Greg Robinson: A review
I have no idea if Greg Robinson is a serious candidate for the DC job, but some people seem to take him as one. Many claim that "his resume as a DC is excellent" and point out that "just because he wasn't a good HC, doesn't mean he won't be a good DC". Lets look at those two claims
First, his resume (omitting time as an OC previously):
1 Year with the Jets. Defense ranked 14th in PPG.
6 Years in Denver w/ defenses ranked 17th, 7th, 6th, 6th, 11th, 23rd
3 Years in Kansas City, when their defense was the laughing stock of the NFL - ranked 23rd, 28th, 20th, and he was fired.
1 Year at University of Texas, where he posted decent numbers (28th ranked defense nationally) against a weak schedule (they played 2 teams that finished the season ranked).
While Robinson did win 2 Super Bowls in Denver, his overall resume is what I would refer to as "checkered", and at no point has he coached a defense that could be referred to as "elite".
Second, while the DC job and HC job require different skill-sets, there are some commonalities - like recruiting. He's demonstrated no ability to recruit at Syracuse (which, for the most part, never fared any worse than the rest of the Big East), and has begun to lose 2-star recruits to FCS schools.
Finally, I don't think we should completely throw out his tenure as a head coach, as it was an epic disaster. Syracuse had 13 non-losing seasons in 14 years before his arrival, and had gone to 12 bowls in that time, including the BCS. Upon his arrival, Robinson turned a 6-6 team that returned 17 players into a 1-11 team. In the next 3 years he would reach a high-water mark of 4-8.
This just isn't a "strong" resume. The peak of his career occurred 10 years ago, and it wasn't that staggering of a peak. Since that time, he has been associated with 2 staggering failures (the KC defense, and Syracuse). I know nothing of his X's and O's, and would be unqualified to comment on them, but this guy doesn't seem like "The" guy.
January 15th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^
but I don't see how a defense that only gave up two touchdowns in the playoffs ('98), one after a fumble on the one yard line, could be called anything other than great.
I also think the staff would respect his two rings, even if the fanbase doesn't.
January 15th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^
He is no Ted Roof. Both are terrible head coaches, but only one is a good DC.
January 15th, 2009 at 1:52 PM ^
i am not a GR advocate but in his defense, Syracuse shouldn't be mentioned in the same paragraph as Michigan when it comes to recruiting. Top recruits want to come to Michigan b/c we develop good pros and have a strong alumni base. IF he becomes DC at Michigan, i strongly feel he will recruit well. Come on now lets be serious, nobody wants to play at football for the Orange minus Mcnabb,Freeney,Marvin Harrison, and Quadry "the Missile" Ismail.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:28 PM ^
The point is more that he recruited poorly by Syracuse standards.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:02 PM ^
While he was at KC, they spent the majority of the money on the offensive side of the ball. Trent Green, Priest Holmes, Tony G, LJ, Willie Roaf, Brian Waters and others tied up a lot of money which limited their ability to sign top notch defenders. Even with average defenders, Robinson's 2002 was ranked 3rd in the nfl and in 2003 they led the league with a +19 turnover margin. I think he could be a good fit for us at DC
January 15th, 2009 at 2:05 PM ^
I figured the reason Schafer got let go was cause he didn't recruit worth squat. I mean NO recruiting defects due to losing Schafer?? Weird.
NFL experience is nice and all, but I would love to get a Miami/U of Florida guy that has good ties to the H.S's down there.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:06 PM ^
But did he get along with the other coaches? It seems RR is looking for more of the right fit then the best canidate. Of course that is just a guess.
On a high note, we could be just like Louisville. Dont' they lose a DC every week? I even think the person that replaced Ron English left for another school.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:13 PM ^
I do know that every new DC is "aggressive", but he does like to bring the noise for you "we gotta blitz more" afficionados. Not sure how that will work with the whole blitz and we'll leave S. Brown and M. Williams to clean up, but he will blitz.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:14 PM ^
Using the DVOA stat from Football Outsiders (I think it's better than YPG or PPG for an idea of how good they were without influence of some factors that would make a good defense worse than it is, and vice versa):
With Denver:
1995: 28th
1996: 2nd
1997: 7th
1998: 19th
1999: 14th
2000: 15th
With KC:
2001: 24th
2002: 29th
2003: 24th
That's not really anything special, even when you account for KC not really spending much money on the defensive side of the ball. He had a couple of good years in Denver, that's about it.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:25 PM ^
Steve Spagnuolo, or Jim Johnson (as in top NFL DC), but he did spend 10 years in the NFL as a DC (1994 was Jets DC), so he's not chopped liver.
Would you rather have a guy who spent 2 years in the Mac, had a good D, then a year in the Pac-10, with an average D (I mean Shafer) or a guy with 10 years of NFL DC experience?
