In Dave Brandon We Trust
Dave Brandon is a smart guy. He played football for Bo, he was a successful fortune 500 CEO at Dominoes, and he was a UM Regent.
I would be willing to bet that he was on the advisory committee to help (tell) Bill Martin who to hire to replace Lloyd Carr.
Brandon is now CEO of UM athletics.
Football is his cash cow.
He MUST make football work. This means winning. It also means graduating his athletes and keeping them out of trouble.
Part of his football program is doing pretty well. The offense is one of the best in the country. But the defense is failing.
His department head in football is a good man. He is a young family man, he is intelligent, engaging, well spoken, and represents the university well. He is an excellent offensive coach and recruiter. His players really like him.
So how to fix football?
Brandon does NOT want to fire this department head.
Are there candidates as good as him out there & available? Not many.
What about negotiating with another university for their coach? How ugly is that?
How much would it cost to pay everyone off and start over?
Football would lose a year recruiting on top of what was lost the last time.
The university would look indecisive (Notre Dame?)
And the next guy: What baggage will he bring with him (a cheerleader in his closet)? And will he win?
No. Brandon will stay with his department head. He will sit down with him, talk about the big picture, and work with him to develop a plan to fix the defense. He will put together an advisory group of football guys to advise the department head on his plan. When the plan is completed, Brandon will help his department head execute the plan.
What is the plan? Basically, it involves getting the right personnel (defensive coordinator), giving that guy control / responsibility, and not interfering with him. Then holding him accountable.
We already tried that?
No, we did not. The department head did not use our brain trust / football family to identify and find the right man to run the defense. Then he did not give the D.C. freedom to hire his assistants, and the D.C. was told what scheme to run. This time it must be different: His personnel, his scheme.
This is what CEO Dave Brandon will do.
If the department head is smart, he will work with his CEO and everybody will look good. This might be difficult on the department head's ego, to admit that maybe his hires and his schemes did not work.
If he is a prima donna, he will not accept help and do it himself. If he does this, chances are he will make the same mistake again, and be fired in another year.
Brandon has other resources to bring to bear on the defensive problem, as long as his Department Head is willing to work with him and them.
My guess is that the Department Head is smart enough to work with the help offered by Dave Brandon to get the job done.
November 2nd, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^
Go Blue!!! I love Moeller sorry.
November 2nd, 2010 at 6:24 PM ^
Hire Nick Saban, the defensive genious and counter-equivalent of RR, and demote RR to OC. Give RR a ten year, rich contract, he has security, no more dealing with the media..better than getting fired with no buyout. A little out of the box, I know, but I bet DB could sell it. Would Saban come? You bet, for the right money...
November 2nd, 2010 at 6:42 PM ^
Why would you want Saban? Sure, we might win, but at what cost? The guy is a scumbag trading young livelihoods for sport.
November 2nd, 2010 at 10:19 PM ^
I don't know that Saban would have the success at UM he's had at other places. It seems like much of the battle at UM is playing nice with the UM culture and playing the part of a "Michigan Man", whatever that means. The culture of East Lansing and anything containing "SEC" are not the same as Ann Arbor. He might succeed at OSU or Miami (not Dolphins), but even if UM wanted him and he wanted UM, it might be short-lived and ugly. Kind of like our attempts at defense each week.
November 2nd, 2010 at 6:33 PM ^
DB tried to force-feed us the idea that the OSU game should be moved from the last game of the year? Money > Tradition in DB's mind.
I don't trust him and probably never will.
November 2nd, 2010 at 6:55 PM ^
Winning = money so you can bet that he'll have the team winning SOON.
November 2nd, 2010 at 7:28 PM ^
After hearing the consumer response, Dave Brandon drew the conclusion that preserving tradition was preserving the brand and would best grow the product.
He concluded that tradition = $$$
November 2nd, 2010 at 7:50 PM ^
You truly believe that Brandon believed that? He never wanted to move that game; furthermore, he knew that his fan base would never accept moving the OSU game. He played the best card he had - publicity. His other options were to go public against the Conference Commissioner (not what a smart new AD would do); or to remain silent and let the game be moved. He chose the wisest course of action with the end result being the game remained at the end of the season.
November 2nd, 2010 at 6:36 PM ^
Good, solid rational thought from the only perspective that really matters.
