Mailbag: Krikor Arman, Alumni Stuff, Ryan As WLB, Also Krikor Arman
Who is the man, Brady Hoke? Krikor Arman, says Brady Hoke
The other side
So last week I bombed Braylon Edwards and various other people who have publicly or privately undermined the program since Carr's departure. I owe the internet in general a POV from the other side. I met a Bo walk-on at the Michigan Beerfest a couple years ago and he's been a consistent email correspondent; he provides this perspective from the recent billions-return alumni thing:
We had the team meeting last night which started out in the field house with Coach Hoke speaking for a few minutes while introducing his staff. Afterwards we went over to the stadium and had dinner in the club level, which is beautiful. There were probably 200 guys there, including Coaches Hanlon, Burton, Thornbladh, Moeller, and Carr. It was a nice gathering and great to see the old fellas.
Regardless of what some outsiders think or what people want to hypothesize about RR, the fact of the matter is it WAS a different environment and it DID alienate ex-players/coaches, to a degree. Michigan football is different. It's a family. It's steeped in traditions that are older than the vast majority of people on the board. RR did not take care of the program. He did not endear himself to the guys who won 42 championships in the 132 years of Michigan Football. One thing I heard over and over last night from ex-players was "thank God we're done with that bullshit" ("the lack of defense" and "the guy just didn't get it"). It may seem petty, but this isn't like taking over an old, family owned business and revamping the computers and offices. This is Michigan. I can't put it into words, but as much as I supported RR, he did not, in fact, get it.
I talked with Bruce Madej for a while as well as Paul Schmidt. I was surprised to learn that RR did not force freshman/sophomores to live in the dorm. The only players who HAD to live in the dorm were the early enrollees, and they only had to stay there until after spring semester. Think about that. An 18 year old kid is going right from living at his folks place and attending high school to instantly living on his own, with rent and phone bills, gas bills, grocery shopping, etc. ALL THE WHILE trying to maintain his athletics AND play for a demanding coach. There's no way an 18 year should be put in that situation. It's overwhelming. Schmitty told me that was the first thing he told Hoke when he arrived. Hoke immediately switched the policy back to freshman and sophomores MUST live in the dorm.
It may seem like a pathetically insignificant aspect of the RR regime, but I think it's yet another example of how many different ways he failed as the head coach at Michigan.
I am NOT here to say Hoke is the answer because he's getting the young kids back in the dorm. BUT, he has brought back some things that made this the winningest program in college football. AND, he's galvanizing the fabric of Michigan football that had rusted a little bit over the last 3 years.
So… there's that. My position here is endlessly conflicted. I wish the "This is Michigan" stuff wasn't so inflexible that it caused what happened over the last three years and etc etc etc but everyone knows that. This guy, like Craig Ross, just wants to see Michigan win. That's what we all want. We just have different opinions on the best way to go about doing that.
Jake Ryan and WLB
Brian -
I know that you weren't as high on Jake Ryan after a more thorough review of the spring game than some people, but he did do okay and he got some good reviews from bowl practices. My question is this - why isn't he a contender at WLB instead of SLB? It seems like he's a bigger, stronger, guy that can tackle well but might not be athletic enough in coverage. Isn't that the type of guy you want at the WLB while the athletic converted safety types play the SLB (Gordon, Hawthorn, Jones, etc.)?
Adam
AC1997
Chicago, IL
I wasn't necessarily down on Ryan. Like everyone else I was impressed by his playmaking, but he was going up against a redshirt freshman walk-on when he blitzed off the strongside. That's a major factor in a 1-v-1/2-v-2 scrimmage.
As for the question, Ryan is a big dude at 6'3" and nearly 230 pounds as a redshirt freshman. The usual S&C path will see him brushing up against 240 next year. That's a good size to be the guy facing down a tight end on the LOS most downs. It's not so good to be the designated super fast pursuit guy. Also, the knock on Ryan from high school was his agility. His recruiting profile is littered with references to his ability to "attack vertically," worries about his ability to cover guys, and vague mutterings about a move to DE.
While Ryan may have been an OLB candidate in the 3-3-5—where attacking vertically is a large chunk of the job description when you're not being coached by Greg Robinson—he's strictly SAM in a 4-3 under. Fortunately, he looks like an excellent fit there.
If you're looking for WLB reinforcements look to safety, where Marvin Robinson and Josh Furman are OLB-sized guys idling behind starters.
