Anti-schadenfreude edition: four issues I'd like to see mgoblog repress...
I hope the play on words in the title doesn't offend the "schadenfreude" poster; I don't mean it that way at all.
Anyway, here are four "fine whines" that I would love to see decanted and disposed of:
1. I'm not sure RR is the right coach for UM.
2. Tate Forcier isn't as good as we thought he was.
3. The spread won't work against better teams.
4. RR doesn't recruit defense.
Why? Here's the short version:
RR needs four and maybe five years to fully restock the cupboard. The team will look a lot different when he has his own fifth-year seniors on it. I'm hoping they start playing well again as early as next year, but will still be patient until he actually has a full team of kids he recruited.
Forcier was great before the injuries; he hasn't been so great playing hurt. It's far too early to write him off.
The spread certainly has worked against UM over the years. Also, there is the matter of the title game last January. For that matter, it worked great against UM on Saturday.
RR recruits defense as hard as anyone. It really isn't his choice that many of the people he recruited on that side of the ball chose to go elsewhere. I'm guessing that the chaos around Shafer last season may have had something to do with this year's class, too.
Anyway, UM will be fine under RR. I wish as much as anyone that it could have started happening last year, but it didn't work out that way. We have really been spoiled as UM fans because we haven't had to go through two years this bad since the 1960's. Maybe it is good for us to go through this crap like every other fanbase in the country has had to. It seperates the die-hard fans from the bandwagon jumpers, and may make us appreciate it even more when we see success again.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:16 PM ^
No debate on a message board?
I don't disagree with your points, I do disagree with a no debate sentiment. Yes, some stuff around here is ridiculous, but I can think of good arguments to counter some of your points, even though the arguments are not my own. All the issues you list are not closed.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:36 PM ^
Seconded.
November 1st, 2009 at 10:47 PM ^
I too want RR here for at least 4 years in order to give him a fair chance. But unlike the OP I think that the idea that there is no question he is the right coach for us is settled, is frankly, ludicrous. It's a perfectly legitimate point to debate 1 year and 3/4 into his tenure. Where I depart from the side that questions him is that there is no way to know the answer to this question yet--for the anti-RR crowd or for the OP.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:38 PM ^
Rich Rod deserves four to five years but if the NCAA investigation comes back with major violations then we will need to change coaches (since there is a clause in his contract about NCAA violations).
A question for someone who knows: why has the NCAA been so quick to jump on Michigan over practice time while they have not been able to get their shit together over the Reggie Bu$h and OJ Mayo scandals at U$C?
November 1st, 2009 at 8:30 PM ^
The simple answer: when you have limited to no subpoena power, you have to largely rely on the willingness of people to talk. In the Michigan case, student-athletes have to talk because of their scholarship status, and the NCAA is after them as a result.
In the case of the USC players, those players were gone and pro by the time the investigations were ongoing, and the problem peoples were agents and the like. They don't have to testify, and there is the rock and hard place.
November 1st, 2009 at 10:04 PM ^
Student-athletes are required to speak to the NCAA? I don't believe that to be true. No one fessed up the first time they investigated the Ed Martin scandal (in 1997), when Taylor, Traylor and Bullock were all on the team. The NCAA couldn't turn up any hard evidence and the case was closed (though only temporarily, as it turned out).
November 1st, 2009 at 10:36 PM ^
at the risk of losing their scholarships.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:45 PM ^
Two things are going to happen. RR will succeed at UM and we will all laugh at ourselves. RR will not succeed at UM and the program will move forward. The jury is obviously still out. The team is not playing well and there are many arguments why this is the case. Some defend RR and the staff and some do not. The board meltdown is somewhat justified, as UM has not had a product on the field with this many question marks in a long time. The questions you wish to "repress" are valid questions, in that, none of them have been proven either true or false.
Comparing his tenure at other schools cannot completely solidify that Michigan will be a championship contender under his leadership (it is like comparing one war with another and coming up with conclusions because the circumstances may appear similar but once you are in they are actually completely different).
We don't know how good Tate really is, the sample size is too small (he is everything and nothing at the same time).
The Spread can obviously win Championships but in the Big Ten a spread team has yet to be consistently successful (Again small sample size).
RR recuits defensive players, sure, but there is bound to be some naysayers because the defensive has looked mediocre in his 1 and half years.