November 2nd, 2010 at 7:53 PM ^
Would Brandon accept a bid to the LIttle Ceasar's Bowl? Bad pizza karma, dudes.
November 3rd, 2010 at 1:03 AM ^
If RR stays, it makes sense to accept the bowl bid to add more practice time for the young defense.
Otherwise, no.
November 3rd, 2010 at 5:11 PM ^
That's probably right, plus I'd add RR likely stays if they get the bid. I had in mind the potential conflict Brandon would have as the Chairman of the Board of Directors at Domino's, on the one hand, and the Athletic Director at U-M, on the other.
For sure having Michigan would be the biggest draw ever for the Motor City/Little Ceasar's Bowl, which is a big boost to Brandon's chief rival. Brandon's fiduciary duty to stuff as much Domino's pizza down American gullets as can possibly be stuffed could be compromised. Which would be to the corporate world like allowing tOSU to advertise at the Big House would be to Michigan football.
Sounds kind of like a hoo-haa, if you ask me.
November 2nd, 2010 at 7:56 PM ^
Amaizing how many CEO's post on MGoBlog !!! Who would have guessed that ....
Adding my two cents ... but new CEO's would first evaluate the strength and weaknesses of the organization, for this discussion, the football program. However some things are obvious ...
First - Michigan's offense is a national top 10 program ... with almost everyone back next year.
Second - Michigan's defense ranks as the worst in school history and near the back end of all programs in the country. And again lots of returning letterman.
Its is then the CEO's job to lead the management team as necessary to "fix" the weaknesses. And it is so very plain where the weakness is ... the entire defensive philosophy. Now whether the philosophy is RR's or GERG's ... I don't know. In the end this HAS to change ! If its RR's philosophy, then IMHO RR will be gone. If it is determined that GERG has failed (what I believe) then GERG is gone. There is no other choice for a CEO to make.
A succesful football business means that they have created a demand for us fans to buy tickets to fill Michigan Stadium. To do this Michigan MUST field a highly competetive team year after year. I like many other posters sat in the stands during the Bump Elliott period (pre-Bo for you younger posters) when only 2 games sold out ... MSU & OSU. If fans don't fill the seats all the other U of M programs will suffer.
Michigan is FOOTBALL. Michigan is the winningest football program in history with the highest All-time winning percentage of any program. Dave Brandon, as Michigan's football CEO KNOWS these facts. Yes, In Dave Brandon I (We) Trust !
Go Blue !
November 2nd, 2010 at 8:02 PM ^
When talking finances, you are completely omitting a very important factor: the possibly that revenues drop significantly if RR is retained. What if people stop buying tickets, renting suites, and donating to the program? Don't think this can't happen. It's essentially why Amaker was fired.
November 2nd, 2010 at 10:07 PM ^
I think this cannot happen. At least not in this generation. No matter how bad UM is.
November 3rd, 2010 at 10:52 AM ^
Here's an interesting side tidbit...
The University recently conducted a very large, in-person (non-athletic) survey of alums across the nation. The questions ranged from "what was your favorite memory" to "what would you advise a current student to take advantage of". I don't know why I was selected for the survey. I'm assuming it was completely random, but anyway...I got a short follow-up survey a couple of weeks back. I don't recall the exact phrasing, but one of the last questions was something like, "How important is the football team to your overall perception of Michigan?"
I don't worry too much about not selling tickets (although I can tell you that the secondary market has gone cold) next year, but I think the University is very worried about donations to the school as a whole.
November 2nd, 2010 at 8:51 PM ^
you guys put way too much thought into this. Brandons the AD and it doesnt matter what we think anyway. As far as I'm concerned, we have no choice but to trust him.
November 2nd, 2010 at 10:33 PM ^
Why are we assuming that a new coach guarantees success? RR's creation is only partially complete at this point. He has some more work to do. It can be done with the right moves. Colorado struggled and thought they were guaranteed success with Dan Hawkins as their new coach. I can think of a few other programs that hired big name coaches and they could get anything going at all (Bowden at Clemson, Neuheisal at UCLA, Barnett at Colorado).
I know the RR haters love to bring up Harbaugh, but is Harbaugh a guarantee success at Michigan? There is no such thing as a sure thing, especially in college football.
I think Brandon is a smart of enough guy to work with what he has for another year.
November 2nd, 2010 at 11:24 PM ^
Rodriguez's resume in 2007 was much better than Harbaugh's is now. Success elsewhere does not guarantee immediate success here.
