Mailbag: About Obviously
via the always brilliant Prevail and Ride. Warning: cartoon genitalia ahead.
Should the Late Carr Malaise be re-evaluated in light of the fact that USC and Ohio State were cheating on epic scales?
The Horror, 2007 Oregon and 2005 Minnesota still happened, of course. But 2003 and 2006 might look very different to us if USC and OSU hadn’t been quite so stacked—in which case we might see 2005 and 2007 as off years rather than symptoms of a systematic decline.
Yours in Michigan Football Historiography,
BML
Possibly? It's impossible to tell how much of an advantage Ohio State got with its Tats For Everyone program and USC got with its Look, Snoop Dogg(!) program, and the list of knocks against Lloyd Carr's career gets a lot shorter if you remove "could not beat USC or Jim Tressel" from the list.
Carr might be regarded on par with Bo today if he'd flipped some scores in USC Rose Bowls and 2006's Football Armageddon, during which Troy Smith torched Morgan Trent. Troy Smith got a wrist-slap for taking 500 bucks, but given what we know now it seems improbable that was all he did. If he was in the supplemental draft, Michigan plays for a national title with Jake Long and a bizarre dominance of Florida instead of still-drunk-from-last-night Alex Boone and a paralyzing fear of the SEC.
However, while Carr's career might have been truly legendary without Cheatypants Sweatervest and Pete Carroll tag-teaming the NCAA rule book, the degradation at the tail end of his career wouldn't have changed. No one did The Horror to Michigan except Michigan; no one else lost that bumper crop of instate talent and left the program with six offensive linemen and only one primadonna itching to leave between Michigan and total quarterback implosion; no one else provided Michigan zero plausible in-house options in a program that evidently needed one.
HOWEVA HOWEVA, a hypothetical win in one of those Rose Bowls or Football Armageddon might have avoided that fate because it would have caused Carr to retire earlier, avoiding a good chunk of the nastiness comprising the last four years. Sans cheating, Carr probably has two or three more wins that swing public opinion of him from solid B+ to Bo 2.0.
Hey Brian,
I was having a facebook conversation with a guy I played football with in high school. He played at a moderately successful IA school from a non-BCS conference, and made the comment that "this goes on at every big-time school." It's important to note that he is NOT any kind of an OSU fan, and that when he said "big-time" it was to note that it didn't happen at his school. Now if "this" means the ebay and the tattoos, I don't really care too much. But if "this" refers to raiding the equipment room and the improper benefits, than I'd like to step off my high horse.
I know he's not really in a position to know, and I know neither are you - but please speculate for me. When the Reggie Bush thing broke, everybody said "well that's how USC dominated." When the Cam Newton thing broke, it was "that's how the SEC dominates." Not it's Ohio, and people say the same thing. But at the same time - Rich Rodriguez did convince an awful lot of people from the south to come to Michigan. Most southerners I know bristle when they hear the word "Michigan" just because of the thought of cold. Maurice Clarett and Terrelle Pryor both took official visits to Michigan. Am I just being paranoid when I get nervous about Brady Hoke kicking butt at recruiting?
I say that we just had NCAA investigators pore over our program, brick by brick. I say that similar scandals to the tattoo scandal broke with AJ Green and at UNC without it implicating the institutions as a whole. But I can't help but be a little nervous - do we have anything to worry about? Do all the "big boys" do this kind of thing?
I think the eBay thing in general has started talk about reforming college sports scholarships and restrictions on activities. But if the shadier parts, of agents and boosters, is widespread - if all the major programs have their own Ed Martin - then can college sports as we know it continue to exist as we pretend it does?
Sorry for the long email - please tell me there are no monsters under the bed.
-anon
I can't flat out say "there are no monsters under the bed" after the Jihad. During that I repeatedly assured everyone that Michigan's compliance was Serious Business that would have all this stuff amply documented. Instead we got a lot of emails from Ann Vollano to Brad Labadie and zero in return. Things can break down; what we saw during the Jihad was a broken system that needed a revamp. It could have exposed Michigan to something serious if they had recruited a 6'6" sociopath instead of the world's nicest cheetah strapped to a jet engine and pushed out of a plane.
