Three And Out Q&A: Part Two Comment Count

Brian

image5

[ED: Make that three parts. Coming Friday: “What does ‘Michigan Man’ mean anymore,” and “What’s next?”

If you live under a rock, John Bacon was embedded in the program the last three years and has written a book about this. It is called Three and Out.]

First, thanks to everyone for your interest, including some 400 readers asking more than a thousand questions. (And big thanks also to Brian for sorting through all those questions and combining them into the most popular categories.) I was not surprised to see they were very smart and often got beyond the surface of the situation, frequently forcing me to re-think the whole thing, when I thought I was long done thinking another thought about the last three years.

 

3. Were the "fit" issues real?

One of the central questions that came up in various forms was the “Fit, or Lack Thereof,” as Brian reduced it.

I’ll start by working backward, from the final seconds of Rodriguez’s regime. On January 5, 2011, the assistant coaches, staffers, and yours truly were all sitting in the coaches’ meeting room, when Rodriguez walked in, laid a file down on the table, and said, “Well, as expected, they fired me.” He later added, “It was a bad fit here from the start.”

And in many ways it was. I’m not certain it had to be.

People who were living in Ann Arbor in 1968 can tell you about the last outsider to take the reigns: Bo Schembechler. His predecessor, Bump Elliott, was a former Michigan All-American who was smart and humble, with an urbane, conservative manner. He didn’t yell at his players, he rarely swore, and if you said you were hurt, that was enough for him.

When Schembechler’s crew arrived with their wives sporting beehive hairdos and stiletto heels, some Michigan insiders took to calling them “The Ohio Mafia.” The players quickly learned the new guy yelled, swore, grabbed your facemask and literally kicked you in the ass. If you were merely hurt, not injured, but didn’t want to practice, you got left behind when the team plane took off.

Instead of turning his back on the new regime, however, Elliott embraced them, hosting parties for their families and introducing them to important people around town. He did not allow players to come to his office in the Athletic Department to complain about the new guy, either. And when Schembechler delivered what today would be an unforgivable comment about changing “Michigan’s silly helmets,” Elliott, Don Canham, Fritz Crisler and Bob Ufer quietly taught him Michigan tradition.

And, to Schembechler’s credit, he was wise enough to listen, and even seek out their help.

When Michigan upset Ohio State that year, they gave Bump Elliott the game ball, and there was not a dry eye in the room.

That’s Michigan at its best. The last three years were not.

Rodriguez had never been to Ann Arbor before his first press conference, and it was clear he had not prepared, nor been coached – a noted contrast to Brady Hoke’s introduction, when his rehearsed lines won over many doubters.

To cross this chasm, neither Michigan nor Rodriguez did enough, soon enough. I believe Rodriguez should have learned more about Michigan faster than he did, but I also believe he received little guidance. Readers will likely be struck by how often Rodriguez invoked Michigan’s traditions – the helmet, the banner, the rivals – when he talked to his team. And he could have helped his cause by reaching out to sympathetic Michigan groups like the M-Club, filled with loyal supporters who could have helped him when trouble hit.

Both sides of this marriage could have learned a lot from the other. Rodriguez could have gained the kind of polish Michigan usually applies to its players and coaches, much as it did for the initially rough-hewn Schembechler. And Michigan’s famed arrogance – occasionally succumbing to rank snobbism during the Rodriguez regime – could have been softened with some of Rodriguez’s down-home friendliness.

I suspect both sides have learned a great deal since, manifest in Michigan’s almost universal support for Brady Hoke. He isn’t exactly Bump Elliott, either, but he’s been accepted as a true “Michigan Man.”

(More on that Friday.)

 

4. What was so hard about the transition?

Everyone knows the transition was poorly handled – but it was actually much worse than you think, marked by a lack of preparation, communication, and transparency, not to mention severe undermining of the process and the candidates. It resulted in the famously unified Michigan football family fracturing before Martin named Rodriguez Michigan’s next coach – and it only got worse afterward. For his part, Rodriguez naively assumed he was walking into the same program Schembechler had created.

Rodriguez also made a crucial miscalculation: He honestly believed that the bigger the program, the less time the head coach has to deal with peripheral duties like connecting with former players, alumni and fans – when the opposite is true. The head football coach at Michigan, Texas or Alabama, is, in a very real sense, the leader of that school.

