3 And Out - Finished last night

Submitted by ijohnb on

Alright, here goes nothing.

I was dissappointed.  From the material that I have read on this blog and commentary I have heard from other readers, I was really excited to read this book.  The excitement came from both the comments of other readers and the perspective I thought the book would bring.  "Rich Rodriguez and the Michigan Wolverines in the crucible of of college football."  The title implies and suggests that the book would put the Rich Rod era in both a national and historical perspective.  I went into the book believing that somehow my perspective and/or opinion on the Rodriguez era would be clarified, altered, confirmed, something.  What I got was a rehash of information I already had.  If I believed that the book was written for a mass audience with little information or backround on the Michigan football program, than my opinion on the book would probably be different, but the matter of fact way that many things in the book are described (this blog being one of them) suggests to me that the book was in fact intended for people who already knew too much about Michigan football and wanted to know more. 

With that in mind, I don't think the book told me anything that I did not know before.  For a person who supposedly spent so much time with Rodriguez, Rodriguez's actions and words in the book seem so canned, so cliche  , that he comes off as more of a characiture that anything.  Events in the book seem random, and are set forth with little conviction or any insight into what compelled the actors to take action.  (What would compel a man portrayed as so level headed to dump over a gatorade stand after a loss against a good team in a fairly close game when the first year is defined as the '"lose big" year.) The book seems to imply so much depth but never scratches past the surface, of anything really, the games, the players, the coaches.  Coach Rod's ultimate demise at Michigan was his failure to win due to a failure to field a well coached defense, but the defensive coordinator switch is not even discussed, and the defensive debacle only hinted at in some spots with RR saying "we can't stop anybody."  There has to be more to the story, and if you are going to write a book you might as well tell it, some of it, any of it?

I also felt the book was less than candid in some aspects, at least with regard to some key moments.  To imply that the "Raise me Up" incident could have been some sort of random coincidence, that the song just happened to be loaded and ready to go right about the same time that Rodriguez was saying the same words without any aforethought, come on man.  And why would a team so desparate to keep their coach, to the degree of giving him a "thank you" standing ovation, give up on their bowl game to the extent they were laughing at half time.

I don't know.  I cannot write a book (though this post may have seemed like one) so it may not be my place to critique or criticize, but I was underwhelmed, and I feel like I was had to a certain degree.  Anybody share similar sentiment?

UMxWolverines

January 20th, 2012 at 2:48 PM ^

I'm not done yet (on page 360 something) But the part that annoyed me was when they said there was "tension" between RR and Robinson. Ok? Why is that? Why did he hire those guys in the first place?

DefenseWins

January 20th, 2012 at 2:49 PM ^

I've been reading MGoBlog religiously for a long time, and I was still surprised by a lot of the book.  In fact, after my first reading, I couldn't really explain my thoughts properly because of the apparent absurdity of some of the topics, especially the coaching search and LC's alleged behavior.  So in that sense, I disagree with the OP.  Because even after reading everything on MGo, I was still stunned at some of the things described in the book.  Of course, for an avid M football follower, a lot of it was rehashing.  But there was still plenty there.

Sopwith

January 20th, 2012 at 3:08 PM ^

While the obvious has been pointed out by numerous posters already (i.e., of course it didn't seem to be packed with revelations to a regular MGoBlog reader), there were nevertheless a number of things I don't recall hearing about prior to reading.  Wish I'd made a list of them, but off the top of my head, I was taken aback by the extent to which the administration put RR under various gag orders not to respond publicly to things, most particularly the agreement for UM to fork over the $$ to settle the WVU lawsuit (which was the plan right from the start, but I recall at the time it looked like UM was riding to his rescue, and it got things off on a very bad note-- and RR being unable to explain the situation owing to the gag order just got him buried in the press).    

I don't recall the discussion of what players like Denard were offered on their recruiting trips to SEC schools, either, ever being discussed here.  The story about RR and GERG fighting over putting Ezeh back into a game (Iowa, maybe?) when Demens was doing well, etc.  Little tidbits like that.

I will say that the "hole" in the book several reviewers have pointed out, namely the reasons behind the demise of the defense, ought to be the absolute last thing a regular MGoBlog reader feels they still don't have a handle on.  How many posts were there on the "Decimated Defense", the "Never Forget" banner, the umpteen picture plays highliting the inability of our contain guys to do exactly that, the repeating defensive UFR themes, etc., ad nauseum, ad infinitum... ?  For a non-regular on this blog, however, I can see it as a more legitimate knock.

