Hokepoints: Why Lloyd Didn't Leave a Tree Comment Count

Seth

carrtree

We're from the Erik Campbell branch

From 1995 to 2007 Michigan had a Hall of Fame head coach who embodied the ideals of ethics and education within a championship-caliber football program, the thing we're actually referring to when we venerate "Michigan." It won a national championship, usually beat its rivals, took a lot of trips to Pasadena and Orlando, won a share of the Big Ten as often as not, and put more players on NFL rosters than any team save Miami (YTM).

But in two (soon to be three) coaching searches hence, there has been a remarkable lack of suitable head coaching candidates from that 13 season span, and it's all due to the single biggest flaw of its last successful head coach: Lloyd Carr was too loyal to mediocre assistants.

A baseline. I'll start with what I consider normal. A coaching staff will typically go through a lot of dudes. On the whole it's more common for an assistant to get a better job than be fired from their current one, with the caveat that a new head coach most often cleans out the old assistants. One or two new guys per year is normal for a successful coaching staff.

You want fresh blood and fresh ideas coming in, but also a core stability, especially from the guys you lean on for recruiting, and that's why a mix is important. The group is usually a mix of the head coach's best bud, a few lifetime position coaches who are loyal and great fundamental teachers but not coordinator/HC material, and a few up-and-comers who are. Have one spot for a young guy who's loyal to your program and can relate well to the players. In coordinators, unless one of them is your best bud, you optimally expect a pair of strategic operatives who'll be around for three seasons or so before their success gets them a head coaching job. You replace those guys with other up-and-comers, or promote one of yours if you think they're ready.

The head coach can take on one of those roles, since in himself he probably has one of the best possible position coaches or coordinators in the country. You see why Mattison is so valuable to Hoke then, because he's good at his job, and good at recruiting, and doesn't want to leave it. That's the kind of rare luxury who can make a staff extraordinary.

For Lloyd's guys, I'll break it up by group.

Offense

Year Coordinator Quarterbacks Off. Line Receivers Backs
2007 Mike DeBord Scot Loeffler Andy Moeller Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2006 Mike DeBord Scot Loeffler Andy Moeller Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2005 Terry Malone Scot Loeffler Andy Moeller Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2004 Terry Malone Scot Loeffler Andy Moeller Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2003 Terry Malone Scot Loeffler Andy Moeller Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2002 Terry Malone Scot Loeffler Andy Moeller Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2001 Stan Parrish (Parrish) Terry Malone Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
2000 Stan Parrish (Parrish) Terry Malone Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
1999 Mike Debord Stan Parrish Terry Malone Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
1998 Mike Debord Stan Parrish Terry Malone Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
1997 Mike DeBord Stan Parrish Terry Malone Erik Campbell Fred Jackson
1996 Fred Jackson Stan Parrish Mike DeBord Erik Campbell (Jackson)
1995 Fred Jackson Kit Cartwright Mike DeBord Erik Campbell (Jackson)

Primary complaint was offense so I'll start there. Number is parentheses is the guy's current age.

Lloyd's first OC, Fred Jackson (64), was promoted more for loyalty than any supposed grasp of the offense. The fan consensus at the time was that Jackson was in over his head, and wasting all of that air-the-ball talent that Moeller had so carefully constructed. The latter half of '96 was brutal (except for OSU), and Jackson was demoted back to RBs coach, where he will remain until the end of eternity.

10370587676_7cf10f5f5a_k
The reason we thought Lloyd Carr would only be an interim head coach at first was he made Fred Jackson his first offensive coordinator, i.e. he replaced GARY EFFING MOELLER with a lifetime running backs coach/program glue guy. [photo: Fuller]

At that point, rather than find a real OC, Lloyd promoted OL coach Mike DeBord (58). It's likely that had the defense not been enough to win a championship with just mediocre offense, DeBord would not have become as entrenched. Nevertheless Michigan spent half of its championship season doinking Chris Howard into stacked lines for two plays then passing on third down, succeeding just enough thanks to a couple of really shining young guys on the offensive line, and spot offensive duty by Woodson.

The DeBord who ran zone left all damn day in 2007 had been a wonderful offensive line coach before that. Prior to 1992 Michigan had Bo's de facto associate HC Jerry Hanlon as OL coach, and then Les Miles, except for a year Bobby Morrison (more on him later) coached it. Moeller hired DeBord after watching Northwestern's theretofore crap OL suddenly not suck in one year, and found a resume of just-as-quick turnarounds at Fort Hays State, Eastern Illinois, Ball State, and Colorado State in a matter of 10 years. From Runyan and Payne to Hutchinson and Backus, DeBord's OL were ready to insert after a year in the system, and usually ready for the NFL after three.

The problem was he approached offense coordination the same way: repetition, execution, toughness. Carr recommended DeBord to CMU as a training ground for eventually taking over Michigan, and when DeBord proved bad even by directional school standards (this was the disaster Brian Kelly remediated), Lloyd made room for him as special teams coach and recruiting guy. The loyalty to DeBord was the biggest complaint we had about Lloyd's tenure, and the caveman-style football they championed survives as a cancerous ideology within the program. As Carr's handpicked successor, DeBord is the personification of this complaint.