The failed HC experience is a plus, if anything because he probably won't be leaving for another HC job anytime soon.
GO BLUE!
January 15th, 2009 at 2:27 PM ^
Our choice isn't between Robinson and Shafer.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:49 PM ^
Shafer is irrelevant now
January 15th, 2009 at 4:27 PM ^
given there backgrounds and I'm not worried about his recruiting ability. Syracuse has their own issues, and besides we have done pretty well recruiting without a DC for over a month now. Maybe all Robinson needs to do is flash his Super Bowl rings as a DC and work with the current staff, who is doing a great job recruiting.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:34 PM ^
His 1st 6 years in the NFL as head coach.
His defensive rankings in yards allowed during those 6 years.
18
14
12
7
24
20
That mans name........Bill Bellichick.....
It's fun to debate, but I think we need to put a disclaimer on that no one on this board has a clue on what is a good or bad hire until we see it in action. There are so many variables that go into the product we see on Saturdays it is often impossible to judge a man's talent at the job. Will we look back on Schafer like Cleveland does Bellichick?? Not sure. It's interesting to read the research guys have looked up and argue points about guys, but the guys who are going nuts that certain guys are a disaster need to chill and have faith that Rich is a good coach and will find someone that is a good coach.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:40 PM ^
A couple problems with that:
1. You're posting the defensive ranking for a head coach, whose job is to coach the team, not the defensive coordinator, whose job is to coach the defense.
2. Bill Belichick went 41-55 over that 6 year span. We don't want that, right? Oh, and he fired 2 DC's during that span.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:49 PM ^
Do you really believe that Bellichick wasn't running those defenses??
Romeo Crennel was the D coordinator when the Patriots defeated the Rams you think he came up with those schemes. Bill's not Joe Pa roaming the sidelines with no headset on.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:53 PM ^
The Giants were ranked in the top 5 defenses of the NFL for 5 seasons with Belichick as DC prior to his hire with the Browns. The Browns were never ranked higher than 15th.
Still - do you want to go 12 games under .500 while we experience that? I don't understand your point - that Greg Robinson, after 15 years ranging from "above average" to "mind-bogglingly horrible" is Bill Belichik?
You're right - we should never, ever, pass judgement on a coach, even after 7 seasons. Because they might be Bill Belichick.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:06 PM ^
What I am saying is that a lot of guys vary from genius to garbage depending on the year and I don't think the guys IQ's are changing during that time frame so to look at a guys stats from 5 years ago and say the guy sucks and if Rod hired him it would be a disaster and so and so =death is a bit over the top. Some coaches are outstanding and some are garbage, but I think the majority find themselves in the middle and how they perform is more based on schdule, personnel, injuries, other coaches, weather, talent, luck etc..
I agree with you Robinson has a lot of data and some of it sketchy so he would not be the most exciting hire, but some pretty good coaches kept hiring him so he is not a complete moron and if Rod were to hire him I would think he had some good reasons and felt good and we would have a decent chance at success. You can bring up any coach and I can find an instance he looked horrid.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:10 PM ^
OK, lets not use data from 5 years ago. Let's use it from last year.
2-10.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
but was he defensive coordinator last year??? gotcha.....
January 15th, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^
Stats aside, Bellicheck was known throughout the league as a to DC, which Robinson never has acheived.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:18 PM ^
He's been an NFL DC for ~9 years (where he won 2 Super Bowls) and the DC of Texas (a top college job).
What else do you want? You can point out the flaws in any coach with 10+ years of experience (JT, Mack Brown, Lloyd, RR...). His background is far better than Shaffer, and if he gets along with the staff, I say hire him.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:42 PM ^
Our choice isn't between Greg Robinson and Scott Shafer.
And regardless, Robinson, over 15 years, has demonstrated himself to be a mediocrity. Shafer, at least, was unknown enough to have upside.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:47 PM ^
I'd submit that virtually any coach with 5+ years experience has some warts on his resume.
Without comparing his resume to others, and evaluating it alone, I don't consider his failings to be serious red flags, I'm encouraged that he's found success at both levels (NFL and CFB) for at least some period of time, and I'm not concerned about his failings as a HC at Syracuse.
Recruiting? Yes, not thrilled, but looks like Rod's staff has some good recruiters on it... the DC not being a great recruiter doesn't worry me, and it's probably easier to recruit as DC at UM (assuming we find some success on the field in the near future) then anywhere he's been besides Texas (at UT, you roll out of bed, offer the first 100 kids you see that day, and end up with a top 5 class).