HOWEVA, in the aftermath a large number of people lost their jobs (or sought other opportunities or whatever other euphemism you would prefer—I like "succumbed to gumball addiction"). With Michigan on probation and Dave Brandon acting as new sheriff* things are on lockdown right now as they're ever going to be. When things are on lockdown the worst thing that happens is some kid does something wrong with some agent and gets suspended a la Marcus Ray or AJ Green. (I'm not so sure UNC is going to get off with just their suspensions, FWIW. Wasn't John Blake in some serious dirt?)
As to your larger point, no, I don't think This Happens Everywhere. That Texas walk-on's story demonstrates there are places that are serious about compliance. Here's beloved MGoStoryteller CRex with a local example:
As someone who once helped a football player fix his car, Michigan compliance was so far up my ass there was a blue lot in my lower colon and I almost got my own blue bus stop. The player bought the tie rods and I did the labor since I knew how and had the tools. He paid me for my time in beer and pizza. Compliance jumped all over this and figured out the hourly rate for a mechanic was greater than the cost of the beer and pizza, thus he still owed me money. I attempted to lowball my time estimate for doing the job, they talked to a real mechanic and got the official time estimate for tie rod replacement. They were also unimpressed by the fact I helped all my friends fix their cars in exchange for beer and pizza. So they basically stood over him while he wrote me a check for what they demanded the difference was. They also made him pay my uncle who let us use the lift in his garage.
I tossed the check aside and figured "I might cash this if he gets drafted, maybe". Someone though noticed the money never came out of his account and started calling me about cashing the damn check. This was old school Carr era though.
The next time I worked on his car I sarcastically sent them an invoice (six page writeup for helping him replace two brake pads) "for their records", they crosschecked all my time estimates and sent me back an approval letter and a genuine thank you for the paper...
While it's impossible to prevent local restaurants from giving players extra chicken wings or free cover, there is a level of shadiness that can be effectively regulated. A debate about whether amateurism is ethical is outside the scope of my brain right now because I'm so happy I'm not wearing pants.
*[While it's obvious I'm ambivalent about Brandon these days what with the whole creeping advertisements, night game uniformz, and failure to put Special K's head on a pike two minutes after taking the job, the way he handled the NCAA investigation both during and after is a huge, huge positive. Our athletic director may suffer a curly fries mascot in Michigan Stadium and refer to the department as "I" but…
…it could be so much worse.
Also, video replay in Yost.]
How does Tresselgate (and rumors of systemic NCAA violations) compare to the Fab Five fiasco in terms of sheer magnitude, and in terms of discredit they bring to the university in question?
-- bjk.
They're pretty similar. In both you have guys taking extra benefits from guys who may or may not technically be boosters, and in both the violations stretch over some years with multiple players. (With way fewer players on scholarship, four basketball players is approximately equal to the 28 Buckeyes SI say are trading stuff for tats.)
The major differences:
- Tressel lied to the NCAA multiple times; Fisher didn't.
- Michigan fired Fisher immediately and without regret, then went into their Day Of Great Shame routine. Ohio State tried to convince everyone this was worthy of a two game suspension.
- Ohio State had plenty of warning in the public eye from the Clarett accusations and the Smith handshake. Michigan had never brushed up against similar allegations.
I'm guessing Tatgate will be worse from an NCAA standpoint. In the end, Michigan got one year of postseason ban and a one scholarship penalty for four years. If Ohio State gets off with the equivalent they'll be skipping and everyone will be outraged. From a program standpoint, it won't be as bad because Ohio State isn't going to hire Brian Ellerbe. From a shame standpoint, probably worse since at least Michigan didn't go around pretending everything was cool.
But everybody in the Big Ten seems to forget there's still one conference member that has never been dealt a major NCAA violation.
There are actually four--you forgot Iowa, Northwestern, and Purdue.