Michigan found a spot for him coordinating various non-revenue sports. This seemed nice and natural because dude did dedicate his life to Michigan, but something about DeBord being around now gives me the willies.

[After the jump: the rest of the staffs]

Stan Parrish (68) had probably the most head coach alleles among them. He had been an OC before, at Rutgers, and before that had 10 years of head coaching experience between Wabash (success), Marshall (success) and Kansas State (no success) for the bulk of the '80s. This meant he was also as old as Carr, so his contemporary value could not be transmitted to the future. Parrish was a great QBs coach, used his weaponry well enough in 2000 to give Michigan its best offensive season in Carr's career, and did about as well as could be expected after the mass exodus left him with just Marquise Walker and underclassmen.

malone_terry_v2
Malone was a great TEs coach Peters'd to OL coach under DeBord and Parrish, then OC (and TEs). Now he's in the NFL coaching TEs well.

Terry Malone (54) was Bowling Green's OL coach and OC for a decade, long after Nehlan, long before Urban Meyer. He was about to join Vanderlinden's staff at Maryland but his father fell ill right when Mattison bolted for Notre Dame. Lloyd took him in, then promoted him to OC years later when DeBord did his CMU vision quest.

He was technically Michigan's OL coach during those monster OL years, but from a guy close to that staff DeBord was heavily involved with that group at the time—credit should be spread the way you would Michigan's DL under Hoke, i.e. there were several guys who were doing a great job.

My problem with Malone as OC was similar to that with DeBord except not as pronounced. With all of those offensive weapons Malone preferred to run-run-run until Michigan had to pass, then we'd get this amazing display of Braylon Edwards et al. unleashed and complain where was this all along? He did open it up starting in 2003 except for the first few Henne games (understandable considering they thought Gutierrez would start until the last week and had to scrap half the offense).

Erik Campbell (48) you know. He was ever effective wide receivers coach and nothing more, and though Iowa can rarely be bothered to use them, he's had a solid record since of developing wideouts there like he did here, though with less wasting of redshirts on blocking.

Weirdly this guy has yet to have a job beyond WR coach despite being successful at that (and TEs at Iowa) at two major programs. He's still pretty young. Campbell's now coaching WRs in the CFL after falling on the sword for Greg Davis's 2013 offense. His career arc probably isn't finished but neither is it likely to take any great leaps now.

Gary's son Andy Moeller (50), who replaced Malone as OL coach in 2002, was a nepotistic hire (he was out of a job after Mizzou), and joins Carr at fault for the state of the OL Rodriguez inherited. He inherited "The Daves" (Baas, Pearson, Petruziello) plus Pape and Stenavich, and Matt Lentz behind them, but kept inserting Courtney Morgan as a tackle.

By 2005 most of those guys were gone, and Michigan started getting diminishing returns from big-time recruits. Moeller got Jake Long and (converted tight end) Adam Kraus, but by 2006 we had Mark Bihl and Alex Mitchell and Reuben Riley starting by default, and were forced to play true freshman Justin Boren. When Carr left the offensive line was a disaster area even before Boren transferred and Zirbel was hurt.

Moeller landed under John Harbaugh and Ravens fans liked him well enough; last year he remained nominally the OL coach while actually sharing the job with another guy, with crappy results. The other guy was retained, and Moeller's now coaching OL in Cleveland. He's used a zone scheme everywhere in the NFL.

Scot Loeffler (40) too was a bit of nepotism; he was a onetime big recruit with just a two-year span at CMU between being a GA and QB coach at Michigan. Loeffler is now the last of a dying breed of competent OCs available to teams that don't quite trust the spread. In his two-year stay at Florida he worked wonders with Tebow's passing. Scot followed Addazio to Temple as OC, and did well enough there to be a hot major program OC name. Out of many choices he unwisely chose Auburn for Chizik's last year, then got picked up by Frank Beamer last year. He'll be a head coach somewhere someday.

That's it except Kit, a longtime Don Nehlan guy whom Moeller hired to modernize M's passing game; after a year of watching Carr just run Biakabutuka he joined Cam at Indiana, where Kit's now the asst. AD.

Note that every guy from the 1996 offensive staff except Campbell would be Michigan's offensive coordinator at some point, and not a single one of them went on to be successful OCs anywhere else. That right there is the Worst Thing About Lloyd Carr™. He promoted guys because it was their turn, and never once reached outside the program for an offensive assistant who might bring fresh ideas or innovations. As his assistants were Peters Principle'd beyond their abilities, the performance of those positions also deteriorated.