It wasn't a perfect book and had its share of hand-waving away some serious problems RR brought on himself, such as trying to shoehorn GERG and Shafer into systems and assistant coaches not of their own choosing, but overall I was still fairly riveted.  It was a bit like reading about a historical event I felt I had really lived through myself-- interesting in the sense of getting some broader, hindsight-informed perspective.

 

snarling wolverine

January 20th, 2012 at 3:31 PM ^

I disagree about the gag order.  I don't know why Bacon thinks it would have been a good idea for Rodriguez to lash out at his former employer.  He was going to be painted as a villain regardless, for the cardinal sin of leaving his alma mater.  Once the lawsuit was on, I don't think it really mattered what he said.  In general I think the book made way too big a deal about PR and not enough about actual football coaching.  You can be the greatest PR guy in the world and still get fired for going 15-22.

I also don't agree that this blog fills in the gaps about the defense.  The question of why Rodriguez is so married to the 3-3-5 has never been answered.  Nor do we ever learn what exactly compelled him to hire Shafer and Robinson, when he knew that they weren't experienced at running that defense. 

Section 1

January 20th, 2012 at 3:44 PM ^

You can be the greatest PR guy in the world and still get fired for going 15-22. 

That's a valid, and an arguable, point.

Because you can also go 15-22 and not get fired, if you aren't also saddled with a bullshit national "NCAA violations" story, an actual NCAA investigation, a relentlessly hostile press and a disloyal faction of former players and perhaps even some Athletic Department staff.

Example: Beilein

In reply to by Section 1

snarling wolverine

January 20th, 2012 at 3:50 PM ^

Did Brandon ever say that he fired Rodriguez because of the NCAA investigation or the media?  I thought he made it clear that it was due to our terrible performance on the field.  The Beilein comparison is apples and oranges.  Beilein ended our 11-year NCAA drought.  Rodriguez had no similar redeeming accomplishment.  If his second year had been as good as Beilein's second year was, I don't think he would have been fired a year later. 

Section 1

January 20th, 2012 at 3:58 PM ^

So, let's ask him, okay?  I would love that discussion.  I'll say again; I would love to convene a University symposium on Three and Out, with a panel discussion including Bacon, Brian Cook, Rosenberg/Snyder, and any of the principal characters in the book who can be convinced to participate.

And, I think that the Beilein comparison is spot-on.  It is hard to think of a more neat and tidy comparison.  Both coaches had trouble at first, and a lack of success that, if sustained, would have been intolerable.  The difference was that the atmosphere surrounding Beilein was mostly placid, and the atmosphere surrounding Rodriguez was completely toxic.

STW P. Brabbs

January 20th, 2012 at 4:22 PM ^

And and I would love to have dinner with Napoleon, and George Washington, and Jesus, and we could just talk about anything and wouldn't that be sooo cool?

Good luck organizing that symposium.  I'm sure the principal character to which you refer are chomping at the bit for such an opportunity.  You're only going to get more traction on your Rodriguez was fired prematurely campaign after the 11-2 season, too.

Section 1

January 20th, 2012 at 4:32 PM ^

...as well as a very sizable audience.  We might also be able to get former Michigan Daily editor Jon Chait, and  an expert on Journalism Ethics.

Getting Brandon, or Rosenberg, or Carr could be a lot harder.  But it would be completely up to them.  We could invite them, make it clear that the timing would be worked around their busy schedules, and then leave empty chairs with their respective names on them onstage so they would know where to sit if they choose to appear.

Hannibal.

January 20th, 2012 at 3:27 PM ^

I wasn't disappointed, but I did think that the lack of discussion about the defensive coordinators was a glaring hole in the book.  Bacon should have either written about it, or if he didn't have enough information, he should have explained that in the book.  There were some rumors during the Shafer year that Shafer and Gibson didn't see eye to eye and that chemistry problem was a big reason for the crappiness of that 2008 defense.  That's the kind of thing that I would have liked to read more about.

Brimley

January 20th, 2012 at 3:31 PM ^

If you thought Bacon glossed over the defense's issues in the book, re-read this:

http://mgoblog.com/content/post-release-three-and-out-qa-part-i

for what I think is pretty damn good discussion of it.