PSU and Stanford are alone among BCS schools. Iowa, NW, and Purdue have received major violations.
According to this study, Iowa, Northwestern, and Purdue have never been placed on NCAA probation for football, which is what I thought the topic was here. If you want to extend to both football and men's basketball, according to another study on basketball by the same author, Northwestern has never been on NCAA probation for those two sports.
There are other BCS schools that have never been placed on probation for football and men's basketball, including Boston College, Vanderbilt, and Washington State.
The "Penn State and Stanford are the only ones left standing" applies to all sports, not just the big two. I don't know what sport Northwestern got dinged for, but they did get dinged.
What source are you basing your claims on? A search of the official NCAA database of major infractions shows no results for Northwestern and Boston College--and that's across all sports.
One example of the mass media coverage:
This explains the BC and NW omissions:
"The infractions stain is Connecticut's first in any sport. It leaves four marquee athletics programs -- of the 65 in the nation's six major football-playing conferences, plus Notre Dame -- without a major case in their histories, and two of them carry asterisks. Boston College and Northwestern endured point-shaving scandals that weren't adjudicated by the NCAA."
So you're right - BC and NW just got caught point-shaving, but not by the NCAA(?)
...jackass, go back to trolling 11W.
I'll take "Which school has a competent AD who doesn't gargle the cajones of the football HC, for $200 Alex?"
In the end, Michigan got one year of postseason ban and a one scholarship penalty for four years.
Missed an obvious follow-up: no one, at the time, could have foreseen the long-term impact those penalties would have on the men's basketball program. Now, I'll grant you that the hiring of Ellerbe probably had very little to do with that, apart from the fact that attracting real talent at the head coaching position and on the court suffered briefly. So, while it might have been a confluence of factors, there's no doubt that the infractions contributed significantly to the collapse of the program.
I think the same may well be true of tOSU. Once those penalties are handed down, whatever they are, the long-term impact won't really be known. If they hire a decent AD to replace Smith, and hire a good coach, perhaps they avoid what happened to us in the wake of Ed Martin. On the other hand, it could snowball into a real cluster the size and scope of which is yet to be seen.
Was there any real long-term impact? Those penalties weren't issued until 2002, long after the basketball program had collapsed. In fact, we improved during those four years we were on probation, becoming an NCAA bubble team and winning the NIT one year.
Good point. I suppose I was thinking about the long-term impact of the revelation of misdeeds more than the penalties themselves. In TSIO's case, the most recent issues are close enough to the punishment that they'll be more closely linked.
Inside knowledge perspective - they are "winning" with a combination of favorable winds, great "product" potential, and a very sincere and insanely aggressive recruiting approach. Some of the nicest and most personable guys you would ever meet and it comes through to the kids immediately.
the football equivalent of 1 b-ball scholarship is about 7.
1/13 * 85 = 6.5
Regarding Carr:
Sans cheating, Carr probably has two or three more wins that swing public opinion of him from solid B+ to Bo 2.0.
Even with OSU cheating, several of Carr’s most ignominious losses came down to a bad bounce or an ill-timed penalty. I mean, even with the deck stacked in Jim Tressel’s favor, Carr lost to Ohio State in 2006 by only 3 points in a road game. Many Michigan fans will go to their graves believing that the Wolverines were one dumb penalty away from getting the ball back, and driving for the winning score.
If you replay the final field goal attempt in The Horror 10 times, Michigan probably makes it more often than not. There was clearly no excuse for the game to be that close, but most of the hand-wringing is washed away when you win the game. Nobody will be fretting years later about 2010 UMass, even though that one very nearly went the other way.
How does Tresselgate (and rumors of systemic NCAA violations) compare to the Fab Five fiasco in terms of sheer magnitude, and in terms of discredit they bring to the university in question?
There is one huge difference. The Fab Five fiasco literally wiped off the record books the best period in Michigan basketball history, including consecutive NCAA championship game appearances. Even if the NCAA wipes out Terrelle Pryor’s entire career at Ohio State, Tressel will still have his national championship and two additional NCG appearances.