Defense

Year Coordinator Linebackers Def Backs Def Line
2007 Ron English Steve Szabo Vance Bedford Steve Stripling
2006 Ron English Steve Szabo Ron Lee Steve Stripling
2005 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Ron English Steve Stripling
2004 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Ron English Bill Sheridan
2003 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Ron English Bill Sheridan
2002 Jim Herrmann Bill Sheridan Teryl Austin Brady Hoke
2001 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Teryl Austin Brady Hoke
2000 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Teryl Austin Brady Hoke
1999 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Teryl Austin Brady Hoke
1998 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Teryl Austin Brady Hoke
1997 Jim Herrmann   (Herrmann) Vance Bedford Brady Hoke
1996 Greg Mattison Jim Herrmann Vance Bedford Brady Hoke
1995 Greg Mattison Jim Herrmann Vance Bedford Brady Hoke

Greg Mattison was the DL coach when Carr was DC; when he left to join Bob Davie's staff at ND Carr promoted from within: Bo/Mo's long-serving LBs coach Jim Herrmann (56). Jim left to coach LBs for the Jets, then the Giants, where he is still.

x-default
Jim Herrmann: a really good linebackers coach who then couldn't get good linebackers.

Herrmann was kind of the defensive DeBord, with the big caveat that on defense old and steady and tough is more effective than offense. There have been plenty of innovations and tweaks to defense in the last few decades, but nothing approaching the level of shift that went on with offense. Like DeBord, Herrmann was a nepotistic promotion of a good positional coach to coordinator. Michigan had a hard time recruiting linebackers under Herrmann, and it showed after the post-national championship class graduated. The one great LB after 2001 was Dave Harris, who was all practice buzz dude until his (medical) redshirt junior season. Sometimes he'd have a really good one (Lawrence Reid, Roy Manning) and would sit that guy on the bench for a run plugger like Carl Diggs or Zach Kaufman. Or Sarantos. Or McClintock.

Herrmann felt to me behind the times. He didn't adjust to the spread well; the times they stopped were when they went to a 3-4 defense and Michigan's nose tackles could suck up doubles while a string of next-Woodsons shut down a three-wide. He also ran a proto-Dantonio defense in 2003, having those big corners play right up on the line, Shazor in a backside run/helper role, and Marlin playing Cov2 or Cov4 depending on what the receivers did. It worked great until Marlin was hurt and Willis Barringer was the lynchpin.

It was English in 2006 who started using Woodley and Crable as backfield slashers, and letting Harris really roam the middle; they could have done that earlier. On the other hand, other than the Howard/Whitley year (sorry buddy) Michigan's defense was always the team's better unit. Herrmann went on to become a very good NFL linebackers coach.

When Herrmann left Carr offered a landing spot for Steve Szabo (71), who'd been Jack Harbaugh's main assistant at WMU in the long long ago; Szabo by the late aughts was coming off the DC job with the Buffalo Bills, and on the tail end of his coaching career.

Vance Bedford (56) was at Oklahoma State and Carr (who coached DBs when he was a coordinator) had his eye on Vance to replace himself. Bedford caught on with Charlie Strong at Louisville and is now with him at Texas; he still gets mentions for various mid-level coaching jobs and high-level DC openings.

Teryl Austin (49), who's killing it at the Lions' DC right now, was a PSU assistant who followed Jim Caldwell out of there. Michigan grabbed him out of McNabb-era Syracuse. He left to be an NFL DBs coach in 2003, and was good at that too.

Austin's on track to have his name brought up as a potential head coaching candidate in a year or so. He has gone back to college once, serving as Urban Meyer's DC in his last year at Florida. After Urban left Austin joined John Harbaugh's staff at his old DBs spot until Caldwell tapped him as the Lions' DC. Austin's going to have a head coaching job one day, probably in the NFL.

english
Ron English seemed like another Bedford or Austin at first, but not getting away from Michigan when he should have resulted in English getting involved with a lot of the bad things from 2007-2010.

Ron English (46) was a rising star on the west coast who, while coaching DBs at Arizona State, got a masters in education (like Bo did at Ohio State).

English's time at EMU (after a season at Louisville) probably didn't do him any favors. For one, nobody can succeed at EMU, and failure just looks like failure despite that. Second he was way too close to Michigan during the Rodriguez years, creating a sort of "Ann Arbor East" where anti-Rodriguez sentiment could fester. The whole thing stank of sour grapes. That might have been alone to turn me off from him. English's other legacy was his horrible mismanagement of Michigan's defensive backs in Carr's last years. He didn't recruit enough of them. His safeties were usually linebackers, or, you know, Stevie Brown/Ryan Mundy. At corner Ron whiffed on some big-time recruits, and put all of our eggs in Johnny Sears/Chris Richards/Donovan Warren. Appalachian State was on him.

Bill (father of Nick) Sheridan (55) was a former Bo graduate assistant who'd been coaching all sorts of places (including Saban's MSU, Davie's ND) and seemed ticketed for a head coaching job someday; Carr hired him for his potential, then found him a spot. Sheridan's bounced around the NFL (plus a year at OSU on Meyer's staff), topping out as the NY Giants' DC one year, and that went horribly. He's now with Austin on the Lions. You won't give a damn about this but my high school's football coach (and Sex Ed teacher, which was exactly as awkward as it sounds) was Sheridan's boss at Royal Oak Shrine.

When Sheridan left Carr hired Steve Stripling (60), a Bill Mallory protégé who'd since been a John L. Smith assistant at Louisville and MSU, whence we stole him because we could do things like that. Since Michigan Stripling's lost the great mustache and hooked up with Butch Jones. Stripling is the technically the fourth in that line of Dantonio-Brian Kelly-Butch Jones that went through CMU and Cincy in succession, since he gets to be interim head coach whenever Butch leaves.

