 6 points. Go back and watch those games. The defense was always solid until the offense went 3 and out five times in a row and left a worn out defense in poor field position. Then the hurting began.
Or until the Purdue game. The game when Richrod went to our 4-3 defense. A defense recruited by Lloyd Carr, a primarily 4-3 coach, and led by Schafer who ran the 4-3 at Stanford. A defense that had spent not just the previous summer but all its time at Michigan drilling for the 4-3. A defense that basically won the Wisconsin game for us with their saves and takeaways. Right before Purdue RR ordered a switch to a 3-3-5. Purdue put 48 on us.
Injuries, players leaving to go to the NFL or to go back home. Yes those things happen. However RR did not walk into a threadbare program. He definitely walked into an under strength program that had issues (DB recruiting comes to mind). Yet he proceeded to weaken it further. He made no attempts to keep the Carr systems in place while he brought his own players up to speed. Instead he burned everything to the ground and look at where we stand today.
Think about it. Year One he threw the Carr offense out the window and left two pocket style QBs to run in terror (well attempt to run from) LBs and DTs. He clearly had designs on a 3-3-5 defense from day one, as evidenced by the Purdue switch and numerous reports that Schafer felt RR was meddling too much with the defense. RR has no depth in the program because he opted to destroy it.
Think about the kind of player Carr would recruit for defense. A kid who looked good in the 4-3. This meant that kid likely played on a 4-3 in HS and possibly even further back. Yet RR walked in the week before the Purdue game, a week where he had 20 hours of allowable practice time and said “You know that defense you’ve been running since you were 14? Forget it we’re going 3-3-5.” End result, Purdue puts 48 on us. The same Purdue team that only managed 21 against Minnesota and MSU that year. Central held them to 32.
The “we lack depth” argument is not a free pass for RR. We didn’t have to lack depth. Schafer managed to field a functional defense. Lloyd Carr was just down the hall from RR and there was no reason the offense couldn’t have been tailored to play to the strengths of the Carr era recruits while the RR era recruits redshirted, learned his system and built depth. Instead we started doing a total conversion in year one and what little depth we had was forced into a system that it was ill suited for.
As it stands today rumors swirl about the fate of the DC. We have an offense that has an amazing athlete at QB, yet the offense goes flat for extended periods of time. On 10 points in the first half against PSU despite having a week to prepare and some of PSU’s better defensive players being out of the game. Last week against Iowa we scored 7 points in the first three quarters. A 21-point surge in the fourth made the final score look somewhat close, but 45 minutes and 7 points.
Picking up from last year, I'll be starting a weekly analysis on the BCS standings since we're getting close to the time it actually starts to matter and the variables get reduced. First, your updated BCS standings:
4) Boise St
So what this means is:
- Oregon and Auburn / Alabama likely control their destiny. Oregon more so, since they have no real roadblocks on the way to a #1 or #2 BCS ranking. Auburn may jump them at the end if they beat Bama and win the SEC, but the Ducks got a slot if they keep winning.
- I still think Alabama will jump all the non-AQ teams if they beat Auburn and win the SEC champ game. Voting pools still make a huge portion of the polls and I have a hard time thinking more "traditional" college football pollsters will not move Bama up considerably with those two wins, and the computers are going to give Bama a big time trampoline-like bounce with potential wins against Auburn and an SEC champ game opponent.
- The non-AQ is playing out as I thought a couple weeks ago. For a slot opposite Oregon or Auburn/Bama should one of the two slip up, it's the TCU/Utah winner, not Boise St. the computers and voters are more impressed with TCU's quality wins at this point over Boise St, and the game against Utah is going to far outweigh any bump in computers's Boise's going to get from either Hawaii or Nevada.
- I also think though, that you're looking at 2 non-AQ's in BCS at large berths. So with that, we're looking at (10 bids overall):
BCS CHAMP 1: Oregon
BCS CHAMP 2: Auburn
ACC: Va Tech/ FSU winner (likely only 1 team)
BIG EAST: Pittsburgh? (Do we have to?)
