Mailbag! Princeton! Comment Count

Brian

Brian,

You are one of the few people I know who defends RR. I do as well. Do you think RR should have been fired? Do you think, if he should have been fired, that it should have happened after OSU game? Do you agree with me that if he had a vote of confidence before the season that RR would have hauled in a top ten class? Do you think with a new DC they would have been better next year with RR then with BH? Do you think DB treated RR poorly as I do? Seems to me that DB wanted RR out even before the season. I am so tired of hearing about toughness, as if that is something that can be taught and as if RR wouldn't teach it if it could be.

Peter from Horsham, PA

There are half-dozen posts discussing this but to reiterate: I thought Rodriguez had done enough after the regular season to keep his job if he fired Greg Robinson, hired an actual defensive coordinator, and never ran the 3-3-5 again unless that DC was Jeff Casteel, then rumored to be open to a move. It was a close thing.

The bowl debacle moved the needle for me to "should fire," but this was under the assumption that Michigan would introduce Jim Harbaugh at a press conference held thirty seconds after the last shovelful of dirt hit Rodriguez's grave. If Harbaugh didn't exist I probably would have gritted my teeth and said we should give Rodriguez one last chance. As you say, even with everything Rodriguez had locked up two five-star guys and was probably going to bring in a recruiting class on the edge of the top ten. The offense was a yardage/advanced metric juggernaut that seemed likely to start turning that into more points as it aged, cut down on the turnovers, added a five-star at the glaring weak spot, and hopefully got some more help from defense and special teams. The other two units were bound to improve from amazing low points, etc.

All the bad stuff is still there but that setup seems more likely to produce wins in 2011 than having Denard Robinson take snaps from under center so he can hand off to someone not named Demetrius Hart.

Does it matter, though? There's a large section of Michigan fandom that would read the above sentence and screech like pterodactyl. The national perception of the program was sinking and while the team figured to get better I'm not sure it was going to get better enough—beat OSU—to make a dent in that. What happens if you go 8-4 next year and lose to OSU by ten? Rodriguez gets pilloried and fired. Hoke gets a bag of popcorn to watch Rodriguez get pilloried. At some point Rodriguez's baggage takes him to the bottom of the sea no matter who tied it to his legs.

[As to the dead man walking meme: I heard it plenty before the bowl game, including from people I know and would have a good read on it, but didn't believe it. Since Michigan got obliterated we don't know. If they'd lost by misfortune or won and Rodriguez still got fired it would be different. IME, Rodriguez was gone. This is just based off Brandon's performance in the press conference.]

Brian
I'll admit my knowledge of APR is not very good, but does oversigning not negatively affect a school's APR?  If kids are leaving the program/school does that not affect the APR?

Scott

So we've overloaded the language here and "oversigning" now stands for two different things:

  • signing more kids than you can enroll by going over the 25 cap, and
  • signing more kids than you can pay for by going over the 85 cap.

In the former case, signing a kid to a LOI and then shipping him off to JUCO when he doesn't qualify does not affect your APR. Not that it should since you haven't had the chance to educate the player.

In the latter case, the answer is yes… hypothetically. In practice the NCAA has provided boatloads of waivers [scroll down]. They're plentiful enough that Kentucky basketball maintained a 979(!) APR despite having a graduation success rate* of 31%. Hypothetically, a school on the 925 borderline is graduating 60% of its players.

What are these waivers? Well, medical hardships, for one.

chartgo

Those don't count against you because the player is still in school. It makes sense that they wouldn't… until someone starts beating the rules into profane shapes. There are plenty others that are less obvious but no one really knows what they are.

This invites questions about how the hell Michigan failed to take advantage of any of these when players started leaving the program left and right and Michigan put up an ugly 870-something. I don't know but assume it's a combination of Rodriguez failing to understand the gap between WVU and Michigan academics—though he did seem to emphasize it—and the massive attrition that went so far beyond even Alabama's rampant axe that Michigan couldn't get close to the 85 number. I'm not entirely sure but I don't think walk-ons count, so when Michigan's running around with 70 scholarship players and one of them flunks out that hurts way more than Alabama sending a guy in good-for-Alabama standing to South Georgia.

*[as opposed to the federal rate, the GSR does not count transfers in good standing/early entries against you.]