They’d have to wipe out Tressel’s entire career, and although he was probably cheating the whole time, I doubt they’ll be able to prove that.
Homers will go to their grave thinking we were one dumb penalty away. The truth is, there is no guarantee we would have scored a touchdown (Henne was inconsistent all day) and even if we did, we would have left time on the clock for OSU's offense and it was hard to see us stopping Smith with the game on the line given what happened all day.
The deck was not stacked in Tressel's favor. He had the game at home. Michigan had a 3-0 turnover edge and still lost. Watch the tape -- we were badly outcoached that day.
"Inconsistent" Chad Henne was 21/35 for 267 yards, a 7.6 average and 2 TD with no INTs.
"Should have been in the draft after getting kicked out" Troy Smith was 29/41 for 316 yards (7.7 avg) and 4 TDs and 1 INT.
If you don't think Smith's numbers rate 3 points, I don't know what to tell you.
Why should he have been ineligible? Tell me - why?
The $500 handshake from two years prior was known about by the NCAA. That does not disqualify you for the rest of your career.
Remember when Marcus Ray had contact with an agent and was suspended for six games in 1998 and then came back late in the season? Say he had two interception returns for TDs against Ohio State that year and Michigan won in the snakepit. OSU fans would sound ridiculous if they tried to discredit the victory after the guy served his time and we would laugh at them for it.
THAT IS WHAT YOU SOUND LIKE! Tell me what the difference is.
Because of course there was only 1 $500 handshake between Smith and... you know, its not worth arguing with you. I get it - you think this is all crap and Tressel is/has/always will be the better coach and OSU the better program over that stretch. No amount of "well, large swaths of that team received improper benefits and should have been suspended" will change your mind, nor mine that while every team has its skeletons, OSU's were quite a bit larger and more flagrant than others.
Of course they are larger and more flagarant. But that has nothing to do with how superior their preparation and game planning was in The Game.
My beef with Carr lovers is they only see what they want to and bring down the discourse here with blatant homerism. For example, one can play all kind of "connect the dots/where there's smoke there's fire" games with speculation that Lloyd was an unsupportive dick over the last three years. His ardent fans all hide behind "give proof or STFU" memes. Fine.
Yet when it comes to the players of the coach that handed him his ass in the rivalry, the thinking of those same fans is anything but judicious and the assumptions about what really happen run wild.
If the SI articleis true abd Tressel allowed those violations to occur as early as 2002, his record at OSU may not include ant championships.
if you think that SI printing an allegation, the word of "some guy" and that the NCAA proving that allegation are the same thing, I guess I will have to tip my hat to your lack of insight.
"Other people at USC were likely getting benefits"
As plausible as that is, I won't be holding my breath for the NCAA to dig up evidence. See how that works? If you think the NCAA is going to find a paper trail that is going to lead to vacatings wins in any season but 2010, you are setting yourself up for disappointment.
I thought the UT Walk-on was a really good read. I have heard Mack runs a tight ship down in Austin.
I'm actually impressed by Brown and his ability to run a decent ship down there. Of course, we are talking about the flagship university in Texas and its football team, so there may be rampant corruption but nobody would think of saying it. Still, I agree that UT has been downright upstanding compared to other power teams the past couple of years.
Carr's record is STILL unter scrutiny?
WTF?
How many coaches in the Big Ten have ever did what he has? Maybe 5 or 6 in 100 years.
Sometimes bitches just needs ta be slapped stupid.
I think the question is more those last few years when the program started to slip, and if a win against a top-flight program would have saved everyone from the Horror, etc. Those first 6-7 years were great; but at the end Carr was definitely losing his fastball.
Going 11-0 in 2006 and then losing by three points on the road to the number one team in the nation, and then losing at USC, where Michigan always lost its road bowl game, is losing your fastball?
Let's not forget both of those teams were walking NCAA violations when Michigan played them.