That said, it’s worth remembering: Michigan was hiring Rodriguez, not the other way around. It is the employer’s job to set their employees up for success, and at that central task, Michigan failed badly.

But I still believe that nothing would have helped more than Bo Schembechler continuing to lead the family. When he passed away, Michigan lost more than a coach. It lost its spiritual leader – and five years later he has still not been replaced.

If there were any doubts before that Bo did more than anyone to keep Michigan football at the top, even long after he retired, his absence erased them for me.

 

5. PRETTY MUCH THE Q: Who does John Bacon blame for the last three years?

I know: you want to know what happened to the defense, and who is most to blame for the disappointing last three seasons.

It’s not hard to identify a handful of contributing factors, all of which were necessary, but none sufficient to guarantee failure. We have a dozen variables in both cases, but no control group, so it’s ultimately impossible to be completely certain what, precisely, was the most important straw.

Nonetheless, if I don’t feed the bulldog something I’ll probably get my hand bitten off, so here goes.

Let’s start with the defense. When people ask if the shockingly poor performance was the result of inheriting weak talent, transfers, a stretch of freak injuries, youth or coaching, I say: Yes. It is simply impossible for your defense to drop to 68th then 82nd then 110th without all those factors playing a part. But the hardest to tease out is coaching.

We do know a few things, however. Failing to get Jeff Casteel was much bigger than probably anyone realized at the time. Bill Martin failed to pony up a few more bucks and a guaranteed contract to get him, while Rodriguez—who would not come to Michigan without Mike Barwis and the promise of a million-dollar weight room—was apparently willing to leave without his defensive coordinator. If he could do it again, he would probably insist he wasn’t coming to Michigan without his trusted defensive coordinator.

After that, Michigan never gave Rodriguez sufficient bait to get his top choice to replace Casteel. When Scott Shafer and Greg Robinson arrived in Ann Arbor, they inherited a staff of strangers who had been loyal to Rodriguez for years. Shafer and Robinson are both decent guys who’ve been successful elsewhere, but it clearly didn’t work at Michigan.

At the end of the day, however, the head coach is responsible for his team’s performance, and that obviously includes defense.

Likewise, there was no shortage of variables contributing to Rodriguez’s demise. The long list includes: the horrible transition; his Honeymoon from Hell (including overblown PR problems over buy-outs, departing players, and even shredded papers); his 3-9 debut; the Free Press feature and subsequent NCAA investigation; the string of four crucial losses in the middle of 2009 and three in middle of 2010; and the final Bust. Obviously, some of those are on Michigan, and some on Rodriguez.

The Rodriguez reign was fatally damaged by two main causes: the harm done by detractors inside and outside the program, and his own missed opportunities – from PR problems to those seven lost match points in 2009 and 2010, any one of which would probably have been enough to deliver him to a new era when he could focus more on football than survival. In particularly, I believe the 2009 game against Illinois, which blew up when Michigan failed to score on a first and goal from the one-yard line, marked the Continental Divide of the Rodriguez Era.

So, it’s not true that Rodriguez had no chance. He had seven. It is true, however, that his chances were greatly diminished by detractors inside and outside the program.

Assigning blame essentially boils down to weighing the factors above. But on one crucial point – really, the most important of all – there is absolutely no shade of gray whatsoever. Rodriguez, his staff, and his players (after the 2008 team graduated) worked extraordinarily hard to win every game.

Some powerful insiders, however, were working just as hard to see them fail. That is not a matter of degree. It’s a clear-cut, black-and-white difference – something I have never seen in all my years researching Michigan’s long and admirable history. But the people who suffered the most were the least to blame: the players.

As former offensive line coach Greg Frey told me, while driving to Mott Hospital one night, “I think about guys like Moosman and Ortmann and Brandon Graham. Man, those guys work their asses off. They care about their teammates. They stayed. They get pushed aside in all this, and that’s all right? That’s sad.”

When Angelique Chengelis of The Detroit News asked Ryan Van Bergen how it felt to see hundreds of alums returning to support the new coach, he said, “You know, it’s kind of unsettling… It’s great they’re back, but it’s kind of, where have they been the last two or three years? We’ve still be wearing the same helmets since they were here.”

Who deserves how much blame can be debated. Who was working against the Wolverines, and who suffered the most because of it, cannot be calculated.

Comments

M-Wolverine

October 19th, 2011 at 10:33 AM ^

But trying to fairly answer your questions, best I can...