I prefer to go with the Devil I know, who has some remarkably good qualities, and try to fix the problems before I go after a complete unknown pipe dream. I have a pretty good idea of where this program is going in the next few years under Rodriguez, and the trendline is up.
As my father used to tell me, "You'll never go broke making a profit." You lose your shirt when you get greedy. There's a lot of profit left to be made with Rodriguez.
November 3rd, 2010 at 1:56 AM ^
I just thought of something. Nothing against Lou Holtz as a coach, but when S Carolina got wind that Spurrier was going to be their head coach so many fans were ready for the SEC titles to start rolling in. They are just now turning the corner.
November 3rd, 2010 at 10:43 AM ^
You're correct that a new coach will not guarantee success, but you're forgetting that keeping RR does not bring a guarantee of success either. That's why an informed decision needs to be made based on all of the facts, rather than on pure hope one way or the other.
November 3rd, 2010 at 11:33 PM ^
I agree, I don't know why people are so sure that a new coach (whomever he may be) is going to be successful with the defensive depth chart that RR would be handing over. Further, how many of the current players on the offense are going to want to go through ANOTHER coaching change?
There are two factors at play here: 1) players; 2) coaches. When making a decision to make a change, it is best to be as certain as possible that the players are NOT the issue, that the coach is -- I don't think the powers that be at Michigan can conclude such with ANY confidence at all!
Best to just leave RR in place, maybe make some procedural changes to the way the defense is administered, RECRUIT RECRUIT RECUIT and DEVELOP DEVELOP DEVELOP
November 3rd, 2010 at 12:08 AM ^
The whole premise on which you are saying Brandon should make his decision is flawed. First and maybe foremost, Rodriguez has not represented the University well. Rodriguez was criticized across the country for the way he left WVU (before all of the crap started flying about shredded records), then there are the disgruntled players who went public as they left, then the NCAA investigation and finally there is his actual record. Secondly, you sort of blow by the opinion of the folks who make his world go 'round, the big dollar alums. Or maybe you assume, which is equally flawed, that this group has some great emotional attachment to Rodriguez.
November 3rd, 2010 at 9:40 AM ^
That the big dollar alums are not happy and have not been for a while. I like RR a lot and would love to see what you are saying come true (admitting his lack of foresight with the defensive hires/fires) but he came to Michigan with a chip on his shoulder that his way would work and he would show everyone. Forcing Threet and Sheridan to run an offense they could not handle (after saying he could tailor his offense to any QB) and playing McGuffie over Brown and Minor (I am sure I am forgetting other head scratchers) are a couple of examples. His resume is impressive, there is no doubt, but his immense abilities might prevent him from seeing the error of his ways making it difficult for him to take a bunch of suggestions from DB or anyone else.
November 3rd, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
I can substantiate that claim re the big dollar alums, having heard that through back channels as well.
I do not believe the Athletic Department was real happy about having to really push to sell those luxury boxes, even considering the current economic climate. I also do not believe anything we have seen on the field so far this year will convince more alumni to spend big bucks next season on those boxes.
Ticket sales are in the $8M range (excluding seat premiums, face value ticket sales only), but quick math estimates skybox revune at over $4M a year annually (excluding club seats). A lot of money went into revamping this stadium (a quarter of a BILLION - $226 million) and I am sure Sailor Bill's scenario analysis for the break even point and future ROI scales did not factor in RR clearing out our high dollar alums faster than a skunk in a Yaris.
November 3rd, 2010 at 9:06 AM ^
You're making the assumption that RR would be willing to sack more people than Greg Robinson, and to yield control over his staff. While the problem on the defensive coaching side certainly starts with Robinson, I think it's naive to assume that the problems end there. There have been plenty of unofficial stories that RR's defensive position guys undermined Scott Shafer, and that's never a good situation if the HC doesn't support his coordinator at that point. There's no question that RR imposed the move to the 3-3-5 for the 2008 Purdue game on Shafer, and that indicates that he sided with his own assistants against his DC.
Unless at least some of these assistants are either replaced, or unless RR is willing to support his DC in a power struggle against his own men, then the underlying staff problems will confront a new DC. I am very skeptical that Rich Rodriguez—who has always been very loyal to his assistants—would agree to any plan that would result in getting rid of anybody besides Robinson. This would in turn present David Brandon with an interesting dilemma: does he then back down and let RR continue to run things his way, or does he draw a line in the sand right there and fire him over the issue of staff control? I doubt that would be first time in college football history that a head coach has been let go over an issue like this.