3392_1323382177
Remember that one time they had a spat and media who knew nothing about Michigan thought they could make something of it, and those of us who've covered Michigan were like "I wonder which crappy bar they'll be sharing a beer and laughing about it at tonight?"

Finally there's Brady Hoke (56), who's inseparable from Greg Mattison (65) since serving together on Jack Harbaugh's staff. Moeller was convinced by Mattison to pry Hoke out of Oregon State, where the DL had been the best (only) good thing going under Kragthorpe, which is why Hoke survived Krag there by four seasons. Then Moeller resigned the same offseason.

Under Greg Mattison (65) Michigan switched to a 4-3 (they'd been a 3-4), and Hoke was immediately a success and player favorite. Michigan's defense had been stout against the run before but after Hoke arrived they strung off three straight years of giving opponents less than 3 yards per carry. Just about every dude to come through the program (offense or defense) became close with Brady. Hoke, whose office was in the same hallway as Bo's, was taken under the wing of Woody Hayes' onetime DL coach. It was Bo himself who put the idea of being Michigan's head coach one day into Hoke's head, and he started working more closely with Carr and talking to players about what he'd do as Michigan's head coach one day. In 2002 Lloyd made Hoke associate HC and began grooming him in earnest as a possible heir (or the Carr to DeBord's Moeller). But Ball State took notice and offered Hoke their HC job that December.

Discussion: There was nepotism here too but not to near the same degree, and as a result there are actual dudes who can coach from the defensive tree.

Other (Basically Recruiting):

Lon Horwedel, The Ann Arbor News
Mike DeBord served as Michigan's offensive coordinator for three seasons. His first year as offensive coordinator - 1997 - Michigan won a share of the national title.
Mike DeBord was OL coach under Moeller, then promoted to OC by Carr in 1997 after Jackson was demoted back to RBs. The more loyalty Carr showed to DeBord, the more fan sentiment hardened against him. [photo: Ann Arbor News]
Year Tight Ends/OTs Special Teams
2007    
2006    
2005   Mike DeBord
2004   Mike DeBord
2003   Mike DeBord
2002    
2001 Andy Moeller Bobby Morrison
2000 Andy Moeller Bobby Morrison
1999   Bobby Morrison
1998   Bobby Morrison
1997   Bobby Morrison
1996 Bobby Morrison  
1995 Bobby Morrison  

DeBord coming back is discussed above; Lloyd brought him back from his failed HC stint at CMU and made him special teams and recruiting coordinator as he groomed him as his successor.

Bobby Morrison was Navy's DC when Bo invited him to join his staff in '87 and tasked him with turning Michigan into a modern national recruiting power. This he did. He's still around Ann Arbor (lives in Plymouth) and shows up to softball games with various grandchildren. I got to meet him briefly at one of Marlin's events. TomVH interviewed him once.

So conclusions: Lloyd built his initial staff like an interim guy would. That is, he kept anyone around who wanted to stay, and promoted from within the program. He tactfully avoided adding innovators or people with substantial experience in things being run differently from his way, which became "Michigan's" way to a degree of religious fervor. He also favored giving an old guy a landing spot instead of new blood when positions opened up. Only on defense, specifically Carr's old DBs position, did he feel at all comfortable looking for up-and-comer assistants with upside as major program coordinators and coaches.

In general Carr was way too loyal to mediocre assistants, and that prevented him from doing the kind of rising star shopping to fill his ranks that coaching trees are made from.

Comments

wesq

November 18th, 2014 at 1:01 PM ^

Very good defense of Debord.  I think the hatred comes from the old guys that were around for his tenure and it felt like his conservative play calling betrayed his superior talent and preparation.  This is a sports talk radio complaint but when he opened things up that offense was at times amazing (2000 Orange Bowl, 2008 Citrus Bowl) and left a lot of us wanting more, especially after big losses.

bronxblue

November 18th, 2014 at 2:39 PM ^

I agree that the hatred toward DeBord is a bit unreasonable, though at the same time he absolutely failed to maximize the talent he had one those teams.  It wasn't completely his fault and he did help Henne and Hart put up some big numbers, but I guess it always felt like his squads were running at 70-80% of their optimal abilities, which I think was infuriating especially when you saw these spread teams with 1/2 the talent blitzing teams.

But yeah, DeBord wasn't any worse than a half-dozen decisions Carr made when it came to coach retention and advancement.

TNBlue1977

November 18th, 2014 at 3:22 PM ^

Not to beat a dead horse but I want to kill the "Debord sucked" argument once and for all. In the 5 years Debord was an OC for Carr Michigan went 52-11 for a winning percentage of 82.5.

In the 4 years that Dan Mullen was the OC for Urban Meyer Florida went 44-9 for a winning percentage of 83.

In summary, Urban Meyer's record with Dan Mullen as his OC was only .5 % better as a head coach than Lloyd Carr's record was with Mike Debord!