File under Rich Rodriguez will have a job by then and will pursue this kid with a force unknown to mankind:

The AD at Southfield is one of my closest friends and assures me that he has a freshman football player with what is perhaps the greatest name ever.  I give you Lion King Conaway!

And file under testimonial:

I’m a junior in high school, and I recently got my first semester grades. A while back in my Government class, I got an extra point on a study guide because I wrote “which, duh.” In my notes (I was talking about how being liberal/conservative affects voting dem/rep, and I guess my teacher thought it was funny), which is something that I picked up from reading mgoblog. I finished that class with a 93%, which is just barely an A, and I finished the semester with a 4.0. So, reading mgoblog may have been what pushed me from an A- to an A, giving me a 4.0.

Know that if I get into Princeton, I’m giving at least some of the credit to you and mgoblog.

Just don't send a bill.

Comments

ironman4579

February 23rd, 2011 at 2:33 PM ^

Well, we can play this game.  Michigan beat ND by 4 on a last minute drive after their starting QB was out for half the game.  Navy dominated ND by 18 points with ND's starter in there.  SDSU crushed Navy by 21. 

And again, SDSU's defense may not have been able to hold up to Michigan's offense, but there's no chance Michigan's D holds up to SDSU's offense.  That UConn game was a mirage.  Michigan did well against the run, but that game would have been alot closer if UConn's receivers didn't drop about 8 and their QB didn't miss wide open receivers for huge yardage with no pressure on numerous occasions. 

BigBlue02

February 23rd, 2011 at 6:02 PM ^

That's kind of my point. RichRod averaged more wins per year against teams with winning records in his 3 years here at Michigan than Brady Hoke has his entire career. Give RichRod 8 years anywhere and I gurantee he gets more than 11 wins against teams with winning records. But it doesn't really matter anymore. I am still going to be skeptical of the hire until he wins some games for the maize and blue.

M-Wolverine

February 23rd, 2011 at 6:43 PM ^

In totally non-comparable situations? How many teams with winning records did they play? (Because invariable a .500 MAC team is under .500 overall due to OOC schedule). And how many over .500 teams did each school beat win in the years before the respective coaches got there? I bet at Ball State it's similar...at SDS worse. At Michigan we know it was better pre-Rich. I would bet WV historically was fairly comparable. Maybe a bit less.
<br>
<br>The point isn't that you're skeptical; it's that you throw out meaningless stats as a dig because you're not skeptical, you're hostile.

BigBlue02

February 23rd, 2011 at 7:32 PM ^

Have you actually read anything that would make you think I am hostile? That is laughably ridiculous. My point was that Hoke didn't and still doesn't have a very good resume. He has coached for 8 years. I would think in that amount of time he would have beaten more than 11 teams with winning records. He has a losing record as a head coach. These aren't really up for debate. For everyone who wants to whine and cry about RichRod's record being the reason he got fired, just understand you look a little ridiculous saying anyone that is skeptical of a head coach with a losing record is "hostile." Sorry I upset your delicate sensibilities but myself, as well as a large number of people, are going to be skeptical with the hiring considering his best attribute as a coach is that he is a "Michigan Man." If and when he wins games, I will be less skeptical. It isn't as though I am going to root against him. Jesus Christ take it easy.

M-Wolverine

February 24th, 2011 at 1:45 PM ^

It seems you're the one flipping out. I'm just pointing out logical inconsistencies. Saying you're skeptical doesn't make you hostile. Your continual posting of knocks, often without provocation, of facts both well know or inconsequential makes you seem hostile. If the vast majority of your posts weren't "Wahhhhh, Rich shouldn't have been fired; look how bad Hoke is!!", you might not come off as hostile.
<br>
<br>You can wait and see; that's all any of us can do, and that's the only time we'll know anything. But this need to point out negatives over and over about our new coach may not mean you're rooting for us to fail, but it certainly comes off as hostile towards said coach.

CRex

February 23rd, 2011 at 2:32 PM ^

One of those "Oh god, shit, shit, no, no, no" games that we just manage to pull out in the 4th.  Very close at half.  We trail in the 3rd, catch up in the 4th and need some insane run by Denard to get the winning drive into the end zone.  We sure as hell wouldn't be kicking a winning FG as time expired.  We win by 4 points and but can't really savor the win because it felt like dodging a massive bullet.

Hoke's team comes out looking the better coached and more complete team (including the ability to play defense), but we win due to some well timed beast mode from Martin and Denard going into full dilithium mode.  