Technical blocking stuff
Brian,
The one thing I noticed from the scrimmage was a lot more "angle blocking" (layman's term, actually the offensive line appeared to be using Wing-T rules) as opposed to zone. The idea is to gain leverage on your opponent by blocking in towards the ball with the tackles/TEs and pull. The biggest thing that makes me say this is first the pulling techniques on the QB sweep looked exactly like a puller in a wing-T system (open deep, run around a down block). "Angle blocking" is the idea in the flesh. However, I actually could see this as an advantage for M going forward. Zone is ubiquitous. Rule blocking is not. Could be an advantage. The blocking did not look that great, yet.
Borges seems to be finding what the personnel does well and focusing on that (hence the grab bag of multiplicity). Holy hell, we need a good runner, I hope Mike Cox is it.
Tyler Sellhorn
I kind of thought Michigan was good at running zone stuff by last year. The mobility on the interior gave them the ability to get downfield and pick up linebackers on the second level. I worry about their ability to move Big Ten defensive tackles, though. Last year it was up to those DTs to move faster than the OL so they didn't get reached. This year the power schemes will ask playside OL to overpower DL who might be bigger than them. We'll see.
Krikor Arman sets the record straight
Hello,
Thank you for the excellent reference in today's blog, I am honored. Just wanted to clarify a couple things. I did not come from the club team. I went directly to open tryouts and made the team out of the 10 people trying out. And this "forward #14" scored two goals in his first game, and has four championship rings from Michigan, one a National Championship.
So thank you, because I really appreciate all of my friends reading about how I was "forward #14."
Krikor Arman, M4
No offense was intended to Krikor Arman in this morning's post. Krikor Arman is notable enough to be in Wikipedia, which means he is more important than me, most webcomics and, for a brief time, Old Man Murray. He is also in med school.
obviously you are mixing three subjects
1.) was RR a successful coach at UofM.
No. You and I agree on this, and I am not defending his record
2.) He didn't get "it"
There is no evidence of this. The most damning thing was that he didn't require students to stay in the dorm (which we don't know how many players chose this option). To me "it" is running the program with dignity and creating athletes who represent well on and off the field, who help in the community, and go to class. RR was fast to discipline, and had very few incidents during his tenure. The team is filled with humble quality people.
3.) He didn't make an effort with the alumni (football)
He created the alumni game and stated there is an open door policy for players to return. This was supported numerous times by alumni saying if they contacted him, they never felt put out. It is a two way street, and many alumni players CHOSE to stay away. I don't know what their reasons are, but I didnt see them make the effort. And that is my major problem with it. RR was an outsider, so it is up to them to get involved with him and help him out. You can;t compare Mo's transition, because Bo was completely behind him, and Mo was one of his guys. I don't beleive it was right for players to leave the program for three years, when they made no effort, when the players needed them.
And regarding disagreeing with Brian, that is completely fine, but you dismissed him aas just "sme blogger". This means you don't respect him. So at that point, why would you go to someones blog when you don't respect him and read his work?
April 26th, 2011 at 12:43 AM ^
I don't understand why you wouldn't just pick one of the many other Michigan blogs linked throught this website.So you're only allowed to read bloggers with whom you agree all the time?
but when you say something along the lines of
"I am going to believe former players before I believe some blogger"
means you don't respect the blogger, which I wonder why you would read his blog. I tend to agree a lot with Brian, but not always. But I am not going to group him as just a blogger. I definately respect what he has to say. I think its stupid to go to a blog where you don't respect the blogger.
My roommate during my junior and senior years lived in an apartment for his entire college career. He also got 2nd in the Olympics last year in Vancouver. He probably would have won if he had stayed in the dorms his freshman and sophomore years though...
Silver Medal? Sure.
Michigan Man? Impossible.
s/
April 25th, 2011 at 10:53 PM ^
Your roommate was the ice dancer, right? Apples and oranges. College football and basketball players have a whole lot more potential negative influences out there. I'm guessing there were no Ed Martins giving cakes full of money to your roomate. (Chris Webber, incidentally, lived off-campus his sophomore year.)
Good god, how dense can some be. "Getting it" is nothing more than an emotional connection, the same thing we hear from recruits when they talk about a situation just "feeling right." It's something in the heart, not the head, it's what has inspired class after class after class. The former players aren't brothers because of the schemes they ran but rather their similar experiences and the things they stood for while they played in Ann Arbor. Rodriguez apparently didn't understand that connection.