I would have hired Rich. I would have handled everything after it differently, and before as well, if I was Martin. I wouldn't be on boats, and I wouldn't be in a panic, and making a hire after an interview in an airport, but after long discussions. These discussions would have involved having him meeting with Lloyd, and having him on the same page, rather than dismissing him.  It would have been finding out (and maybe going another way) if Rich was willing to retain some of the previous staff.  Sure, offensively it's a different system, so he needs his own guys, but defensively he had no plan, so there's no harm in having guys who can help him adjust to the Big Ten. Ron English wasn't a possibility, because you can't have a guy who applied for your job on your staff, but if handled early enough, he might have been retained. But guys like Bedford and others, not even replacing Rich's guys, but taking the open spots that he went outside the WV staff to get anyway.  And find some ex-Michigan guy (probably not Mattison, but there are other candidates) for the DC job. Or make someone like Bedford DC and find another ex-Michigan guy to plug into whatever the Rich guys didn't have covered. Yeah, you'd like to let him just put in his own staff, but obviously he wasn't the best judge of defensive coach talent, so you might as well had smoothed things over with old school guys like Carr, and in turn made Rich seem like less of an outsider. And certainly would have helped recruiting locally, which is not only political, but might have helped the overall talent level by getting a few more talented players who were easier to pick locally. Or at least keep those doors open...or prevent them from being hostile, in any regard.

Having not read it, I can't say Bacon was dishonest...and my impression is he's not. I wouldn't even say he's "shading" it. For sure not intentionally. I think he's presenting a one sided story, because that's who's he's made a connection with, contactwise and emotionally. The fact that the defense (even brought back up in this post) gets only mild attention seems like a huge omission. Sure, Casteel might have made things easier, but LOTS of coaches (including our current one) can't bring whole staffs with them, and there isn't the political backbiting and cohension disaster there was with Rich's defensive staff. How a book that can (supposedly) concentrate on all the politics, and brush over the internal staff politics, which most likely had a lot more on field effect seems odd.

I really doubt everything Lloyd did was defensible, either on field or off.  Lloyd is a guy who holds a grudge. Look how he got the job; check out the press conference where he gets it, and how he feels about the guys he thinks screwed over his friend, Gary. I think the whole Bump story is a false parallel...because while Bo after the fact told how he had to whip the team into shape, at the time he wasn't  going out (in a different, non-instant 24/7 media environment) blaming Bump for all his woes, and discrediting the staff and the program. He may have thought the football needed an overhaul, but he valued Michigan. I doubt he ever said things "not after I got here...or what I had to work with"; he talked about how "that was the nail YOST used!", propping up the deficiencies. Bump for that was certainly grateful, and returned the favor. It's a two way street. Bo saw as an outsider you can go in and change things, but you don't devalue where you're at. That's in the book Bacon wrote.

And I think a lot of it comes from the people around them both. The part shown from the 3-way meeting has Lloyd saying stop having your people talk about me, and Rich basically saying it's beyond his control...and I'm sure Lloyd doing the same. People who liked either guy, and were on either guy's "side" were saying bad things about them, and less Rich and Lloyd themselves (though I'm sure it went on, to some extent), and because they weren't on the same page to begin with, they didn't actively try and stop their camps. Because one thing I'm amazed at is that it seems even though Bacon heard all this stuff about Rich, he never heard Rich or Rich's guys disparage Lloyd or the players behind closed doors...because he'd have been the only guy behind the scenes NOT to hear of that stuff.

If they're on the same page, maybe a lot of the problems don't happen, and Lloyd acts a little more out of character and comes out and says more. The whole "never said anything" is a myth. There's video of him supporting the program; there's the in game interview with Brandstatter. Frankly, he talked as much about the program going in the right direction then as he has now, with Hoke, one of his guys, in charge. Which is not much.

And the last thing I'd do is realize how Michigan works...lose, and you're going to get burned. I'd have let Rich know he'd have time to build a world beater, but the goal was to win to the best of your abilities every year, and not act like you're building a team that won 5 games over the last 3 years. It's about the players, and the seniors. Do what you can to maximize their experience. Do what you said you would when you say "I like winning too much not to adapt" and "a WV fan said you better not go 3-9 at Michigan like you did at WV. Uh huh".  Don't worry about the next big guy, work on keeping your current players, and let the existing players know you're going to do everything possible to have them go out the best they can as seniors. Because it's really about them (and for you, you won't have the weaker of them turning on you).  And for the fans, try try try to get to that 6th win...because man, if bowls streaks start going down, we're in trouble.  And you'll have time to slowly integrate your system.  And I'll try not to do stupid stuff to get pushed out of the department so I'm around to make sure you have that time.