MIdocHI

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:19 PM ^

RR deserved to go.  He did not win, period. It is painfully clear that Casteel deserves a great deal more credit for the WVU success than he has received.  What is amazing to me is the loyalty Casteel has shown to them considering that he has been passed over as Head Coach twice now.  Other than Casteel if he would leave after this second snub, NO quality defensive coordinator would have come into the situation with RR twisting in the wind as a must-win-or-else final fourth year.

TrppWlbrnID

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:20 PM ^

all in all, it was getting frustrating to have to carry around a list of excuses, valid or not, for why the michigan football team could not win as much as they historically had, whether or not they were at the most recent time. 

we have now compiled all of those excuses into one: rodriguez.

tk47

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:28 PM ^

Anybody else happy to not see "Yep, these are my readers" after that last e-mail? 

I used to like Simmons but I now find him irritating.  Glad Brian took that in a different direction.

ironman4579

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:26 PM ^

This argument is getting tired, but I did have to throw something out there.  This blog and posters on it that supported RR constantly talk about "improving turnovers" and "regression to the mean" when talking about them, as if it was going to happen just because the team was more experienced.  Even in today's post, Brian says:

" The offense was a yardage/advanced metric juggernaut that seemed likely to start turning that into more points as it aged, cut down on the turnovers  ...."

The problem is, the evidence says is wasn't likely.  In fact, far from it.  In 7 seasons at WVU and 3 seasons at Michigan, RR's teams had less than 10 fumbles lost in a season twice.  Yes, that's it.  Two times. And in one of those, they still fumbled the ball 19 times.   And no, they were not his last two seasons at WVU, when he had his most experienced and talented teams.  In 10 seasons as a head coach, his teams have averaged 12 lost fumbles a season.

His teams play sloppy and are prone to fumbling.  Even though Denard likely would have cut down on his INT's, you're still talking about the likely outcome being at least one turnover per game on average.  The odds of cutting down turnovers by any great number were tiny, at best.

I'm sorry, but it's time to put it to rest.

 

 ...

AeonBlue

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:31 PM ^

This is a prime example of what the last 3 years have made us as a fan-base. I think the only consensus we're reaching is:

If (RichRodDiscussion)

{

     BURN_ALL = true;

}

Brian, please incorporate this code into MGoBlog.

Wolverine 73

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:33 PM ^

I thought we had called an end to rehashing this RR firing issue.  I think everyone on this site has heard all of the arguments, pro and con, ad nauseum.  I think everyone on this site has his or her own opinion.  I doubt anyone's opinion is likely to change until we see at least a couple years of the new regime.  It's over.  Let it go.

AnthonyThomas

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:41 PM ^

Like Brian pointed out, RR wasn't going to survive another season without 9-10 wins, and it's hard to enivsion 9-10 wins next year, no matter the coach. Even so, perhaps RR should have gotten the chance to prove that theory right or wrong. I don't know the answer and I've moved on from the issue enitrely, but it's still a poignant question to explore. It's likely though that the program was going to have to be realligned substantially after next season if RR was retained for another year. Delaying that change for another season isn't worth a top ten recruiting class in my eyes.

Ziff72

February 23rd, 2011 at 1:42 PM ^

Anybody want to make a bet with me?   I'm going to make a post up in a couple days about something generic, but in my example I will use 2 letters.... RR.   I set my comments at over/under 100 and the thread spinning out of control rehashing the same shit.  

I've turned over my sword to B. Hoke at the treaty.  I'm done.  I fought the good fight, I lost.  You will never convince me, I will never convince you.   I wish it would end, but it won't.

Unfortunately this will be rehashed every day next fall depending on the outcome.   I pray the offense is amazing even though, I know morons will say,  see RR was an overrated loser.   If the offense tanks it will give me nothing but pain and then my RR guys will say,  see they ruined it.   It will be ugly next year regardless,  just wait.

gsimmons85

February 23rd, 2011 at 2:57 PM ^

but frost was not going to come to michigan..

 

and....

 

Thanks for the advice, but that's not who I am. I stand up for all things meaningless or not. I was once yelled at for sitting on a new couch (I paid for) with dirty clothes on. I never sat on that couch again. Not for watching tv or for family pictures or any other reason. I never sat on that couch, never will.

 

 

this was a joke right?