 

There are only 5 HC/OC combos in the past 20 years from the power 5 conferences that won more than 80% of their games(with a minimum of 3 years together):

Pete Carroll(Norm Chow) 2001-2004  with a record of 41-10(80%)

Pete Carroll(Lane Kiffin and Steve Sarkisian)2005-2008 with a record of 46-6(88%)

Urban Meyer(Dan Mullen)2005-2008 with a record of 44-9(83%)

Nick Saban(Jim Mcelwain)2008-2011 with a record of 48-6(88%)

Lloyd Carr(Mike Debord)1997-99 and 2006-07 with a record of 52-11(82.5%)

 

Look at that list again and tell me Mike Debord wasn't a good OC. But I already know the board's response, "but he didn't run the spread, so he sucks!".

bighouse22

November 18th, 2014 at 9:33 PM ^

Interestingly, I think Michigan had a very good bowl record when Debord was OC.  Back then, I wanted to pull out my hair because of what I perceived as conservative play calling.  They always seemed close to greatness, but played not to lose.  You never saw any killer instinct to finish an opponent.  Teams always seemed to get back in the game because they would take their foot off the gas and go conservative.

Even back in Lloyd's last bowl game against Florida, I felt frustrated wondering where was that playcalling all year long!  You felt like this was the team that they were supposed to be, but the coaches were holding them back all year with the conservative play calling.

lilpenny1316

November 18th, 2014 at 5:11 PM ^

The WRs were developed by a very solid coach.  Erik Campbell did a great job.  I mean Tai Streets was a serviceable WR, not hardly a stud, and he developed into an NFL receiver.

If anything I would give Stan Parrish a ton of credit for the QBs.  Parrish developed Griese, Dreisbach, Brady and Henson.  Griese went from walk-on to NFL starting QB.  Brady went from being redshirted before Stan got there to an NFL starting QB/future HoFer.  Drew Henson was on track to become the #1 pick in the NFL draft. 

And one thing I will agree with is Lloyd handcuffing the offensive playcalling a bit.  Look no further than the 2000 game against Purdue.  Stan wanted to keep throwing, Lloyd wanted to run out the clock.  HC made the call and we suffered by losing the game and the Rose Bowl big along with it.

DFW_Michigan_Man

November 18th, 2014 at 11:54 AM ^

Too loyal to his assistance coaches. Outside of Mattison, the rest have not developed talent. (Will give Manning a pass since Hoke put him at CB coach, and he is learning on the job). Rather than cleaning house last season, Borges took the fall, and while Borges had his flaws, the offense has completely regressed under Nuss. If Hoke really want to save his job, you make changes to the position coaches and keep continuity in your coordinators. Starting to wonder if Brandon forced Nuss on Hoke? In any case, the lack of development and on field product is ultimately what will lead to Hoke's demise!

Bez

November 18th, 2014 at 12:06 PM ^

This is a trip down memory lane.  I coached HS football in the early 2000s with someone closely connected to the program. I remember asking him who he thought Lloyd's replacement would be. Even around 2000-2001 he said that Hoke had the best chance to be the guy to replace Carr, which I was kind of shocked by. Debord had just gotten started at CMU and Hermann hadn't totally worn out his welcome by that point.

 

bighouse22

November 18th, 2014 at 9:12 PM ^

There sure was a lot of animosity towards the RR hire almost immediately, starting with his first year at the helm.  As much as everyone hates the Freep for the hatchet job they did, I don't believe for a second that someone inside didn't plant the seed.

Hoke was the opportunity to right a wrong.  As soon as Bill Martin stepped aside, they removed RR in short order. 

Makes you wonder if the rumors about Brandon having made up his mind about hiring Hoke before RRs 3rd season are true?

My Name is LEGIONS

November 18th, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^

I was out of country for many of the Carr years, but I don't understand the deBord hate...   from afar, we were getting the top QB in the land, and the top wrs... wasn't Henne the top guy? Mallett?    then the wrs... deBord was doing something right, fellas.  Pulling a guy like Mallett out of Texas, is incredible.... I'd love to go back to those years where we get the de-facto qb studs.

Bando Calrissian

November 18th, 2014 at 1:13 PM ^

Did you just not watch DeBord's offenses during the regular season?

I'll never forget, I was in the band for the Alamo Bowl in 2005. We were at a luncheon at the team hotel, and I left the ballroom to go get some water or something before we played. I turned the wrong corner and ran smack into DeBord sitting on a bench by himself in this totally deserted hallway. He had his head in his hands, looking completely dead to the world. The game hadn't even happened yet.

/coolstorybro

Rufus X

November 18th, 2014 at 12:43 PM ^

This is a fantastic history lesson - I've been thinking about this a lot.  

Lloyd did, for the most part, do his job of winning games the right way.  I get that you can point to the lack of a successor as a critique, but who gives a damn if you're winning?  What is so wrong with picking guys who aspire only to be assistants, and by the way they happen to be pretty good at it. 

But remember, Lloyd didn't happen in a vacuum.  Moeller's implosion also chased the two coaches that were in the coaching tree (albiet not Lloyd's) - Miles and Cameron, who were fantastic assistants by any measure.  Moeller was a direct succession to Bo, as was Lloyd, but with Lloyd, Mo, Cam, and Les no longer assistants, that left a gaping hole in the succession tree that was filled with the guys who were left - Debord and Parrish/Malone.  And don't forget that Bo was still alive and adored during those times, and had an office three doors down from the HC's office. Don't think he wasn't consulted REGULARLY on those kinds of decisions, and the default was to keep the assitant jobs in-house.