So, I think there are people involved. Damned people. Martin, who knew how to make money, but was far from a people person. Lloyd, who takes offense and holds grudges. Rich, who came in cocky and arrogant, and wasn't afraid to say so.  And people around playing game, that made for a toxic situation. But I still think in almost any situation, a lot of that gets smoothed over by winning. People learn and accept...cocky seems justified...and people are too happy over the last win to care about the other stuff.  And while things can certainly be made harder, I still think coaching and players have a lot more to do with winning and losing football games. And bad decisions there (mostly on defense, but some recruiting errors) caused the horrid record far more than he said-she said, and that's why Rich isn't coach here anymore. 

And it has little to do with "I told you so's" about Hoke. I like the guy a lot. I think he's a good coach. I'm impressed with his recruiting and the staff he hired (best coordinators as a group I think we've had since at least Moeller and McCartney).  And I feel confident he'll carry on the Michigan thing of doing it the right way. Now he has to win (which I'm pretty sure Harbaugh or Miles would do, but not so sure about the other stuff). And if he doesn't, he's not going to last more than 3 years either. MSU next year is a HUGE game for him, because that one at home, with all the motivation from this year...not sure you come back from 0-2 vs. State...unless you're beating OSU every year.  And it has little to do with he's "better" than Rich (or not). Just that a change was needed, and I like who we got from it.  I wanted to see Rich have a shot. I wasn't sure it would work after the end of last season. And after the bowl, I had my doubts he could make it work. Because the recruiting was going to fall apart, it'd be a full year of REALLY hot seat, and it wasn't fair to him or his family either, because that scrutiny would be hell. And if HE had lost to MSU last weekend (as we probably would have)? It was best for everyone to get out of it. But it's not something to be proud or happy about. It's a sad day any time Michigan has to fire a coach, and not have them just retire. But for the future of the program, to not struggle in recruiting and have a dip turn into a down period, it probably had to be done. I take 0 glee in it, and wish Rich well. Like the guy. But I don't see him as mistake free either, (and even the biggest Rich backers say it presents him in a REALLY good light), and while the mass media likes to paint him as the only bad guy, the side media seems to do the opposite...he was blameless and a victim.  And I don't really see anyone ever presenting the nuances and the gray areas, the middle ground. But that's pretty much true about everything, not just Michigan Football.

Hope that answers your questions.

rederik

October 18th, 2011 at 2:11 PM ^

What legacy was more cherished to the Univeristy of Michigan than its 32-year streak of continuous bowl games?

20 years from now, we still won't be able to have that streak back. Hopefully, we'll be at 20 by then. But that streak, which is something that ALWAYS made it way onto our student t-shirts (a sign, to me, of how much we cherished that record), ended under Martin's watch. THAT is Martin's legacy.

If you think upgraded soccer and softball facilities, as well as a balanced budget, outweigh our leading position in the NCAA for continuous bowl appearances, then we simply have no common ground.

But there's nothing short-sighted about holding the man accountable to do the job he was hired for. There's a word to describe his performance. That word is failure.

profitgoblue

October 18th, 2011 at 3:09 PM ^

I understand you're perturbed.  Add about 15 years to your experience of Michigan participating in bowl games and you'll match my level of upsetment at missing bowl games in 2008 and 2009.  That said, as I mentioned above, all of the "fallout" comes from the single decision to hire or not hire Rodriguez.  And from an HR standpoint, the hire was arguably justified as well as strong.  It just didn't turn out that way.  And, for the record, I would not have been happy about the hiring of Schiano just as you were unhappy about Martin not taking that call (and I think I would have been justified seeing as how Rutgers has disappeared off the radar the past few years).

rederik

October 18th, 2011 at 4:22 PM ^

Sorry, didn't mean to imply I wanted Schiano. (I definitely did not.) I probably threw that in too quickly--it was just intended to be an add-on re: Martin generally failing. (Being: one, offering the job to a hot-right-now but generally lower-tier/Big East coach like Schiano at all, and two, doing it in such a way [warning: pure, baseless speculation ahead] that even someone like Greg Schiano actually has the balls to say no to the head coaching job at Michigan. I'd be willing to concede, though, that latter aspect might speak more of the broader problems we had at the time, though, and less about Martin himself.)