Not saying he's a perfect hire, but there are no perfect hires.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:57 PM ^
Sure, no one is perfect. I just think his resume boasts more warts (half his Denver tenure, his entire KC tenure, his one season in New York, his entire Syracuse tenure) than clear patches (one season in Texas, 2 seasons in Denver). Of 15 years, we can term maybe 4 of them a success.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:15 PM ^
if he was a superstar in the nfl, he'd still be in the nfl
that said, how many nfl d coordinators have sterling resumes? it's a tough league.
January 15th, 2009 at 3:25 PM ^
He's certainly not a homerun and he seems like a downright terrible recruiter. However, Schaffer didn't do much for recruiting and we seem to be hauling in a pretty good class this year after a crappy season. It could be that RR feels we have enough good recruiters on the staff and wants an X&O's game planning guy to add to the staff. I think that with GR's NFL experience he could be an asset to the staff. I don't know enough about X&O's to say, but if RR hires him I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not sure we are going to be able to lure a "homerun". If a guy doesn't get a say in his assistants and is expected to incorporate the group's input why would he take the UM job over other alternatives. Given the restrictions in place I just don't see us getting a top name. What does everyone else think? Does having a staff set significantly reduce the job's attractiveness?
January 15th, 2009 at 3:32 PM ^
plenty of coordinators come into set staffs - it's a factor, but it's been overblown
January 15th, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
would be preferable to Robinson
January 15th, 2009 at 4:26 PM ^
would be preferable to Robinson
January 15th, 2009 at 4:26 PM ^
Just playing a little bit of devil's advocate here. Pete Carrol was a terrible NFL coach and then he went to college and has become a great college head coach.
Our boy (potentially) Robinson was a decent to good NFL DC and apparently a terrible college head coach. Maybe once he gets back to just coaching a defense he will go back to good and maybe be a great defensive coordinator.
January 15th, 2009 at 4:35 PM ^
how was pete carroll a terrible nfl coach? explain that please. everyone says that but hasn't actually looked at his NFL resume. he was 33-31 and went to the playoffs twice in 4 seasons. is that so terrible? those are the types of #'s that the lions would absolutely love to have.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:08 PM ^
Since the Lions have been among the worst franchises in the league for a few years now, "numbers the lions would absolutely love to have" is an effective synonym for "mediocre at best." I prefer numbers a decent franchise would love to have.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:21 PM ^
The guy got into the playoffs twice in his 4 year career as an NFL HC. Only a quarter of the league's coaches go to the playoffs each season. are you saying that the lions wouldn't jump at the opportunity to have their team playing in the playoffs twice possibly in the next 4 years? 'decent franchises' would like those numbers. the nfl is built on parity, you can be 16-0 one year, and then not make the playoffs the next (albeit you're beautiful QB had his knee blown up but that's neither here nor there).
anyways, this was primarily about Pete Carroll as a coach and not about the Lions. I've just noticed a lot of people like to say that he was a terrible NFL coach, as if USC basically just grabbed some shitty coach who then began to work wonders in LA. That wasn't the case. He was always a good coach, just happened to be a much better coach at the collegiate level.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:51 PM ^
I actually don't really care whether or not PC was a good NFL coach; I just wanted to point out that the Lions probably weren't a good franchise to use in the "numbers x would love to have" format, since the Lions are desperate for anything. Numbers the Broncos would love to have, numbers the Chargers would love to have, numbers the Steelers would love to have, numbers the Panthers would love to have ... whatever.
So yeah, your point that PC wasn't a bad NFL coach is a good one; I'm just nitpicking. Sorry.
January 15th, 2009 at 9:07 PM ^
Hope all is well and happy new year, my friends. Hope the photog is treating ya well.
But, um, those are numbers we Steelers fans would love not to have seeing as if the black and gold have made the postseason 12 of the last 17 seasons, six of the last eight and four of the last five.
Not bragging, but those numbers would represent a little bit of a slide.
January 15th, 2009 at 10:55 PM ^
Wow -- I knew the Steelers have been good, but I didn't realize they'd been that good. Don't send Jerome Bettis after me!
January 16th, 2009 at 9:38 AM ^
Not a prob....i wont send him, but you might want to be on the lookout anyway......i have been told he's from nearby Detroit!!!
January 15th, 2009 at 6:19 PM ^
So I did a bit of research on my "Pete Carrol was terrible head coach statement" and I'll be honest I thought his record was a lot worse (I'm man enough to admit I was wrong). But research shows he wasn't awful, but he also was not exactly lighting the world on fire either. So I will adjust Pete Carrol was an average NFL head coach ( 33-31 - I think we can agree that was pretty average winning about half of his games). So he went from average NFL guy to great college guy.