Also, remember how this book morphed from a magazine article about the spread to what it eventually became.  Plus, Bacon knew that he had to aim at the middle to pull both more casual fans and we with MgoObession.  On the whole, he did a very good job.

snarling wolverine

January 20th, 2012 at 3:46 PM ^

In my opinion the problem with Bacon, both in the book and here in that follow-up article, is that he seems to start with the premise that Rodriguez is a great coach (even on defense) so there must be some external factor that did him in.  I'm not sure I agree.  I think Rodriguez is good at coaching offense, but there are other aspects of being a head coach at which he seems to be lacking.

thisisme08

January 20th, 2012 at 3:56 PM ^

The books purpose was never to be a full rehashing of ever single event RR had during his time here and for that purpose it has to aim for the middle ground between casual reader and rabid fan. 

I feel that any Mgo reader should be saying "yup, already knew that" but thats the whole point, we had discussed so many points ad nauseam and to see it put into print was validation that we had drawn the correct conclusions long ago because its not like the AD is going to issue press releases telling us Bill Martin has no idea how to work a Blackberry.

To me the book represented the fact that the car had been broke for a long time but finally the wheels fell off and well people didnt like that very much. 

Bacon did a good job with what he had to work with, his points were well sourced and  researched (looking at you FreePress), and  he painted a story as nonbiasedly as he could considering the book is told from RR's viewpoint. 

    

MIdocHI

January 20th, 2012 at 4:01 PM ^

I am 3/4 through the book, and I admit to being slightly disappointed.  It seems to cover a lot of topics superficially, but not the depth that we, members of MGoBlog, expect. 

Also, I think the game stuff is glossed over.  He mentions in one sentence during a game review how Tay Odoms drops a punt.  He fails to mention that this is a RECURRENT problem.  He states that the final chance to comeback against Iowa at home was killed by a kickoff out of bounds.  What he fails to mention that this was the second time that game and how demoralizing/disgusting it was for the fans for us to keep witnessing the same mistakes over and over as if there was no coaching.

In the book at one points RR states after watching film of a loss that it looked like a "poorly coached team."  I would say that most games the team looked poorly-coached.  Perhaps that was because we were afraid of practicing too much due to the NCAA investigation.  I do not know, but we never seemed to be a well-coached, mistake-free team. 

Bacon never fails to mention that after every loss, RR blamed himself to the players.  Yet, he rarely did that in the media.  It might have made a big difference for him.

Bacon tells us that RR preached, "Ball Security Always. BSA." We were were awful at turnovers.  Apparently, ball security was just talk.  We had terrible turnover margins. Yet, no players were benched.  There were no consequences.  Talk is cheap.  Good coaching fixes mistakes.

Here on this blog, we have many rumors about RR's guys undermining the defensive coordinators Shafer and Robinson.  There is not a single mention of the dynamics of the defensive coaching staff.

I think the book has a pro-RR slant.  I was thinking while reading this book that it did not jibe with my memories of how I and other fans thought of the situation at the time.  I did enjoy the history of Michigan football that I did not know completely despite growing up in Michigan, having multiple family members with degrees from Michigan as well as a couple myself.  I am also more angry at the Freep for the extent to which they went to complete the hatchet job. Overall, I think it is a good book and a quick read, but does not have the depth that most MGoBlog members would want.

 

LIZARD4141

January 20th, 2012 at 4:41 PM ^

I enjoyed the book, but there wasn't any big surprises to me either. Everyone knew that Bill Martin butchered the hiring process. Also there wasn't a lot of facts in the book. A lot of hear say. I'm a little confused why so many people idolize Bacon. It's As if they believe that he's done more for Michigan football than LLoyd Carr.

Section 1

January 20th, 2012 at 5:11 PM ^

But I do have a lot of questions.  So did Bacon.  It's too bad Carr wouldn't answer any of them.

Carr has done more than just about anybody for Mott Childrens Hospital.  And he did more for Michigan football, up to 2007, than almost anybody.