BIG TEN: Wisconsin or Iowa or tOSU at this point, but more thoughts below
SEC: see above
BIG 12: Nebraska / Mizzou / Oklahoma winner (likely 1 team)
PAC 10: see above
Fill- in for Auburn's SEC (champ slot replacement rules): (1 loss) Alabama
Fill-in for Oregon's PAC-10 (champ slot replacment rules): Stanford / Arizona
At-Large 1: TCU / Utah winner
At-Large 2: Boise St
BCS Championship: Oregon v Auburn
Rose Bowl: Stanford/Arizona v. Wisconsin/Iowa/tOSU
Orange Bowl: Va Tech / FSU v. TCU
Sugar Bowl: Alabama v. Pitt
Fiesta Bowl: Okl/Neb/Mizz vs. Boise St
Big Ten: At this point, I think the Big Ten is likely the conference to get most screwed. Lets say Alabama beats Auburn, I still think both the SEC champ game winner AND a 1-loss Auburn get BCS bids. Sugar Bowl's going to take an SEC team if at all humanly possible to replace Auburn's slot. The fill in for Oregon's slot is probably going to be the Pac-10 runner up so the Rose Boel gets it Big Ten v Pac-10 matchup. Both an undefeated TCU/Utah and an undefeated Boise St are probably for to autoqualify for a BCS at-large slot taking one of the second conference slots from the Big Ten. The second team from the Iowa/Wiscy/tOSU triumverate are going to have to hope for a loss by either (TCU and Utah) or Boise St.
- Big games left really are Alabama v Auburn and Boise St vs. Hawaii or Boise v Nevada. TCU v Utah is big terms of who gets a loss, but really, the winner of that should be able to win out and secure themselves a BCS at large slot. Th eonly real drama about TCU . v Utah is that if Utah wins, then Boise probably has the top non-AQ slot from voters, Utah has the top non-AQ slot from computers, and the difference in BCS standings will be miniscule.
- The Iron Bowl is really shaping up as football armageddon 2010. Should Auburn win, they're either the BCS champ rep or the SEC at-large depending on the result of the SEC champ game, but really, Alabama's probably out at that point. If Bama wins, then we are on the verge of absolute chaos. Bama wins the SEC championship, they're probably in the BCS champ with a whole lot of wailing/gnashing of teeth jumping over non-AQ's & 1-loss Oklahoma/Neb. A loss by Bama in the SEC championship and we probably have the first non-AQ in the championship game, most likely TCU, not Boise.
Action since last rankings:
10-25-10 Notre Dame loses commitment from Clay Burton.
10-26-10 Nebraska gains commitment from Taariq Allen.
10-27-10 Nebraska gains commitment from Aaron Green.
10-30-10 Wisconsin gains commitment from James Adeyanju. Notre Dame loses commitment from Aaron Lynch.
10-31-10 Wisconsin gains commitment from Jesse Hayes.
|Big Ten+ Recruiting Class Rankings|
|Rank||School||# Commits||Rivals Avg||Scout Avg||ESPN Avg|
Rivals rankings are on the "RR" scale, which is on a scale from about 5 to about 6.1. Unrated prospects are given a 5.1 rating, on par with the worst of any Big Ten commit last year. Scout is on the 5-star system (unranked players earn star), and ESPN uses grades out of 100 (unranked is 40 or 45).
|#1 Ohio State - 17 Commits|
No change for the Buckeyes.
|#2 Notre Dame - 17 Commits|
|George Atkinson III||S||CA||5.8||4||79|
The Irish are starting to hemorrhage commits, which I guess is what happens when it looks like you might be staying home for the holidays for the third time in four years (gulp). Their averages have stayed about the same after losing a few commits, but the class is definitely worse.
|#3 Nebraska - 15 Commits|
The Huskers pick up a bigtime commit in Aaron Green, along with WR Taariq Allen. That boosts them comfortably ahead of Michigan State and Michigan for the time being.
|#4 Michigan State - 16 Commits|
Nothing new for MSU.
|#5 Michigan - 12 Commits|
Michigan and MSU are neck-and-neck, and the next Wolverine commit will probably push them past the Spartans unless he's by far the worst-rated player in either school's class.
|#6 Indiana - 22 Commits|
|#7 Wisconsin - 18 Commits|
A couple big weeks move Wisconsin past Northwestern and Iowa. Although their averages are slightly lower, they have more commits, and once a few of their unrated guys pick up rankings, those numbers will go way up.
|#8 Iowa - 15 Commits|
|#9 Northwestern - 13 Commits|
No change for Northwestern.
|#10 Minnesota - 15 Commits|
Surprising that Minnesota has held onto their entire class so far.
|#11 Illinois - 17 Commits|
No change for Illinois.
|#12 Penn State - 4 Commits|
They have to get some commits sooner or later, right?
|#13 Purdue - 7 Commits|
No change for Purdue.