January 15th, 2009 at 5:07 PM ^
Nix and his wife are from Mississippi. I don't think it's very likely that he would leave a team likely to be in the preseason top 15. His best player on defense (Greg Hardy) just announced he was coming back as well. I agree Nix is better than Robinson, but I don't think it's going to happen. Would be great if it did though!
http://www.olemisssports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=56305&SPID=737&DB_O…
January 15th, 2009 at 9:12 PM ^
Is worth not hiring just so we dont have to deal with that possible nickname.
Seriously, I have some great friends who are loyal KC Chief boosters.
I look forward to catching up with them in the upcoming days if UM hires Robinson because the taunting and mocking texts, emails and calls will be a coming.
Of course, if it ends up working out for UM, I will mention to them for the rest of time that clearly Michigan is a better football franchise than their Chiefs.
January 15th, 2009 at 10:13 PM ^
I never understood the big hoopla surrounding Robinson - the guy was a decent NFL DC (and yes, I read the stuff below concerning DVOA, YPG, Bill Belichek, etc. - he was, at best, decent) and his most recent coaching stint resulted in the worst 4-year stretch in modern Syracuse football history (I tried looking up Syracuse's defense rankings for those years but the NCAA site was down). Would he be an upgrade over nobody? Sure, but I think UM still has better options out there.
January 16th, 2009 at 12:32 PM ^
Super Bowl rings coordinating under a top-notch coach?
Mediocre, though overrated, results as an NFL coordinator?
Leading a college team to historically bad results?
Sounds like someone else I've heard of. The only thing we're missing is a speech about schematic advantages.
Now it's time for the X's and O's! Let's see who has the advantage now, baby!
January 16th, 2009 at 4:02 PM ^
was the OC instead of HC, ND would be much better. He does bring in great recruits.
HC and coordinator are 2 different jobs that require different skill sets.
January 16th, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
ND would not be much better, except from the different head coach thing. He called the plays after the BC game and ND's offense was atrocious. As a recruiting guy he would be quite excellent however.
Although I will give him credit for thinking on the metagame... instead of worrying about the regular season, he had his eye on the prize: ending the bowl losing streak for ND. Carefully dropping his last games to teams as bad as Syracuse, he dropped to a bowl where ND could actually win. Why doesn't anyone else give him credit for that?
January 21st, 2009 at 8:08 PM ^
Never has there been so much hype for a lousy team winning a second rate bowl game against a mediocre opponent. It means nothing.
January 16th, 2009 at 12:37 PM ^
Schwartz came here under the guize that he will be coaching the Lions but secretly he will be feeding U of M stuff for their defensive schemes in 09. (Could you imagine if that were possible)...
Relax Guys. Like has been widely speculated above and on prior posts, RR is taking his time so he can make the right decision. Clearly recruiting is not being hurt by our not having a DC right now so why take energy away from that. I am confident we will all be happy with RR's pick, whomever that may be. It is what comes with the territory of being a fan...JUSTIFICATION. We can justify anyone he picks, I am certain of that.
January 16th, 2009 at 2:45 PM ^
I can't help but think that virtually every name thrown into the mix as yet--Larry Johnson, Greg Robinson, Rex Ryan (!), CHUCK HEATER--are all internet speculation with about as much empirical evidence demonstrating their candidacy as Al Kaline's.
Whatever happens happens; I'm confident that Rodriguez has a clearer idea of what he wants from his defense with a full season under his belt.
With that being said, I would vehemently disapprove of a Greg Robinson defensive regime. Not only has he proven himself to be a pedestrian defensive coordinator and an atrocious head coach, he is also the progenitor of THE worst recruiting classes in America during the last five years.
Their starting quarterback this season was a guy named Cameron Dantley. I went to high school with Cameron at St. Albans in DC. Don't get me wrong, he's a perfectly nice person, but the fact that he is the starting quarterback for a BCS conference program is beyond absurd. He made the Washington Post All-IAC (our conference) his junior year
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/hssports/longterm/allmets/f…) along with five other STA guys. None of those five play organized football anymore, and among them, only Lemi even attempted it after high school, playing RB at Trinity College. We went 5-6 during Cameron's senior year in a private school conference playing other private schools. Syracuse currently has the #114 recruiting class in the country according to Rivals; in 2008 and 2007, they were #48.
January 21st, 2009 at 8:03 PM ^
for progenitor.
January 17th, 2009 at 12:39 PM ^
CW is a great recruiter b/c of Belichick. Charlie's reputation precedes him. He has done nothing since leaving NE except recruit great talent to play poorly. That's is not a talent, we've seen that here in AA.
CW flashes his SB rings and probably says he built the Pats. A 17-18 yr old kid might fall for it, but the Pats have continued to be great without him and Romeo. What does that tell ya.
CW has only one option, schedule crappy teams and beat them to get into the BCS and then get drilled against real competition. If it wasn't for playing UM, USC and MSU Charlie would have the weakest schedule of any FBS school. He's living on borrowed time.
Comments