The Future Is All We Have

For your first question, the one about implementing a more traditional offense, that was not done for a few reasons. First, it is difficult to recruit talent to a system that you don't yet have on the field. Second, Michigan needed to make the transition eventually, and sometimes it is best to do these things like a band-aid. Third, to say that Michigan's players are better suited to the pro-style attack is something of a misnomer. Most of the skill positions were very young and, therefore, didn't have a great degree of practice in the pro style. The zone scheme for the lineman is very similar, as the blocking scheme for a zone stretch left out of the i form is fairly similar to the blocking for a zone read out of the shotgun single back. With Michigan unlikely to be this youthful again for many years, this year was a good opportunity to bite the bullet and make the transition.

As for your question about the six year deal, there is more to this than meets the eye. RR's deal has a substantial buyout for the first three seasons. That buyout diminishes greatly following third season. The general consensus on most major coaching hires is that they get three to four years (long enough to bring in "their" recruits") before termination becomes possible. The six year term benefits Michigan as much as RR, because if he is successful, his salary won't be jumping up on a yearly basis. Don't let the term fool you. RR has, at most, four years to put a big winner on the field. I think you're right to believe that he's up to the challenge.

The other reason for a 6 year contract is demonstrating stability to recruits. I have a hard time saying this in regards to Michigan, but recruits want to know that the coach that recruits them and is committed to them will be around when they are in the program. They don't get the luxury of just transferring to another D1 program the next season if the coach is gone and playing the next season. They sit the bench for a year at their new school.

One thing that i was confused about when Boren transferred was that he is only sitting for one season before being eligible at OSU. Didn't there used to be a rule that if you transferred in conference to another team you had to sit out 2 seasons? Maybe I am confusing that with basketball, but I coulda swore that used to be a rule. Maybe I am just plain wrong on this, but wouldn't mind someone setting the record straight.

Go Blue!

"Those Who Stay Will Be Champions"
"What the mind can conceive and believe, the body can achieve" - BS

You ask a girl to the prom even though she may not be the prettiest flower in the bed. You figure what the hell, you'll probably score after the dance with this broad so it might be worth it. You go to the dance, people talk behind your back, but they are just jealous, or so you want to believe. After the dance she agrees to go to lookout point for some serious face time. You...could...go...all..the..way.
But just as you are about to reach for the condom she hops out of the pickup truck and climbs into the Cadillac parked nearby.
What kind of girl would do such a thing? I think we all know what kind of girl would sell her virtue to the highest bidder.
I am one WVU fan who is happy that Rodriguez left WVU before getting the program placed on probation by the NCAA and I am grateful that the destroyed the records that may have indicted himself before climbing into the Caddy.
Mark my words, he will win but Michigan will pay a steep price.

We all share your pain. And at one point have asked the same questions.

 I'll take a stab at "Biting the bullet." Overall not the best idea, in my opinion. As mentioned above, the transition is inevitable; therefore, the sooner the better. If the transition is this rough now, how much better would it be if we had done it next year? We'd have your Odoms, McGuffies etc., knowing/learning an offense that will become "legacy" once we convert to RR's offense. Would we have two series of practices, or just teach the new system from scratch (much like this year)?  What would the format of practices be? Current Offense practice, and Future Offense practice? How time consuming and confusing would that be? It's important to get everyone to buy into the new system as early as possible- but especially the new players.

This may be a bad analogy but picture an organization going through a transitional phase of a new business/system process. Would you want to allow your new hires to use the legacy process/system or buy into and train immediately in the new system? How would you handle the current employees? Doesn't it make sense from a time and cost perspective to train them and have them buy into the new system as early as possible? (Disclaimer: This comment assumes that the RR offense is a better solution than the pro-style offense!)

I know all you hear is "be patient" but, but all we can do is be patient. Ann Arbor wasn't built over night.

There was nothing saying that Threet or Sheridan couldn't run this offense.

Asking RR to coach a prostyle offense is like asking LC to coach the spread. He doesn't have much experience in it, let alone his staff, and it wouldn't have turned out any better.

Minor sat out early because he had preseason injuries and McGuffie was the only one to make it through the full preseason. Whenever Minor did get a chance, he would fumble the ball. As soon as he started to hold onto the ball, he retained his starting position.

The 6 year deal is also for RR's assurance. He came to UM and ended up paying 1.5m to get away from there. If they let him go after 3 seasons, he needs some sort of severance for the risk that he took. I could be wrong but I am pretty sure it is a standard thing.

thats the best name on here.