Whatever unsubstantiated rumor you might attribute the Moeller/Les/Cam exit, it had a huge impact.

Lloyd wasn't perfect, but he did a fantastic job of balancing winning and representing the University as a whole, and if his only flaw was that he didn't have a successor, then I'll take it.  The blame for the successors after that lies solidly in the lap of the men who hired them - Lay off of Lloyd

Njia

November 18th, 2014 at 1:46 PM ^

That's why you do it ... No one lives, coaches, leads or works forever. Successful companies, the military, other government agencies, and so on, have been doing so for decades (even centuries in some cases). They each have succession planning as an essential part of their business continuity plans. Boards of directors require it.

Bo was right: no coach is more important than the team, either. It is vital to ensure the long term success of the program. That begins by making sure your coaching staff has as deep a bench as the personnel playing the game.

Rufus X

November 18th, 2014 at 2:17 PM ^

Succession planning was part of his job, and he failed.  But he still won a lot.  In your analogy, the company was immensly profitable during the CEO's tenure.  He did everything right except the succession plan.  He was still a very good CEO.  The fact that the board hired a buffoon to replace him isn't his fault.

Njia

November 18th, 2014 at 3:05 PM ^

A CEO (to continue the analogy) is many things and has many responsibilities. One of them is to make sure that in his or her absence (or following his/her departure) the company continues to be successful. Part of that is to ensure that there is at least one or two management tiers with the development of talent and skills ready to step into place. In other words, they could be a CEO themselves. It may not be as urgent in the near term as growing revenue, servicing customers or increasing the company's profitability, but it is essential for long-term success.

It's also true that nepotism can kill companies (see: Akers, John; IBM c. 1985-1993). So, when planning to replace a CEO, many BODs have a list of inside and outside talent they can tap when needing to make a change at the top.

I'm frankly a bit surprised, given Bill Martin's business experience, that he obviously had no pre-planned succession for Lloyd Carr. It was really his responsibility to have those answers when the time came. Lloyd's failure was inadequately judging and preparing a small group that had the skills to take the job. It seemed as though he valued loyalty over other qualities.

bighouse22

November 18th, 2014 at 8:59 PM ^

I have always felt that BM (Bill Martin) bungled the obvious Miles hire back in 2007.  In retrospect, I wonder if Carr undermined Martin's choice of Miles and that is why he went for RR.  Obviously BM had no interest in hiring someone from Lloyd's tree.  

My recollection was that the rumored coaches (Miles-Bo tree, Schiano-outside, and RR-outside) were all outside of Carr's tree.  I wonder if BM was trying to make a break from Carr with the next hire?  Maybe just coincidence, but interesting to me looking at it now. 

RR got the hook pretty early in his tenure shortly after BM retired.  Was there a rift between Carr and Martin?  The Michigan Men sure wasted no time to re-establish control once BM was out of the way.

SteveInPhilly

November 18th, 2014 at 12:45 PM ^

I will always remember Andy Moeller for his ridiculously ill-fitting collared shirt in his mgoblue bio photo (also seen in the tree graphic). Maybe he borrowed it from Hutch. That dude had a strong neck.

Seth

November 18th, 2014 at 2:03 PM ^

He was a grad assistant. I didn't include them because those guys come and go and it's hard to attach them to any one job unless you really knew the inner workings of that year. Technically I probably could do that from about 1998 to present with people I know from those teams, but it would be a lot of work for little effect.

tspoon

November 18th, 2014 at 1:18 PM ^

I think you are paintng a VERY overly-rosey picture of Scot's track record post-Michigan.  No one is talking about him as HC material.

For the record, I was very much on the Loeffler side of the equation in the "who should be calling the plays, Loeffler or DeBoring" debates of the last Carr years (esp '07, when many reported that Scot was the one who finally got his way in putting together the aggressive game plan in the bowl game against UF).  

But ... he has not shown anything of significance to support the idea of him being a coaching prodigy.  Is he at least a competent grinder?  Sure.  But that's a low bar.  He's turned out to be quite ordinary.

 

 

 

 

Ziff72

November 18th, 2014 at 1:27 PM ^

You can't just wash away one of the best defenses ever as great talent.  I would contend that against pro style offenses Hermann was excellent.  I'll admit he struggled against mobile qb's. 

saveferris

November 18th, 2014 at 2:35 PM ^

Why can't you?  I mean, isn't it an indictment of Hermann as a coach that he was never able to come close to duplicating the results he achieved in 1997, a unit he pretty much inherited from Greg Mattison?  Doesn't the explanation for that performance point to great talent over great coaching?  I don't know if it's an endorsement of Hermann to point out that he was good at defending against the style of offense that he and Lloyd had recruited and schemed to stop while whitewashing the fact that he was never able to effectively innovate to contend with mobile QBs and up tempo offenses.  This is the reason he's being cited as part of the issue with Lloyd's coaching tree, right?