The former player lays it out and some of you are screaming for specifics? It's exactly the opposite, it's more about all that Rodriguez didn't say, how he didn't resonate. He didn't talk about the tradition, the championships, the aspirations, etc. So that's right, all you are going to get are examples of things that seem petty because the point is, they weren't petty in the context of Rodriguez' bigger disconnect.
...from the Bo era who went to the reunion. He spoke with Mattison about tackling... Mattison said the players were unbelievably bad during the first drills he witnessed and have a very long way to go just to get the fundamentals down.
That wikipedia page was clearly written by somebody trying to justify their importance and show up the writer of college football blog.
One funny part is how it explains his current roommates. That's an important fact.
The RR hire was the severed head of the old guard; it was an indictment of Carr and his 'outdated' system.
<br>It was a rejection of the players of the previous dozen years. At least that's what they saw, and it's somewhat true. Fans were pining for an upgrade and kicking Carr (and the players, and what they built) out the door. That was unfair and stupid.
<br>The players acted out. Everyone's got to realize what they did wrong and move forward. Hug it out as we roast marshmallows on the bonfire of OSU lies, and toast to the new future.
There are hundreds of former wolverine football players. To name a few who've been outspoken about RR in the past few years: Braylon had to say something about #1 jersey gate and went on to say more later, famously, "LCs U of M". Michael Taylor railed on the search that ended in RR instead of Les. Rick Leach stepped up big-time in RRs defense and ripped those in "the family" who weren't getting behind him. Boren, a football legacy, said the family values were gone. A bunch of other players left the program, some talked, most didn't. Point in this list: lots of opinions from football players. And then there's this guy who's email Brian shares. What's sticking out for me is there seems to be a vocal, even majority sentiment among formers that RR didn't get it. What I'm reading is RR failed to properly kiss their fucking rings. That is to say, I'm with Rick Leach on this, and Mike Hart too, if he weren't mincing his words. Seems to me a lot of these former players are acting like frat boys who came back for homecoming and the contemporaries didn't give them the appropriate suck up. And by appropriate, I mean "didn't know the traditional (stupid) handshake". Seems to me ignoring tradition is the farthest thing from the issue. The issue is RR ignored the players, thinking they, being Michigan Men, would be able to deal with the fact that he was different, alien, but a good football guy who had to put together a football team in a different image.
Krikor!
The dorm thing is really surprising. I thought that it was just a standard athletic department policy to have them in the dorm for two years.
Who is Krikor Armon?
April 26th, 2011 at 12:14 PM ^
I've watched "The Usual Suspects" several times, and I've never been able to figure that out.
April 25th, 2011 at 10:11 PM ^
What I get out of this is that in addition to hiring a Michigan man, Brandon has done a great deal to support Hoke. And un fortunately it doesn't look like Martin did anywhere near as well by Rich Rod. I have no inside information on this, but. I wonder if the problem between Rich Rod and. Former players was a bit of a vicious circle. Rich Rod came into the program with lots to do, understanably outreach to former players was not his highest priority. Bill Martin didn't make it a priority either. After getting grief on things like the number 1, RR felt even less need to prioritze former players. Those players in turn felt more aloofnrss and returned it.
<br>
<br>I imagine many former players have lots going on and I find it hard to blame them for not finding time to reach out to someone they have never met just because he coached a team they played for. Similarly, while I can fault Rich Rod for not putting a defensive staff together that worked, I can't fault him for not having more time to learn Michigan traditions. I can however fault the athletic department for letting both of those things happen.
<br>
<br>While I know many people here don't like "the proccess", I think the team would be in much better shape if Brandon had been around to handle the transition to Loyd's replacement.
April 25th, 2011 at 10:27 PM ^
I'm just happy now that we're even talking about RR in the past tense. After '08 nobody could mistake it being a bad idea. How do you screw up a thing like Americas best defense so bad in just 1 summer? Still I cheered for our kids every Saturday (and once in December) A real fan vs. fake fan discussion is kind of pointless now that Hoke is the coach.
I absolutely agree about Jake Ryan. I can't find a decent LB depth chart anywhere. Some have guys who will obviously transfer out on top of the depth chart, others don't even include JB Fitz as a backup of any kind. Cam Gordon, Jake Ryan, Mike Jones, Marell Evans, and Brandon Herron have all stood out but will it be a "seniors first" team or will it be best players play. Proly a little bit of both. I don't know if Cam Gordon will be ready to start the Strong side this year. He's fast enough, but is he big enough to take on the power run side or split the 5 gap? Time will tell.