I see your point about the evidence available at the time. I just feel like Martin kind of got away with completely bungling the transition, the entormity of which I've already described ad naseum, and that if guys like me who remember it aren't a little bit of a dick about the subject, he'll get away with it and be remembered fondly. I know, I know, he did other things decently. But ultimately, you asked earlier if the mistake was unforgivable. In my book, it was. But I understand it isn't in your book, and that's fine too. I'm just glad to share my two cents on the subject, and am genuinely looking foward to the book. (Wanting a Rosenber-esque tearful "I hate that they hate me [on Amazon]" moment is too much to hope for with Martin, so I'm rambling in its place.)

rederik

October 18th, 2011 at 4:34 PM ^

Also: an interesting flash from the past, with Brian's perspective on the whole "Fire Martin for his performance as AD in the this coaching search before the coaching search is even done? Probably, yes" debate. (Although the fact that Hoke is also brought up as a non-option next to Ron English is kind of funny given how things ultimately turned out.)

http://mgoblog.com/content/why

MGlobules

October 18th, 2011 at 12:40 PM ^

that there are some sane people in the world, including John Bacon and Mr. Hoke. And for anyone who hasn't noticed, this is a huge boost for mgoblog (absolute must-reading for anyone interested in UM football). Congratulations, Brian. 

CRex

October 18th, 2011 at 12:42 PM ^

I've always wondered if part our problems came from the fact we were used to Bo, Mo, and Carr running the entire program.  No one ever said no to those coaches (post Bo establishing himself as a Michigan man of course).  If word got out that anyone, the AD, the Provost, the President, etc had told Bo "No" on something like a coaching hire, a weight room upgrade, etc, that person would have been dead.  Unceremiously ejected from the University at the least.  

So when things like Casteel didn't happen, we blamed RR.  Because to us the Athletic Director exsisted solely to fetch drinks to the football coach.  So back in 2008 it seemed alien that the AD wouldn't give the coach the money to go get the DC he wanted.  If Boannounced "I want Vince Lombardi" as our DC, it would have been the AD's job to go get Life Sciences  a cloning facility, not to tell Bo no.  So much of this seems to center around us blaming RR for not getting things, when in reality it was Martin being stingy.  There is of course also blame on RR for not asserting himself more and publically pushing back when Martin wouldn't cut Casteel a contract.

M-Wolverine

October 18th, 2011 at 12:57 PM ^

Bo was notoriously underpaid. Canham made Martin look like he was on a Vegas bender. Mo and Lloyd were always underpaid too. Lloyd used to give some of his raises and extra money to his assistants (Bo too). They have always been notoriously cheap, and believed people should work "for the honor of working at Michigan". Yeah, Bill was a little pathological about it (turning off lights in offices and telling staff to take the stairs, not the elevators), but it's not like they didn't all deal with it. The difference was they won, even with those restrictions. Maybe it's more to their credit than blame on anyone else, but it is what it is.

CRex

October 18th, 2011 at 1:16 PM ^

The underpaid thing is very true.  However we compensated with stability and loyalty.  People could always come home if they failed (ex: DeBord) and firings were uncommon.  We often eased people into adminstrative jobs or something, as opposed to booting them out the front door.  

The issue surrounding Casteel is that we definitely underpaying and we offered no stability.  Actually we offered less since we weren't offering Casteel a nice garaunteed contract.  So it was in his best interest to stay at WVU where he had a resevoir of goodwill built up.  Coming to Michigan was the same pay for less security.  That is what I really blame Martin for.  It's fine if he wants to keep the pay scale low, but if you do that you need to offer security.  Hire people into the Michigan family and make it clear we take care of our own.  Not "Hey, I'll match your pay for one year, no other assurances."

It's how staffing for the rest of the U works.  I could make more in the private industry (and I've considered it), but the benefits package here is awesome.  So the retirement funding matching, the really cheap but good medical plan, and the insane amount of vacation days keeps me around.  