1974

November 18th, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^

Overall Lloyd was a very good coach. As many have noted, his record was good and he won a national championship.
 
Why not great?
 
"... put more players on NFL rosters than any team save Miami (YTM)."
 
That wasn't accompanied by any citations, but I recall reading that UMich was a Top 5 NFL factory at one point. A *great* coach would've had more Top 5 finishes than Lloyd. A great coach wouldn've been a threat to win another national championship more often than Lloyd. Instead, we had to suffer through early season losses to ND or a Pac Ten team on the road.

saveferris

November 18th, 2014 at 2:41 PM ^

I think it's fair to characterize Lloyd's tenure as achieving good results with great talent.  The criticisms being leveled here, and I agree with them is that Lloyd and his coaches could've gotten better results with the talent he recruited if they had been willing to be more creative and innovative in their approach to the game.

Magnus

November 18th, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^

I look at it a different way. I don't have any statistics to back me up, but it seems to me that a lot of Michigan guys performed really well during college and then didn't do extremely well in the NFL. Obviously, there are guys like Tom Brady, David Harris, Steve Hutchinson, and Charles Woodson, who have continued their success at the next level. But Carr also had guys like Chris Perry, Anthony Thomas, Mike Hart, David Terrell, Marquis Walker, etc. who have done very little at the pro level. Some of these guys weren't world-dominating athletes whom Carr held back from being great. Some of them were just good athletes who peaked under Lloyd Carr and then fizzled out afterward.

Regardless, there aren't many "fluke" head coaches who win national championships. The vast majority of coaches who win national championships do so because they are very good coaches. Looking at our one NC coach in most of our lifetimes and saying "Eh, he was okay" just seems a little overboard to me.

Everyone has flaws (Nick Saban is an asshole and a liar and oversigns; Les Miles is a weirdo and makes strange in-game decisions; Jimbo Fisher is a slimeball). I just wish Michigan fans could sit back and realize how lucky we were to have a coach who brought us so many wins, happy moments, and a national championship. There are lots of college football fans who never get to see that moment. As a Lions fan, I've only seen one playoff victory and may never see them win a Super Bowl. That sucks. You've got to appreciate the good stuff when it happens.

Seth

November 18th, 2014 at 3:49 PM ^

There's a series I'd like to write in the future: what happened to Michigan greats in the pros and why?

I think a lot of those are just the difference between the speed of defenders in the NFL vs college football. Edwards and Terrell and Walker were all kind of big leapy dudes, not dissimillar from the type Michigan was recruiting under Borges. Terrell had his own issues besides, but both he and Braylon were not used to defenders who could rise with them.

It's the Amara Darboh effect. He just can't get the kind of separation from better corners to make him a big threat. When facing guys who just don't have the athleticism to stay a step ahead, those big dudes are unstoppable weapons because you can't shove them off a route.

With the RBs, again you have dudes who whose flaws were just okay enough that their awesome parts could really shine, and once they got to the NFL those flaws were too exploitable. Mike Hart was small and didn't have great top speed, but against college defenses he was big enough and fast enough that his spectacular vision and technique in blocking made up for his deficiencies. Those deficiencies were exposed the second he had to pick up Ray Lewis.

A-Train and Perry were a similar type of player to Ron Dayne. They also both will admit they played hurt for most of their NFL careers. Anyway A-Train could push a 3-yard run into 5 yards by being a train, and Perry had just enough balance to break through college lines. In the NFL that became 3-yard runs and getting tripped up after 1 yard on draws. Wheatley and Biakabutuka before them had okay NFL careers, but neither tore up the league because of the same thing: big dudes who run high get chopped down too fast unless they're Adrian Peterson/Lawrence Maroney accelerators.

On Lloyd: Who's saying "eh, okay?" I started off with a whole paragraph about how he's great so I could discuss his flaw in detail. There's some dudes in this thread who treat all criticism as insult (and then either get offended or offensive depending on which faction they're in). You're egging them on.

Magnus

November 19th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^

What you seem to be saying is that Hart, Perry, Terrell, Walker, Thomas, etc. didn't have great athleticism. And yes, the speed of the game increases when you go from college to the NFL, because you're weeding out the vast majority of college players.

What I'm saying is that Michigan (Lloyd Carr) took a bunch of those guys who weren't big enough or fast enough to make it in the NFL and turned out some pretty awesome seasons. Lloyd Carr made guys like Perry and Terrell look enticing enough to the NFL to make them look like first round picks. When they got to the NFL, the coaches and general managers realized, "Hey, this guy isn't so great after all."

Some people don't seem to respect that Carr took a ton of sub-optimal athletes and made them look like 1st or 2nd round picks. There are places you can look (USC, Miami, Oregon, etc.) where every dude runs a 4.4 and can do a backflip over the crossbar. I don't think Michigan was ever that place. Sure, we've had the occasional Charles Woodson or Braylon Edwards or LaMarr Woodley (legitimately good all-around athletes), but Carr was not blessed with a ton of great athletes at any given time. Tai Streets? Mike Hart? Brian Griese? Nobody will be doing Sports Science segments on those guys, but they were heroes and/or all-timers at Michigan.