O-Line blocking technique will be of critical importance this year more than most. Incoming freshmen Linemen outweigh some of our current starters who've zone blocked for 3 years straight now. Coach Funk is just the man to get them up to speed. They won't be bigger then the D this year so they'll have to have perfect technique.
Where's the criticism for the last AD anyways? RR couldn't help who he was. He was BROUGHT in and did exactly what he did in West Virginia. The AD shouldv'e known that even Miami got out of the Big East it was so crappy. Even the ACC has a tougher conference. Beating up on Louisville and Uconn every year isn't exactly a glowing coaching resume.
????????????Yourself. Nice to see what nerds do with their free time.
You're like the Buckeye version of a Michigan fan, aren't you?
Has Michigan EVER had a #1 ranked defense? That's what "America's best defense" (please note the apostrophe) implies. I don't actually care enough to go research it, so I'll let you go do that and if you come back here with proof, I'll accept it.
April 25th, 2011 at 11:56 PM ^
But I will leave you with this, 'anyways' is not a word.
Anyways is a word. It has transitioned from the Old English anywise and has been used since the 1300's to signify "to any degree at all". You look a bit like a jackass when you go out of the way to call someone out when you're dead wrong.
April 26th, 2011 at 11:37 AM ^
"Anyways" is an archaic form; as such, it's not common to the English lexicon. Colloquially, one would be correct in saying that it's not an English word.
Without resorting to pedantry, though, "proly" is most definitely not a word, so at the very least he was correct in spirit.
How do you screw up a thing like Americas best defense so bad in just 1 summer?
Was there a purpose to your post? Do you make an argument or do you just try to have a pissing contest?
1. You like to engage in the pissing contest, as evinced by your reply comments.
2. Some of the replies to your argument are based on the simple fact that you had no real argument; rather, you made a conclusory statement ("best defense") with neither context nor justification.
Why don't we face the fact that the three years of Rodriguez' tenure are a complex mosaic of personality and historical interactions that, given the strength of the individual predilections, reactions, and opinion, along with the need for a fairly long transition to sort out those interactions, could not have produced success without patience. At any rate, there were certain predispositions, as we read in Brian's post of the e-mail he received, that would create an atmosphere of suspicion and offense that arises from hide-bound conservatism, which is not the same as honoring tradition.
April 25th, 2011 at 10:23 PM ^
From Brian......"I wish the "This is Michigan" stuff wasn't so inflexible that it caused what happened over the last three years.....".
What exactly did "This is Michigan" cause?
Did it cause the three worst defenses in Michigan history (with no significant light at the end of the tunnel yet)?
Did it cause botched fake punts?
Did it cause badly missed field goals?
Did it cause multiple fumbles on punt returns? Hell not just punt returns but more fumbles in every manner than any of us have seen in our lifetimes of watching Michigan football?
Did it cause probation?
Did it cause 6' 6" slow QB's running the zone read?
Did it cause a significant drop in recruiting rankings?
The "This is Michigan" concept is real and can't be dismissed. However, it's silly to think that it caused RR's downfall. The team's results on the field took care of that. I was at the Mississippi State game. That game alone is proof enough that RR failed during his three year tenure.....and it had nothing to do with outside influences.
April 26th, 2011 at 12:12 AM ^
Did it cause the three worst defenses in Michigan history (with no significant light at the end of the tunnel yet)?
-> Yes. Decimated Defense
Did it cause botched fake punts?
->Becasue a mentality can have an impact on this?
Did it cause badly missed field goals?
->Id.
Did it cause multiple fumbles on punt returns? Hell not just punt returns but more fumbles in every manner than any of us have seen in our lifetimes of watching Michigan football?
->Id.
Did it cause probation?
->Yes. Were the people that needed to supply the correct paperwork not employees of teh University before RR was hired, in other words, part of the old regime
Did it cause 6' 6" slow QB's running the zone read?
->No QB was 6' 6", but still, Yes do to a lack of QB depth. Don't give me the "but, but RR ran Mallet out" Mallet was gone as soon as he arrived in AA, he would have told you that.
Did it cause a significant drop in recruiting rankings?
