Note: I'm really going to try to keep this from being an opinion piece, as I'm sure everyone is sick of those "Hey look, it's my opinion and it deserves it's own thread" threads. I'll do my best to to keep from doing this, but I must admit that I'll probably stray from that a little bit.
This poll was conducted at the end of this article, and most of the questions were about Coach Rodriguez. Here is the data (for just over 1,200 responses):
Questions #1-3: Should Rich Rodriguez be retained after the season? (Answers sorted by final records given in each question).
|I'm not sure||11%||19%||24%|
I don't think that this is very surprising; as the record falls, the amount of respondents who replied "yes" fell, and the amount of respondents who replied "no" or "I don't know" rose considerably. The main thing to take from this is that MGoBlog seems to support keeping Rodriguez if Michigan has a winning record.
|Responses from the previous poll:||6%||48%||38%||8%||1%|
So if we can combine our probably optimistic predictions and The Mathlete's realistic predictions, there is less than a 10% chance of having a losing record.
This data agrees with Question #6: Take a guess: will Rich Rodriguez be Michigan's head coach in 2011?
- Yes - 80%
- No - 15%
- I'm not sure - 5%
I agree. I believe that Brandon will stick with Rodriguez, but, as always, this is 100% pure e-pinion.
I think that Question #4: Can Rodriguez succeed at Michigan if he's given two or three years? is a more interesting question however.
- Yes – 72%
- No – 7%
- I’m not sure – 21%
Here's what people responded to the first three questions (Should Rich Rodriguez be retained after the season?), broken down by their choice in question #4.
Yes, Rodriguez can be successful at Michigan if he's given a few more years:
|I'm not sure||5%||19%||29%|
No, Rodriguez cannot be successful at Michigan, even if he's given a few more years:
|I'm not sure||12%||1%||0%|
I'm not sure if Rodriguez can be successful at Michigan if he's given a few more years or not:
|I'm not sure||30%||25%||13%|
What's really intriguing here is that the respondents who stated that Rodriguez can succeed at Michigan do not necessarily think that he should be back for next year. Obviously those who said that they didn't think that he could succeed here pretty much all want him gone, but it is really interesting that those who think that he can succeed in a few years do not necessarily think he should be given that. It seems as if those who aren't sure if Rodriguez can succeed at Michigan or not are waiting for the end of the year: if the team finishes with a winning record, then he should stick around, but if not, he should be let go.
Question #6: Will the 2011 season be more successful with or without Rodriguez? provides another chance for an interesting breakdown.
- With – 87%
- Without – 13%
(It was probably a mistake not to add another "I'm not sure" option, but oh well, my bad)
2011 will be more successful with Rodriguez than without:
|I'm not sure||8%||21%||21%|
2011 will be more successful without Rodriguez than with him:
|I'm not sure||32%||8%||2%|
Again, it's interesting to see that more of the "with" respondents wished to get rid of Rodriguez if Michigan finishes 5-7 than those who wished to keep him. Doubtlessly some of that can contribute to the fact that there would be a pretty painful transition if Michigan hired a coach with a pro-style offense for next year, but still, I thought that there would be more support for Rodriguez for those who think that next year would be better with him than without. Those who do not think that the team will be better with Rodriguez next year unsurprisingly think he should be removed, and rightfully so.
The last two questions deal with the possibility of a coaching change, and we will cross that bridge if or when we get to it. I was just curious to see what the answers would be and...
Question #5: If a coaching change is made, should it be done before or after the bowl game?
- Before – 51%
- After – 37%
- I’m not sure – 12%
Question #8: Would Jim Harbaugh be the best candidate if Rodriguez is fired?
- Yes – 48%
- No – 19%
- I’m not sure – 33%
There isn't really correlation between these two and any other of the questions, so there isn't really much to be gained other than just an answer to my curiosity, I suppose. By the way I don't think that this is a place to start a "'Jim Harbaugh is awesome!' 'No he's not!" flamewar (which are kind of annoying anyways)
So there it is, MGoBlog has spoken, and it has said that we should probably keep Rodriguez if Michigan wins at least one more game and achieves bowl eligibility, but if not, a change might be in order.
I get to one, maybe two home games a year b/c I live 600 miles away. I will be at the game tomorrow. I have lousy seats, but I don't care. I'm in row 86, but you'll hear me if you're in Row 1, or Row A or whatever they call those first five rows. Everyone (but vegas for some odd reason) has us as underdogs in this game, and that sounds about right. But it IS a winnable game; a win would shock no one. Anyway, point is that we need this game, that I'm going to be loud and that you should be too. I want to make Nate Scheelhaase feel like his ear drum is going to break. We can disagree on RR, on GERG on schemes, etc., but we all have to support the team. I'm going to be loud. Please join me.
This topic is primarily directed at those frequent visitors of the blog who have experience coaching defense, but any of us arm chair coaches can respond as well. I profess no knowledge of defensive schemes aside from what I learn on this blog, but here's the question:
If you were the Defensive Coordinator, what would you do?
Obviously you're stuck with an insanely young defense that lacks depth, experience, and in most positions talent. This question also assumes you're taking over right now and not during spring practice when you can really make wholesale changes.
I'd run a conventional 4-3 with 2-deep safeties, one of whom will probably spend a lot of time in the box. My alignment would be:
DE - Roh
DT - Martin
DT - RVB
DE - Banks/Black
LB - Mouton
LB - Demens
LB - Kovacs (with a dose of TGordon/Johnson/Robinson here and there)
FS - Vinopal (yes, I know - but who else? Carvin?)
SS - CGordon
CB - Rogers/Avery
CB - Talbott (I think he's made mistakes, but seems the best in man coverage)
I think a conventional 4-3 is the easiest way to let the defense just play football and not over-think. Right now they're lost mentally and that's affecting them physically. This reminds me exactly of 2008 when the D seemed confused - and THAT defense had a lot of veterans on it. Just put the guys out there and let them play. Try to play man defense for those young corners, play two safeties as much as you can, put Roh with his hand down, and keep Kovacs near the line of scrimmage.
Yes, good offenses will chew you apart, but that's going to happen no matter what!
I spoke with Demetrius' mom today, and she cleared a few things up for me. There was a rumor/post whatever you want to call it that had said Demetrius wasn't sure about his commitment, and that he was "working on it."
There was a slight mix up with Demetrius' enrollment with Michigan, but it has been cleared up. That was the issue, it wasn't that anyone was recruiting him harder, or anything along those lines. Everything has been straightened out, and his mom says Demetrius will be at Michigan in January.
A bit of shameless self-promotion on my part here. Enjoy