Since 2007, I woud argue that not only did John U. Bacon do more for Michigan football, I'd argue that Brian Cook likewise has done more for Michigan football, than Lloyd Carr, and unlike Carr, neither Bacon nor Brian were getting $350,000+/year for their troubles.  Forget about the fact that Carr seemingly never lifted a finger to help Rodriguez; where was Carr, to defend Michigan football, apart from Rodriguez, when Rosenberg was on the attack?  Brian Cook stood up.  Jon Chait stood up.  Rick Leach stood up.  Frank Beckmann stood up.  Not many others did.

I'm not so silly as to downplay what Lloyd Carr has contributed to the historic success of the Michigan football program; I just can't think of any examples since 2008.  Can you?  Really, how hard would it have been for Lloyd Carr to have done a sit-down interview, or an Op-Ed column for a major newspaper, picking apart Rosenberg the way that any of the aforemnetioned stand-up guys did?  And to declare public support for Rodriguez?  And to insist to all of his former players that there was one guy in charge of Michigan football and his name was Rodriguez?

ryanfourmayor

January 20th, 2012 at 4:56 PM ^

I waited and waited and decided to cave and get the book because someone on the board talked about denards SEC recruiting but that was a blip on the radar of this book. It was nice to relive some of the games through the book but over all it Made up most of the book along with pregame, half time and post game speeches.

Class of 1817

January 20th, 2012 at 5:05 PM ^

Preface: I was not a Rich Rod fan. I was not a Rich Rod hater. I am a fan of Meeechigan, and RRod's 3 years were maddenginly difficult to endure. But it was clear that there were some weird things going on...something was Wrong. And I think the book touches on that and, overall, does a job of vindicating RRod, while most media seemed to paint him as a foul-mouthed coach who wasn't committed or connected to his players...who then broke down into Josh Groban. But it seemed like that was only one side (if it can be called a "side") of the story.

...I purposely didn't read any excerpts before I read the book, and tore through it in 3 days.

I learned a helluva lot about what was going on behind closed Meeechigan doors. A lot of RRod's tenure made more sense after seeing the adversity that he experienced from both within and outside of the program.

Yeah, it's too bad he isn't interested in defense, and that probably means that it was going to be difficult for him to fit in at Michigan long-term. But I thought the book broke down the RRod era into:

A) Program in-fighting from powerful individuals who seemed to be against him from the beginning.

B) Media that seemed to have it in for him arbitrarily because certain writers/sources thought that slamming him would be a good way to make a name for themselves.

C) Repeated failures on the field...some of which (mainly injuries) were outside of a coach's control.

There was no doubt that the team was improving throughout his time, from an offensive perspective. And they may have been able to shore up the defense. But I think it was clear that RRod may have lasted another year if he only had encountered 2 out of the 3 elements; but for whatever reason, he had a lot going against him and he didn't win quickly enough to shut down the naysayers.

I kind of needed that book to better understand a few things that, for better or for worse, were possibly going Very Wrong during RRod's years.

 

B-Nut-GoBlue

January 20th, 2012 at 6:59 PM ^

I don't even want to read the book at this point.

Only half-joking, but damn such sour-ness through the blog regarding this book.  The thing is, I understand both sides: "Not another '3 & Out' " thread and "I just finished the book, here's what I think" thread.  Both are valid retorts, but damn, the fun seems to be taken out even going to buy the book to read.

Lord (and Bo) knows I will though.

BlueGoM

January 21st, 2012 at 1:27 AM ^

I thought the book was great.

The book is about Michigan football during the RR years.  You follow Michigan football and read MGoBlog on a daily basis.  Of course you already knew 1/2, maybe 3/4 of what was going to be in that book!  I was reading it to get details that hadn't been made public,  I don' t know what others were expecting.

As far as some people claiming Bacon  was "leaving details out" -  he's condensing 3-4 years of football and controversy, following coaches and players around, into a few hundred pages.   IMO that's not a simple task.  Suffice to say there were many little things, like quotes from coaches meetings, and the details of the confrontation between Cook and Rosenberg, that I hadn't known.

Some posters have implied that Bacon is trying to "rehab" RR by discussing his previous successes.  Well OF COURSE Bacon is going to talk about RR's previous coaching successes.  How else did he become a candidate for the Michigan job?   That's part of the story, how RR got to be the coach here in the first place.

Lastly I'll just say that some people are determined to dislike RR, and aren't willing to admit that the UM admin/alums/others treated RR very poorly.   After reading the book I was embarrassed by the behavior of certain people at UM, and RR wasn't one of them.