Michigan lost lots and lots of talent after the 2006 season - its high ranking in 2007 was overplayed. Then, the injuries happened. 9-4 was probably an appropriate record in 2007 given what happened. I don't see that as losing a fastball.
No less than the proprietor of this blog has admited that the three-point loss to OSU in 2006 was a cosmetic score. The game wasn't as close as 42-39. We were outplayed and outcoached. Also, OSU was the #1 team in the country at that time. They were also exposed as fraudulent in the desert when Florida held this great juggernaught to 81 yards of total offense for the WHOLE GAME. You make it out like they are the 1980 USSR hockey team.
The "road" bowl game and Michigan's past futility in Pasadena? This is your excuse for Michigan getting plowed in a game they were originally favored in? Just end this charade now. You're not playing with a full deck.
Whether or not you feel the socre of that game was closer than it subjectively should have been, the fact remains that UM was 3 points down to OSU with over 2 minutes to play. Yeah, maybe play that game 20 times and OSU pulls away, but so be it. OSU won their NC because of a hotly-debated PI call against a Miami team that should have steam-rolled them (and would have more times than not), then pulled off a huge upset at the end. Stuff happens.
And yes, playing a game about a month after your last game, on a neutral field that happens to be (with USC) THEIR HOME STADIUM is not a fair barometer for measuring the team's entire season. The OSU and UM teams people saw at the end of the year were not the ones that showed up in those bowl games, and while I have no explanation for why that happened, just dismissing those teams in hand because of their last game is myopic.
My main point remains: EVERYTHING that Carr's program failed at is being excused for these days, often with laughably illogical argument.
The easy explanation for why Michigan and Ohio State laid huge eggs in their bowl games after the "Game of the Century" is rather obvious: the Big Ten wasn't nearly as good as we thought it was.
UCLA plays in the Rose Bowl. Still a home game for SC.
But before 2006, he had gone 7-5, down from 9-4, which was then down from 10-3. Yeah, minor drops and all, but in each season they lost in a bowl game. His fastball, though, was still decent in terms of winning games. But as we've seen the past couple of years, the recruiting was what really fell off the table, as he failed to bring in the type of consistent talent that led to seasons like 2006. Sure, he had a couple of big-name kids in subsequent years, but the crater at certain positions that RR inherited under Carr had their genesis during this time.
If you look at 2006 it isn't as impressive as it first appears: all Big Ten teams we played that weren't Penn State, Wisco, and Ohio state ended the season under 500. Wisco ended up being ranked at 5 but didnt play TSIO and Penn State was a solid 9 and 4 (lost to all the good Big Ten teams). Out of conference was Central Michigan, Vandy, Ball State, and a pretty overrated ND. We didn't have much of a measuring stick for the team. English's daunting defenses were demolished by good teams, and Deboard squandered more talent then we have had in a while. That team had a minimum of 12 draft picks off the top of my head. I even watched the Game against TSIO and we were clearly outcoached in the assistant department if not Carr himself. The offense was predictable and if Mike Hart didn't do what Mark Hart does, then we wouldn't have been close. Ya, the penalty on Crable sucked, but we had an iffy pass interference call for us earlier in the game that continued a drive for us in which we scored; also, the play on the pass interefernce was a joke.
Yes, there were injuries to key guys in 2007 (Henne being the tough one), but you would think we would have depth to compensate (eh tough replace starting qb, but when all you have is a cocky freshman...were is the recruiting foresight). Injuries are part of the game and you have to overcome them (although I'm sure Oregon could bitch worse after losing Dixon who was leading them to glory).
All in all Carr didn't have the sharp edge he had earlier in his career. Poor recruiting strategies left RR in a huge hole (exaccerbated by a radical coaching change), Carr lost several top talents from Michigan, and certain sense of underappreciation for our opponents/lack of preparation would show on the field at times (The Horror). The main thing we can take away is that although Carr might have lost some on the fastball, we still haven't seen any evidence that he compromised his values and integrity. He never seemed to believe running the program was a business, as the SEC seems to think, but respected UofMs tradition and respected his kids here. It wasn't purely about winning, which college football needs to focus on nowadays.