M-Wolverine

October 18th, 2011 at 1:54 PM ^

Yeah, technically we didn't even "fire" Bump or Mo...but, well...that's why the whole Rich affair was sad.  It was admitted failure. On ALL sorts of levels. I think the attitude toward Casteel and others was the same as they had always done. I don't think DeBord ever had any more "security" than anyone on Rich's staff..other than a head coach who would stand behind him (for better or for worse). Which was a big problem for Rich too, with his defensive staff. Who knows how those other guys would have worked out (particularly the first one) if he was able to bring in his own guys, his own system?  Mattison didn't really get to do that either, but the head coach and coordinators were on the same page from day 1.  And I think where Martin is coming from (which doesn't necessarily excuse him from it) is that you coach at Michigan and you're more likely to become a head coach elsewhere, it's more high profile, and there are those perks and such. Whether that's an accurate view or not is hard to really say, but I'm sure in his mind it was true.  So you're making the same amount, and you're not really protected if you do badly, but if you succeed you are doing it on the biggest stage and people will come after you.  Not saying that equalizes any decision, or that Casteel made a bad choice, just the lines the Michigan Athletic Department has been telling themselves for years.

gbdub

October 18th, 2011 at 2:35 PM ^

Was Bo always underpaid? I could be totally off but I thought he was brought in at a reasonable salary given his history and the usual pay at the time, but was never given raises commensurate with the quickly rising salaries elsewhere. The infrequent addition of new blood into the staff up through the Carr years (and the loyalty to Bo, who didn't ask for much) probably meant that the pay scale was rarely recalibrated to match the rest of college football. Could this have contributed to the sticker shock of having to hire a 21st century coaching staff at 21st century pay scales? That is, was Martin, instead of saying "is X a reasonable price for a DC in 2008", saying to himself "why on earth should I double what I'm currently paying for a DC"?

M-Wolverine

October 18th, 2011 at 3:07 PM ^

Was that it was for a ridiculous amount of money, way more than he was getting paid by the University. Actually, for most of Bo's career, he basically worked under a verbal contract, with nothing in writing.  But yes, the salary explosion (at least the first...it got worse more recently) started taking place and passing him by. And continued on.

And for the most part, their facilities sucked. Everyone knows the "we had better stuff at Miami" counter-speech, but really, even Schembechler Hall was bordering on outdated pretty quick. It's only until just recently we've been anywhere close.

quigley.blue

October 18th, 2011 at 1:00 PM ^

And one that I tried to make on a lacrosse thread.  5 years ago, Schembechler Hall would have exploded into a firey pit of rage had anyone suggested painting red(!) Lacrosse lines on the outdoor practice field.  Things are changing now, fast, and time (or an ex-Dominos CEO) will tell whether the changes are accepted, and which ones stay.

Michigan Arrogance

October 18th, 2011 at 12:51 PM ^

Some powerful insiders, however, were working just as hard to see them fail. That is not a matter of degree. It’s a clear-cut, black-and-white difference – something I have never seen in all my years researching Michigan’s long and admirable history.

 

Who was working against the Wolverines, and who suffered the most because of it, cannot be [debated].

 

Are names named in the book? I want names. Seriously.

 

 

And preferably addresses, to same me some time. kthxby

Section 1

October 18th, 2011 at 11:09 PM ^

got it one of two ways:

A) Friends of John and media people were given advance copies, several weeks ago.  That would be Brian Cook, other sportswriters, reviewers, etc.

B) On the Thursday night before the Northwestern game, there was a gathering of the U-M Club of Chicago, and they sold (and John signed) several boxes of books.  Estimates of the number of people there are around 200+. 

I got mine via B).  I damn near took my copy to Ryan Field with me; I couldn't put it down. 

steve sharik

October 18th, 2011 at 2:38 PM ^

Once those names are made public, the people attached to them should be banned from the University of Michigan for life. 

Their behavior was reprehensible and indefensible, and I don't care who they were, be they Lloyd, Desmond, or whoever.

Pete Rose is one of the greatest players in the history of baseball, but he is banned for good reason, and should never be reinstated.  This is how I feel about those who conspired against their own god-damned head coach.  Et tu, Brute?

mgowill

October 18th, 2011 at 12:58 PM ^

This is a very sad part of our storied football program.  This is truly what happens when a university decides to devour itself.  This book will be a great piece of our history.  Although not one that tells of glory and championships, but of shame and contemplation.