I can easily foresee the official statements from both camps:
"Rich and I had a fundamental disagreement over how the program would be managed going forward, and it wasn't something we could get past. This is not about wins and losses, or the fine young men he's recruited. Sometimes these things arise in organizations, and it's always a disappointing thing, but you have to deal with it and move forward. I want to personally thank Rich and his family for the incredible amount of effort they've put into the program here, both on the field and on all the volunteer efforts he and his players have put into things like Mott Hospital. I do know this: the next head coach of Michigan football will inherit a squad of intense, smart, and dedicated players who are all in for Michigan, and thanks go to Rich and his staff for that."
............
"Well, sometimes these things come up, and I just couldn't agree to some of the things that were asked of me about my assistants, who have been with me for a long time. I understand that Dave saw things differently, and that's his decision. Obviously we didn't win as many games as we wanted to, but I am still confident that things are headed in the right direction. We're proud of the young men we recruited to Michigan, and of course I'll greatly miss seeing them graduate. I want to thank everybody at Michigan who has supported us, and in spite of some disappointments it's been a wonderful experience. I don't have any plans right now, other than to spend a lot of time with Rita and the kids."
November 3rd, 2010 at 11:00 AM ^
from some strangely transparent parallel world where former CEOs and fired ("resigning") coaches actually decide it's a good idea to explain to the media exactly what everybody's reasons are...right?
November 3rd, 2010 at 2:42 PM ^
I think Rich probably sees what we all see -- that 2011 and 2012 could be special years, between the returning offense and a relatively soft schedule, if only the defense can improve. It must be very frustrating for him, to be so close to where he wants to be on offense, and so far away on defense. So he may be willing to do something more than just firing his DC.
The image that sticks in my mind from the Penn State game is Rodriguez in the middle of the defensive sideline huddle, gesticulating, trying to fire them up, with Robinson standing behind him, looking surprised.
If you look at the org chart of the football team, Gibson doesn't make sense -- he's "assistant head coach" but he's also under the defensive coordinator, not to mention his role with special teams -- so he reports to both Rodriguez (twice) and Robinson? I don't get it. How can this arrangement not undermine the DC?
I don't think you necessarily have to fire anyone -- you just have to make it so everybody has only one boss. It's about hierarchy. That means giving Gibson one job -- either fire Robinson and make Gibson the DC, or make Gibson the special teams coach, or whatever.
November 3rd, 2010 at 8:03 AM ^
My belief for a while has been that RR will eventually get his team into a NC game. It just won't be at Michigan.
November 3rd, 2010 at 9:23 AM ^
I think we at times forget it is a business and Dave will use his experience to make it better. I think Rich has a lot of pride and it will drive him to want to succeed at MICHIGAN...if for no other reason than to beat his detractors. If they tie his keeping the job into bringing in someone new for the defense, then he may seriously consider it, because he isn't the hot coaching candidate he was 3 years ago.
November 3rd, 2010 at 9:46 AM ^
that our current department head is well spoken, and represents the university well......
ummmmm, no. he isn't, and he hasn't. not even close.
i just don't know how you let a guy who is 4-16 in the big ten fire a 2nd DC after his 3rd season as HC, and hire a 3rd to start his 4th year..... It's just not gonna happen IMO.
When he did end up firing Shaffer after season 1, that was his chance to get it "right". And while i don't think Gerg is a bad coach, when you hire him to do something he doesn't do, and make him work with people who he doens't know and who from what it seems, are very difficult to work with (running Shaffer out), well - that's on you bud. fool me once, twice, no way in hell there will be a 3rd time.......
November 3rd, 2010 at 10:15 AM ^
And, very likely to be exactly what happens.
November 3rd, 2010 at 11:12 AM ^
It seems like the OP is assuming a lot in this post:
Brandon does NOT want to fire this department head.
Really? Why not? None of us know what's really in his head, but not many new bosses like to keep the old management. Just look to RR who booted all but one (or two) of the old staff. What Brandon is really thinking is a mystery.
Are there candidates as good as him out there & available? Not many.
Again, it's likely that none of us know the answer. Coaches work in the shadows in that regard. Further, "hot" names always seem to come out of the blue. Whether that's an assistant somewhere, a D-IAA guy, or a head coach.