That's what happens when in the second half of your career, you can't beat OSU and can't win a bowl, when those were games you seemingly couldn't lose in the first half of your career.
1995-2000: 9-3 in those games 2001-2007: 3-11 in those games
THAT is cause for "WTF?"
And now we're learning the reason why Lloyd Carr lost those games to Ohio State in the second half of his career:
In 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, and 2010, Ohio State's star player (either Clarett, Smith, or Tressel) was receiving improper benefits and should have been ineligible.
You don't know that anymore than some OSU hack speculating "Yeah, but what was happening at Michigan at the same time, hmmmm?" Without definitive proof, you are getting on a very slippery slope and it all comes off as a total loser's lament.
Why is it so hard for you to take your medicine and admit that Carr got pw3ned when OSU brought in a new coach? A psychologist should be shown some of these threads. They'd have an absolute field day with the uniformity of this denial in face of overwhelming evidence.
Tells you all you need to know. Integrity would have said "this is all my fault, I should have put a stop to it long ago; I lied, we didn't the right thing as a team, and for that I resign."
Instead we got "federal investigation", "confidentiality", and "I didn't know who to go to."
He's a phony and a Liar and that's it.
brings to mind Plato - "Human shame arises solely from the threat of discovery"
brings to mind Plato - "Human shame arises solely from the threat of discovery"
As much as I hate Ohio State and have enjoyed reading nearly every available article and blog regarding their demise, I have a hard time convincing myself that Tat-gate/Cheaty McSweatervest is worse than the Bill Martin scandal.
Doesn't matter, the damage is done and can only get better regardless of what they get hit with. Last year was the addition on NEB, B1G Logo/Divison names, now the Buckeye Shitshow will carry us till fall camp.
I should neg myself.
BILL Martin? Duh. I meant Ed Martin.
I don't think the first coaching search (that gave us RR) was really all that bad was it? To be compared to what OSU is going through? I mean, hindsight and all that, but at the time I know it seemed bad, but I wouldn't go that far.
/s
damn, you screwed up my sarcastic post! lol
that Fisher wasn't coming from a program that had been punished by the NCAA for violations that occurred on his watch? (He hadn't been a college head coach before, but my point is that he didn't take the job with an already-shady background, unlike Sweatervest.)
That article from the Texas Walk-On was a great read. Why isn't more of this stuff/oversigning stuff mainstream?? It's so simple
I think only those wearing blue-colored glasses could confidently conclude that Webber et al were corrupted only after they arrived on campus. Sure, maybe Webber had been a Michigan lean. But he strongly considered other schools, as did all the other commits. Rose flatly said the M booster had been "helping them out" with "pocket money" since they were in 9th grade. Without question, the booster exerted undue influence during their recruitments. If a kid is torn between M and Duke, for example, probably he leans further toward the campus that's more profitable. Come on. How can you really argue otherwise?
And where did he say that? If you mean Ed Martin, Martin actually had players he was taking care of go to other schools. Like Minnesota and Syracuse, at the very least.
Despite trying to flame the board, you do bring up a few good points:
1) webber and Rose were on the take at least a small amount
2) They were recruited heavily by other schools
3) Martin seemed to be most supportive of Michigan
4) The Howard commitment seemed to lock everyone else in.
I think it's hard to assume that Martin's relationship with Webber and lesser with Rose didn't somewhat, at some level affect their decision. But I think more importantly was the opportunity to put together the most dominant recruiting class.
...this excellent piece by DJ Gallo at ESPN's Page 2.
How to avoid Jim Tressel's fate
...no one doubts the difficulty of the many responsibilities that come with being an elite college football coach. But some things are surprisingly simple. And, coaches, it's not hard to make sure your program is on the up and up. I promise that none of these steps will take up more than a few minutes of your very valuable time.
- Check out the parking lot
- Note the progression of tatoos over time
- Actually care about any of this
I love his snarkiness. It's perfect for the subject.
Comments