His Dudeness

October 18th, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^

This is exactly why I feel the way I do now. The most horrible anti-Michigan folks actually won. The players are the only ones I care about in all of this and the only ones I will ever care about in all of this for the rest of my days.

kmanning

October 18th, 2011 at 1:37 PM ^

Sure they won, they got the guy they hated out(Rich Rodriguez) and got what they wanted, a Lloyd assistant that says the right things and runs the program the way they wanted. I don't buy that everyone loses, sure those people look bad, but they obviously didn't care when they were doing it. They were more interested in doing what they felt was best for themselves and didn't give a shit about Michigan or the players. And they won.

mtzlblk

October 22nd, 2011 at 10:20 PM ^

Only by 'winning' they may have doomed us to obsolescence as a football program. We are headed right back to the path of a program running outdated schemes that will beat under-powered teams in our conference, split with the mediocre teams and lose to any programs fielding teams that are geared to compete on a national level. then we will have to pray for favorable bowl matchups.

I definitely think that the anti-RR sentiment made the difference between him getting enough time to build something special at M and bringing the program into the modern era, and him being run out of town. I will never forgive them for that.

I like Hoke as a person, but I think it is safe to say, based on the evidence and not on the PR blitz, that he wasn't the clear front-runner for the position at the start of the coaching search. I just fear that we reached down too far for the hire, there is a reason he was coaching at San Diego State and not on anyone's list of up and comers. Is it impossible that Hoke gets us back to national prominence? No. Is he the coach with the highest probability of doing so? Certainly not. Quite the opposite. 

Sadly, the entire program and the rest of the fanbase are going to have to deal with the aftermath of the transgressions of the few for a long, long time.

M-Wolverine

October 18th, 2011 at 1:01 PM ^

After that, Michigan never gave Rodriguez sufficient bait to get his top choice to replace Casteel. When Scott Shafer and Greg Robinson arrived in Ann Arbor, they inherited a staff of strangers who had been loyal to Rodriguez for years.

Are they related? If he had gotten some other top choice, would Rich have cleaned house, but he wouldn't if he got his 3rd choice or something? It seems like two separate problems- one on the University, and one on Rich, but lumped together, in a related overall arc, but not really a cause and effect.

jackrobert

October 18th, 2011 at 1:01 PM ^

Can we just fucking beat Ohio State this year and give the game ball to the guys who stayed and worked their tails off during the RR years?  At this point, that's what I want most out of this season.

Section 1

October 18th, 2011 at 1:06 PM ^

The 1969 team, under Bo Schembechler, gave the historic OSU game ball to Bump Elliott, for his grace and class and help with that team.  He had coached those seniors for three years.  It is one of the greatest moments in Michigan football history, in my book.

The corollary would be for this team to beat OSU in 2011, and give the game ball to Rich Rodriguez, who had coached the seniors for three years.

BursleysFinest

October 18th, 2011 at 1:02 PM ^

While admitting fully this is more of a complicated issue than I'm about to break down...but if our Offensive Genius Head Coach lets himself be an Offensive genius and let his Defensive Coordinators run the defenses they are actually, you know, Good at Running, we have more success in the 3 years he was here, and probably similar success to what we are now doing...Michigan made it hard for RR, unfairly so to be sure,  but winning shuts down all other arguments, and a not Horrible defense adds a lot more wins/success than we had in that 3 years 

(and to be clear, there is no sarcasm when I say Offensive Genius.  I think RichRod could have become successful here and I really wanted him to do so, I was a fan of the guy)

lexus larry

October 18th, 2011 at 1:38 PM ^

Remember from other summaries and comments, LC opened the door for anyone who wanted to leave, prior to RR arriving.  (And referring to RR solely as OGHC is unnecessary...)

Look at how many good QB's have been recruited while RR was here...and look at what was left for RR to work with...how many players on that 2008 roster had started games? 

Hard to win when you can't score...

Qmich

October 18th, 2011 at 1:57 PM ^

a lot of the comments have listed Martin as public enemy no. 1/failure/idiot/whatever but Martin doesn't recruit football players.  If M had recruited better leading up to Carr's retirement RR doesn't go 3-9 with walk-on QBs.  Although if we had gone 6-6 through the regular season in 08 that probably wouldn't have made much of a difference given what's been brought to light about the folks inside the program who wanted RR gone.  Either way, whatever Martin deserves blame-wise Carr also deserves.

markusr2007

October 18th, 2011 at 1:03 PM ^

for the Michigan football players than I did before.

And worse for Rodriguez, his family and staff.