-A look at Rivals team rankings:
2004: 5th
2005: 6th
2006: 13th
2007: 12th
2008: 10th
2009: 8th
2010: 20th (people worrying about the job future becasue so many people were 'speculating' that he was not a Michigan Man
2011: 21st
What drop? Check facts before you post
Facts? That's pretty funny. You showed yourself that the two lowest ranked recruiting classes in the past eight years came under RR's watch (and he was only here for three years). If you looked back further, it's probably two of the lowest ranked classes of past 40 years. If RR hadn't been losing all of those game by double digits (six of them last year) there wouldn't have been all of the 'speculating' about his job.
The Decimated Defense meme is largely bullshit. A significant portion of those players were Four and Five star caliber....and all of them had least one year of experience on the team (Graham, Trent, Taylor, Johnson, Jamison, Mouton, Warren.....).
Do you think that Northwestern, Indiana, MSU, Minnesota, Illinois, Purdue......would whine about that level of talent. It might not have been incredibly deep but there was enough talent to compete at teh Big Ten level and they didn't do it.
Facts? You're funny.
2002: 16th
2003: 17th
That's as far back as they go. Throw out 2011 as it's a mixed class, then in RR's first and second year he had higher rated classes than four of Carr's final six seasons. There was never a huge drop off. Again, the sample size is not one that should given much weight, but still, your last point is not correct.
Just because a player was a 4/5 star doesn't mean that their talent panned out or they contributed to the team in an impactful way. 2008 should have been better, but this is what happens when a team is on it's third D-coordinator in four seasons, and then a new D-coordinator in 2009, and then one of the youngest defenses in the country in 2010. It was a bad confluence of events. Part of it was RR and hiring Robinson, we all know that, but part of it was the lack of talent on the roster that eventually contributed, and this is a product of the Carr era.
April 26th, 2011 at 11:01 AM ^
2010: 20th (people worrying about the job future becasue so many people were 'speculating' that he was not a Michigan Man
That's funny. He had a weak (for Michigan) 2010 recruiting class and you blame that on "speculation that he wasn't a Michigan Man"? You think maybe it had more to do with the fact that he produced two of the worst seasons in the history of the program?
April 25th, 2011 at 10:41 PM ^
What in hell are you talking about?
April 25th, 2011 at 10:55 PM ^
Can we get a Denard Blinding Smile here soon? Please?
.
Excuses: RR just needed a few more years to get the players that fit his system. If Lloyd Carr would of supported RR than he would have been more successful. It was Greg Robinsons fault. If Michigan had a good field goal kicker they would have won more games. They were too young to be competitive.
Facts: RR had a 15-21 record at UofM. He won 6 big ten games in three years. His three teams at Michigan were almost last in the country in turnover margin every year. The margin of defeat against the top 25 and OSU was a good indication of where the program was after three years and where it was heading under his leadership. I could go on, but that’s enough to get my point across.
Do you think RR will support Michigan football? Michigan made him the highest paid employee ever. If Hoke fails at Michigan will you blame RR for not supporting him? Gary Moeller was fired and he still supported UofM football. Bruce Earl was fired at OSU and still supported them. Please give me some examples of how Carr could have shown support to Michigan football during RR's tenure. Would RR have won more games if Carr would have come to every practice and followed the coaching staff around like a lost puppy? Would they have won a big ten title if Carr would have tweeted once a day that he thinks RR is a great coach? I'm sure RR actually felt more comfortable not having Carr around Schembechler hall when he took over as coach. RR is his own man and has his own coaching philosophies. RR was the coach and he was in charge of the program. Carr had nothing to do with him losing football games. Its a shame that this blog and some of the members bash Lloyd Carr. RR isn't half the coach that Lloyd was. More facts that support my post.