Seth

November 19th, 2014 at 3:44 PM ^

You can't really point at David Terrell--one of the top overall high school prospects in his year--and say "wow look how much Lloyd did with so little." What David's NFL vs college careers suggest is that college players weren't able to exploit Terrell's weakness (because every guy has one) but NFL players were, therefore his strengths were able to really shine in college but not so much in the pros.

A metaphor: say a player is a medieval castle. This is a 5-star castle so it's got an impregnable moat around 3/4 sides and front is covered by two massive towers and a big oak door. So long as you're going against coastal raiders, they won't be able to break down that door unless they hack at it for an hour under a hail of your fire, so you can just keep picking them off from the towers all day long and then maybe have to do some bloody work against those who hacked their way in. Against such competition, your castle dominates. But later on this same castle gets attacked by Richard the Lionheart and his well-organized, hand-picked Plantagenet army, and those batards have themselves a battering ram that'll take your door down in one slam. Your towers and your moat are now rendered moot because the enemy will attack you at your weakest point: the door. This castle will thus have a huge disparity in production depending on whether it's facing the Raiders or the Lions.

Chris Perry was a huge recruit too and so was Walker. Braylon Edwards wasn't, but you saw his amazing athleticism. I think it's reasonable to assume that all of those guys would have had a similar measure of success wherever they went, with the caveat that nobody else had Tom Brady/Drew Henson to throw to them. Justin Fargas was in the same class as Walker and Terrell, had the talent to carve out a better pro career than A-Train, and Lloyd got mostly that Northwestern game out of him because Michigan didn't know what else to do but run him off the edge.

I honestly believe Carr had as good of athletes as anybody in college football at the time. Maybe FSU in the '90s, Miami at the turn of the century, and USC in the mid-aughts had better, but find me a program that was as strong as Michigan from 1996 to 2007 in pure talent? We compared favorably to Oklahoma and Nebraska and Florida and Ohio State and Penn State. The 1999 and 2000 and 2003 and 2006 teams were as talented as any roster in college football those years. Carr's staff recruited them well and generally developed them well, and that's what made him a great coach. He didn't particularly deploy them any better than an average coach, largely because his coordinators weren't the kind of strategic battlemasters who do that sort of thing. The castle had a lot of parts, and this article wasn't meant to assess the whole so much as talk about that door.

HermosaBlue

November 18th, 2014 at 1:43 PM ^

The reference to his actions as interim HC post-Moeller is interesting.  In that period of uncertainty and, to Lloyd's eyes I presume, disloyalty by the AD towards Gary Moeller, I wonder if Lloyd's reaction to that situation was to emphasize loyalty over all other attributes, resulting in what you've laboriously documented in this post.

 

BlueGoM

November 18th, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^

"In 2002 Lloyd made Hoke associate HC and began grooming him in earnest as a possible heir (or the Carr to DeBord's Moeller)."

heads are exploding right now

 

bronxblue

November 18th, 2014 at 2:40 PM ^

I've always thought of Carr as a good coach who was a near-great recruiter.  But he never innovated, or seemed particularly interested in doing so.  His job was to win, and he was pretty good at that.  But great coaches win AND push their teams forward, and that's why I think Carr will always be a step behind some of the greats despite the gaudy numbers.

Seth

November 19th, 2014 at 1:04 AM ^

Great coaches all have flaws--they mitigate them with their strengths. Lloyd Carr was a great coach. He had some great assistants whom he promoted until they weren't that anymore because he never recognized this flaw in himself.

NO coach is great in all aspects. The best coach who ever lived won despite some flaws he never got rid of, and covered others up with good help or dumb-ass luck or, as is often the case, lucking into good help.

We should discuss those flaws because they're viable criticisms, and in this case it was a flaw that continues to affect Michigan. The same thing I've been arguing with Magnus and Reader71 this thread applies to you too: don't read criticism of one aspect of Carr's career as a net negative assessment of Carr's career. He was a great coach at Michigan, and we should feel damn lucky and proud we had him.

Reader71

November 19th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^

I haven't taken issue with your opinion of Lloyd. Its clear from the article that you think he was a great coach. I'm not even taking issue with your claims that he had weaknesses, because duh. I just don't think the thing you claimed is accurate. I do think one huge weakness is that he didn't bring in a successor. I also think he probably should have been more open to bringing in coordinators from outside. I just don't think his coordinators were mediocre (even though I do think they were better position coaches). I mean, in your estimation, the 1997 team had two mediocre coordinators. Even a great head coach cant overcome that and win every game. Especially someone like Lloyd, who did not call plays on either side of the ball. I've got my own quibbles with Carr. We should talk about weaknesses, and we (most of us anyways) are. I think his #1 problem was the tendency to favor a soft defensive shell late in games with the lead. Or at least his tendency to hire DCs with that tendency. Which is weird because Herrmann was an aggressive playcaller, by and large. English probably less so, but not a timid DC by any means. But when the bell rang for the final round, be it on a last minute drive or on a key third and long, they often played coverage. They didn't call Cable Zero Train like Mattison.