somehow we're only 124th
Reader Interaction Day
I've always wanted to have the kind of blog where I can post something like "9:00 AM Open Thread," watch it fill up with hundreds of comments, and then post "9:15 AM Open Thread," just because the pageviews must be immense. We aren't there yet, but the blog is getting enough traffic/external opinion that there's a fair chance this upcoming enterprise will not be totally embarrassing.
The enterprise? It's akin to that featured in the BlogPoll roundtables. I'll throw out some questions, you answer to the best of your ability, I round up the general sentiment and highlight any bon mots that set the courtesans a-tittering (hur hur hur). I'll throw in my point of view as well during the roundup. If the comments are filled with things like...
Cricket | Posted at 10:28 AM
...then we will pretend this never happened and any reminders of its existence will be shot. That's life.
Anyway, two parts submitted by readers:
Part I: The Man, The Myth, The Dude Who Tried To Run For The Orange Bowl's Entire First Half
James Scuccimarri asks what's with the sourpuss act in regards to Mike DeBord:
I just wanted to point out that despite your seeming dislike of Mike Debord, as Michigans OC he only lost five games in three seasons and he never lost a bowl game. Now these are facts which I'm sure you knew. I make the point only because I wonder what your actual concerns about him are and if you truly believe our offensive line could be any worse under his tutelage than Terry Malone's? I know that game is changing and that is a fact Michigan is slow to accept, but a running game is a running game and I will take whatever we can get. I'm just another Ann Arbor yokel who despite his own best efforts cannot quell growing feelings of optimism. So if you should have time feel free to crush my happy-go-lucky-things-will-be-looking-up-by-springtime-attitude with a solid dose of reality. thank you
Well? Why does everyone hate the DeBordster?
Part II: It's Different, I Give You That
Mike Brennan asks an interesting question I haven't seen get a full treatment anywhere else:
As Lloyd Carr has reassembled his staff throughout the last several weeks, I've begun wondering what others think about finally having a defensive coordinator that's not also a position coach. I can't say with any certainty that Herrmann's ability to function in either of his roles suffered because of the two sets of responsibilities, but I have a difficult time imagining that it helped. As the years progressed and the defense and linebackers regressed, I became perplexed that he never hired a full-time linebackers coach. It seems to me that doing so would allow him time to take more of a macro-level look at the defense and conceptualize ways to use the whole unit to stop, say, a mobile quarterback.
So is Ron English doing himself and the team a favor by relinquishing responsibilities for coaching the DBs despite the fact that he did a good job in that role? I'm sure there are plenty of cases of successful coordinators that also coached a position group, but I'm wondering if you have a take on the matter. For that matter, have you seen anyone address it anywhere else? Is there a medication I can take for this ailment that has me deeply pondering, in February, the dynamics of the one-day-old Michigan coaching staff?
What say you? After the revamp, Michigan is down one special teams coordinator. In his stead is former Wisconsin DBs coach Ron Lee, who has been assigned to just the corners. Is this a worthwhile trade-off? Will it have any material effect?
If "forget this ever happened" does not come to pass, expect a roundup-type thing in the middle of next week.