Ryan Van Bergen was right to ask his question.  

I hope those players and coaches from 2008-2009 and 2010feel included and welcomed back. They were part of Michigan football no matter what.

 

 

 

profitgoblue

October 18th, 2011 at 1:06 PM ^

Thanks again to Brian and John for the hard work and time spent putting together these Q&As.  I'll admit:  Almost all of the information in these Q&As and sneak-peeks at the book make me feel very, very sad, kind of like a child learning that there is no Santa Claus. 

I grew up never knowing a losing seasons for 30+ years and always assumed that Michigan would be playing in a bowl game during that time.  And I was even excited about the Rodriguez hire and the new system he was bringing.  Then, after 3 years of losing (2009 was definitely the hardest) and now learning the inside story, the childish wonder and holding Michigan football on a pedastal is gone.  I was the worst of those with feelings of "entitlement" and assumptions of Michigan's constant domination.  The reality check has definitely been hard (Michigan football is one of my true loves, like most of us) but I guess it was time to "grow up." 

John, I'm more excited about the release of this book than I was about the release of Deathly Hallows (yes, I am a tool) and have already pre-ordered it - the first time I have ever pre-ordered a book.  I suspect that the final product will live up to the expectations.

TorontoBlue

October 18th, 2011 at 1:08 PM ^

The contrast between how Bump assisted Bo in his first year vs Carr's demeanor with RR - wow.  I have always wondered why LC was not involved in helping RR ease into his role - LC was being paid $350k+ as an employee of the Athletic Dept at the time.  Did RR stiffarm LC, or did LC wall himself off and throw hand gernades behind the scenes?  This is a very central question in the scenario that unfolded IMO.

GO BLUE!

BRCE

October 18th, 2011 at 4:07 PM ^

RR would have no good reason to stiffarm Carr, but we know that LC is a bitter guy when he doesn't get his way and that he is a complete believer in the "buddy system" of coaching hires at Michigan, which is how he got his job and thusly the fashion in which he hired every offensive and defensive coordinator he ever did.

Carr won't talk for a reason - there's nothing about the truth that makes him look in this. His legacy at Michigan should be far below Bump Elliot's, wins be damned.

 

Blue boy johnson

October 18th, 2011 at 1:15 PM ^

There should be an additional thread in honor of John U Bacon's radio show, in which we all get to pick our WINNERS and LOSERS regarding the whole darn thing.

Off The Field with John Bacon, Jamie Morris and a cast of a handful, is must listen radio for me on a Sunday morning during M football season.

Great show. Check it out 10:00 AM on WTKA immediately following Sam Webb's 9:00 AM show

WolverineRage

October 18th, 2011 at 1:17 PM ^

Every time I read more about the last 3 years, I reflect on that "Final Word" piece that Brian did on RR and I become profoundly sad.

I'm afraid that when I read the book, its just going to depress me into a case of what could've been's.

I suppose the consolation is, hopefully everyone learns from this and we never have a continental divide in the fan base again.

Also, thanks John and Brian for some truly stellar work.

Hail-Storm

October 18th, 2011 at 1:18 PM ^

important to hear this.  If we don't know and learn from our history, we are doomed to repeat it.

I had wished to see RR get 4 years last fall, but know that Dave Brandon made the right choice to make the switch to Hoke, and Hoke has done everything right (minus maybe one call on 4th down) to bring this team, community, and program back to whole.

Another reason to root all the harder for the current players that always gave their all.

Can't wait to order the book (through MGoBlog of course, available now for pre-order sales)

 

LB

October 18th, 2011 at 1:18 PM ^

because that is certainly not the case. I'd sure feel better if some of this felt like a revelation to me. Instead, it starts my blood pressure up  (again). On the plus side, listeners and readers that follow a few of the local (so-called) media personalities just might learn a thing or two.

There were an awful lot of people worrying about their own little slice of life at the expense of the players and The Team. It is an unfortunate stain that will never go completely away. Let us hope we all learned from it.

BlueFordSoftTop

October 18th, 2011 at 1:19 PM ^

Focus both us.  Historians will record ultimately that the coaching controversy and root football issues originated from the University leadership itself.  The football episode begins and ends with choice of athletic directors and it is cast within the context of University-wide changes that were occurring within the University leadership and its community.  For better else for worse, we have had the reincarnation of Don Canham back in the AD office since Martin left.  0.02