RR's coaching credentials while at UofM
| Michigan Wolverines (Big Ten Conference) (2008–present) | |||||||||
| 2008 | Michigan | 3–9 | 2–6 | T–9th | |||||
| 2009 | Michigan | 5–7 | 1–7 | T–10th | |||||
| 2010 | Michigan | 7–6 | 3–5 | T–7th | L Gator | ||||
| Michigan: | 15–21 | 6–18 | |||||||
| Total: | 15-21 | ||||||||
| National Championship Conference Title Conference Division Title | |||||||||
|
†Indicates BCS bowl game. #Rankings from final Coaches' Poll. °Rankings from final AP Poll. |
|||||||||
Lloyd Carr's coaching credentials while at UofM
| Year | Team | Overall | Conference | Standing | Bowl/Playoffs | Coaches# | AP° | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michigan Wolverines (Big Ten Conference) (1995–2007) | |||||||||
| 1995 | Michigan | 9–4 | 5–3 | T–3rd | L Alamo | 19 | 17 | ||
| 1996 | Michigan | 8–4 | 5–3 | T–5th | L Outback | 20 | 20 | ||
| 1997 | Michigan | 12–0 | 8–0 | 1st | W Rose | 2 | 1 | ||
| 1998 | Michigan | 10–3 | 7–1 | T–1st | W Citrus | 12 | 12 | ||
| 1999 | Michigan | 10–2 | 6–2 | T–2nd | W Orange † | 5 | 5 | ||
| 2000 | Michigan | 9–3 | 6–2 | T–1st | W Citrus | 10 | 11 | ||
| 2001 | Michigan | 8–4 | 6–2 | 2nd | L Citrus | 20 | 20 | ||
| 2002 | Michigan | 10–3 | 6–2 | 3rd | W Outback | 9 | 9 | ||
| 2003 | Michigan | 10–3 | 7–1 | 1st | L Rose † | 7 | 6 | ||
| 2004 | Michigan | 9–3 | 7–1 | T–1st | L Rose † | 12 | 14 | ||
| 2005 | Michigan | 7–5 | 5–3 | T–3rd | L Alamo | ||||
| 2006 | Michigan | 11–2 | 7–1 | T–2nd | L Rose † | 9 | 8 | ||
| 2007 | Michigan | 9–4 | 6–2 | T–2nd | W Capital One | 19 | 18 | ||
| Michigan: | 122–40 | 81–23 | |||||||
| Total: | 122–40 | ||||||||
| National Championship Conference Title Conference Division Title | |||||||||
|
†Indicates BCS bowl game. #Rankings from final Coaches' Poll. °Rankings from final AP Poll. |
|||||||||
Carr wins!
April 26th, 2011 at 10:40 AM ^
the single dumbest attempted smart thing anyone has posted on this site since I have been here.
April 26th, 2011 at 10:53 AM ^
Prove me wrong. You can't think of anything better than that? Is it Earl Bruce or Bruce Earl? LOL!
April 26th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^
That Lloyd Carr had a better record than RR? Do you think you are breaking some kind of new ground here?
Let's get to the main difference: Lloyd Carr was brought in to be a continuation. He inherited a readymade team. He got Charles Woodson rather than Morgan Trent. He won a National Title in his first three years - just like Miles, Saban, Tressel, Meyer - with someone else's guys. It's a hell of a lot easier to have early success when you have things like "talent" and "experience" at your disposal from the beginning. Thus, it IS somewhat Lloyd Carr's fault that Michigan was terrible the last three years, because he left Rodriguez with a dearth of both.
Ask yourself this: What did you expect Michigan's record in 2008 to be? When you bring up Rich Rodriguez's record, what did you think it would be after three seasons? 39-0? 35-4? 30-9? 25-14? Myself, I thought it would somewhere between the latter 3. Because I was as ignorant as you and thought that Michigan's uniforms and helmets meant a bare minimum of 7 wins. I didn't realize that the players under the helmet were far more important than the helmets themselves.
I don't have to go into this any further. There is plenty on this site that explains it. Lloyd Carr was a better coach for Michigan there is no question. But stop pretending like their situations were anything close to similar.
April 26th, 2011 at 12:12 PM ^
We should expect a drop off after getting a new coach. What he was addressing is that none of those reasons excuse a 3-9 season and the following lack of success. People's expectations should be tempered next year with Hoke, and I doubt they are, but no one will accept an equivalent 2-10 season from where we were last year.
April 26th, 2011 at 12:29 PM ^
so what should our record have been in 2008?
no one answers this question.
what would have been acceptable to you?
April 26th, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^
Analyzing our team.
We had a talented front four on defense. That was probably the only above average unit that Rodriguez inherited. The rest of the defense was decent at best.
On offense, we replaced our 4 year starters at QB and RB. We replaced our LT, the #1 overall pick in the NFL draft. We returned ONE starter. We lost two NFL wide receivers early and our back-up quarterback, because he wanted to be closer to home and didn't think he would fit in Rodriguez's system. Our skill players consisted of freshmen, RS freshmen and injury prone running backs. Our quarterbacks were Sheridan and Threet. In short, we were fielding a team incapable of moving the ball.