Football would lose a year recruiting on top of what was lost the last time.
This has been discussed in detail in another thread, but the opposite could also be true if players are excited about a new coach with recruiting talent.
The university would look indecisive (Notre Dame?)
Or...the University could look decisive, making a decision and putting an end to the will-they-fire-him talk.
Brandon will stay with his department head. He will sit down with him, talk about the big picture, and work with him to develop a plan to fix the defense.
Again, no one knows what Brandon is thinking. The words that are maybe omitted are "I hope". You "hope" that DB will do what you're saying, but no one really knows but DB. And there's nothing wrong with hope. Nothing at all. I just don't know we can assume to know what's in DB's head.
November 3rd, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^
We need a coach who doesn't need to be chaperoned by the AD.
November 3rd, 2010 at 1:57 PM ^
here's another asumption by the OP:
"How much would it cost to pay everyone off and start over? "
Nothing. You get nothing when you violate NCAA regulations. Says so in RRs contract.
November 3rd, 2010 at 11:00 PM ^
According to the AP reports, and again, this could not be accurate, but will be confirmed tomorrow, the one allegation that was dropped against UofM was the one directly related to RR and his 'failure to promote an atmosphere of compliance'. If this stands correct, we would in fact owe him his remaining salary, plus the sunk cost of what we already spent bailing him out of WVU AND what he's earned over the last 2 1/2 seasons....PLUS...potentially buying out a new coaches contract and negotiating a new multi-million dollar contract...whew, I'm broke just thinking about it!
November 4th, 2010 at 12:53 AM ^
The goal of this post isn't to split legal hairs but are the other remaining charges considered "major" ones? If so, the University still has cause according to RR's contract. Just because the atmosphere of non-compliance got dropped doesn't mean Michigan is scott free or anything. There were still violations on his watch. I just don't know what the "level" of those violations are considered.
http://blog.mlive.com/wolverinesfootball_impact/2008/10/102408-rodrigue…
November 3rd, 2010 at 2:27 PM ^
Given the talent on the roster what coach gives us a better chance at navigating that ridiculous 2012 schedule?
A switch would drive more current players and recruits away than it would attract. a change in offensive system would take several years and pretty much guarantee sub .500 seasons in 11 and 12.
i agreed with one of the previous posts that said Brandon would not have agreed to the Alabama game if he thought he was going to dump RR....of M was undefeated (i think) when that game was announced...
November 3rd, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^
This whole thing is about $$$. It has been that way for years and is that way at any major program. Think about it for a second. Michigan pays for RR to get out of his contract at WVU, plus he draws a salary from Michigan. He is in the third year of said contract with two years remaining (I think 2 years??). RR is into the University for an awful lot of money. I cannot see AD DB paying off RR's contract, paying for another buyout (Harbaugh or Miles) and then paying another salary on top of that. The only way I see RR out early is if there are some type of major sanctions that come down from the NCAA investigation. On the other hand, if RR and U-M get nailed in the investigation, why not make him sit in the poopy diaper he created? Why not let him finish his time and then identify a target to replace him?
November 3rd, 2010 at 5:02 PM ^
Defense wins championships and offense sells tickets. The stadium will continue to sell out as long as RR and company put on a weekly offensive fireworks show. However, I do agree RR needs to understand his weaknesses. He is not a defensive guru and loyalty is commendable as long as the relationship is successful. His blind eye to Gibson and forcing GR to operate in an environment of uncertain job security will not resolve his defensive problems. As others have indicated, the defensive fix is either get a new DC with hiring authority regarding assistants and defensive schemes or keep GR and allow him to remake the entire defense unit including coaches.
Either way, RR must stay because to try to rebuild the team with a new coach would require another five years.
November 3rd, 2010 at 6:14 PM ^
RR must stay because to try to rebuild the team with a new coach would require another five years.
Why? And feel free to check this thread.
November 5th, 2010 at 9:28 AM ^
I'm surprised that no one ever mentions that firing Rodriguez at the end of this year would create a risk of having Denard and many other Rodriguez recruits transfer. We could easily lose a guy who may be good enough to be the best offensive player at Michigan, ever.
CEOs are always concerned about keeping the "star" individual performers. If firing your department head means losing your best engineers, probably not a good idea. Brandon knows that.
Comments