Our defense would have been okay that year had you given it either the 2009 or 2010 offense. It could have been okay if it had the talent level of Nebraska 2009, which basically dragged its offense kicking and screaming to within a field goal of a Big 12 title. But that's not the case. Instead, an average defense got no help from our abysmal offense and ended up worse than it was. Thus, Shafer was fired - because it had to be somebody's fault we were 3-9, not just the fact that the team was terrible - and Rodriguez makes a gigantic mistake that costs him his job and hires Robinson.
Could that team have won 5 games? Yeah. With a little more luck we could have beaten Utah or Northwestern or Notre Dame or Toledo. But was 3-9 realistic? Absolutely.
April 26th, 2011 at 12:41 PM ^
That would have been acceptable. Beating Toledo at home was the game that made all the difference. How about yourself? Was 3 games enough for you?
Also, you act like people wouldn't have gotten over the 3 win season had the following 2 years been better. Fielding the worst defense in school history in year 3 didn't cause people to just right on the RR train thinking, "I'm sorry I doubted you".
No, three wins was not enough. Eight and nine wins rarely feels like enough. But realistically, three wins seems about right for the 2008 team. With luck, that team could have maxed out at 6 wins. With no luck, we could have ended up 2-10.
I agree with you, we definitely should have beat Toledo at home. But let's be clear about this: that was two 3-9 teams slugging it out. Two terrible teams played and the better 3-9 team lost. In hindsight, it was an upset of miniscule proportions.
I'm in agreement with you: winning more the next two seasons would have fixed everything. But once again, please, go back and look at every other coaching change at a major school in the past decade. There is a reason that Charlie Weiss was so successful his first two years. There is a reason Tressel won a NC in his second year. The same with Urban Meyer. They were set up for success by the previous regime.
RR was basically starting from scratch. Take the wings off the helmet and no one panics after that first season, because everyone would realize that "Wow, he inherited an awful team." What can be said about Rodriguez is that he didn't handle that adversity well. At all. He himself believed the foolishness about the helmets and the reality is, while ignorant fans can believe in that mystique, the head coach cannot.
Let me ask you this: if it wasn't Michigan and you were talking about a random university, do you think Rich Rodriguez would have been fired for increasing his win total every year? Of course not. But since it's Michigan, people seem to think that the 2008 team was supposed to win 10 games and thus Rodriguez destroyed the program from year one.
How many games do you think Lloyd Carr would of won in 2008? The argument that RR should have kept his job because his win total was increasing every year is kind of dumb. I would hope so. A monkey could of coached the team in 2008 and won three games. RR did win seven games in his third season, but three of those wins were against UMASS, Bowling Green, and Indiana. They could of easily lost to UMASS and Indiana. The defense, special teams, and turnover margin wasn't showing any improvement after three seasons. Denard Robinson put up unheard of numbers the first half of the season, but then sputtered the second half of the season. I will say the offense was improving, but only averaged 16 points a game against the top 25. RR's team showed no impovement against the good teams in the Big Ten. The margin of defeat actually was getting bigger against teams like Iowa, PSU, OSU, and MSU. Dan Mullen made RR look like a fool in the Gator bowl. D-ROB was healthy and RR had two months to get his team prepared and they lost 51-14 to a average football team. Think about it. Michigan couldn't even compete with a average football team after year three with RR. I gaurantee Michigan will improve dramatically in turnover margin and defense in Hokes first year. The offense might slip a little, but Michigan will win at least 9 games and will keep it close and surprise a couple of big boys. How many games do you think Michigan would win in 2011 if RR was still the coach? I would predict between 4-6 if RR was still the coach.
would HAVE won, damnit!
/explosion.
April 26th, 2011 at 12:22 PM ^
Lloyd was vastly underrated while he was coach.
That's it.
April 26th, 2011 at 10:54 AM ^
The people that blame Lloyd Carr for the losing record of RR are about as dilusional as it gets. This whole thing is getting hilarious. Listen, I realize RR wasn't evil, I realize he got negative attention in the media, and I realize he didn't have all the support he could have from former players. That being said, he did a shitty job as head coach at Michigan. These people are in disbelief that they faught so hard and put some much energy into defending a coach that ultimately failed. Its hard for them to let go.
Comments