Long post (trying to avoid doing things that must be done) but my point being that only time will tell. Blind optimism or pessimism is counter productive. Nobody can say with certainty one way or the other. It will be up for debate until the team under RR is successful or his tenure is over. The beautiful thing is that we will not settle for mediocre football at Michigan (I hope) so it will be one way or the other.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:46 PM ^
This was beautiful. That is all.
November 1st, 2009 at 11:31 PM ^
*Laconically scrolling through what I was anticipating was another overheated board post. See this*
*Snort, spit half of my 4th gin fizz all over my 24-in Mac and my $4,000 Versace silk kimono*
Me: MY GOD!
*Fulgencio, my Cuban house boy, looking up from his latest Utne Reader, murmurs*
Fulgencio: Something wrong, babe?
*Wiping said gin fizz from my full-but-soft moustache*
Me: Nothing dear. Just surprised to see a bracingly-intelligent comment from a fanboard less than 48 hours after a meltdown. Could you pass me the Shamwow? I seem to have a mess on my hands.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:45 PM ^
1. I'm not sure RR is the right coach for UM.
He's a proven coach.
2. Tate Forcier isn't as good as we thought he was.
Tate's a True Freshman
3. The spread won't work against better teams.
Tell that to Oregon.
4. RR doesn't recruit defense.
?? Robinson better get started.
Tater, in another world you know me, as I am and
will remain All in through Thick and Thin.
I first like to define Schadenfreude, as the term
has been skewed. Here's my take.
Schadenfreude
noun: malicious joy
gloating
spitefulness
glee
I saw none of the above yesterday. What I saw was Tate
playing rattled in the 2nd half with his Schwanz hanging
out, turnovers and pissen poor decision making.
We had better get a win next week against Purdue oder wir gefickt for a bowl bid.
We're going to get
unsere Ärsche getreten up at Camp Randall, especially
if we play like we did yesterday.
If it wasn't for the Stellar play of Graham, Übermensch, there
were few bright spots in the 2nd half. Juice Williams ran his
arse off, aside from Graham, he made our defense look like
a bunch of Fotzen.
As far as Sheridan starting, nein fickin weg!
Just remember diese Arschlöcher von der Ohio Universität St
are going to be here on 11/21, and if we play like we did
yesterday, wir gefickt!!
As one poster has on his avatar you can't spell
Schwanzlutscher without OSU.
Gehen Blau !!!!
MOD EDIT:
He asked for help with html tables, so this edit is just to help a guy out. -FA
| Title A | Title B | Title C |
|---|---|---|
| Row 1 | Cell B1 | Cell C1 |
| Row 2 | Cell B2 | Cell C2 |
November 1st, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
I agree with the poster here. I am as disappointed as anyone about the turn this season has taken. However, there are still three games left, and things can change quickly (as we have all seen this year).
What if Michigan manages to beat Purdue next week and then pulls off the shocker against OSU? 7-5 with wins over ND and OSU would make me pretty happy. Hell, even if we win one of our last three plus a bowl game I will be satisfied.
Now, I know these scenarios may not seem all that likely after the team's recent performances, but Illinois sure turned it around pretty quick on Saturday. Why can't Michigan pull something similar?
All we need is a game like last year at Minnesota. Did anyone see that one coming? I surely did not.
I just think that none of this doom and gloom talk would be happening if we had won on Saturday, and it will all stop if Michigan wins their next 1,2,3 games.
I suggest that we all just focus on each Saturday's game until the season is over. After that we'll have 9 or 10 months (hopefully 9) to discuss RR, Tate, recruiting, etc.
Let's all stick together on this one and will our team to at least one more victory! I want that bowl game!!!
November 1st, 2009 at 8:07 PM ^
They looked lifeless and let Wisco run all over them.
I just worry about them trying to save their season(just like Illinois) by beating "mighty" Michigan.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:02 PM ^
I agree with Tater. Kill me.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:55 PM ^
I don't have enough energy to hurt anybody, but I think I can manage spreading some H1N1y goodness.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:21 PM ^
I guess my attempt at Deutche satire wasn't too popular.
Maybe you should come up with a better term if you
don't know what you're talking about. If you disagree
with my analysis, maybe you didn't watch the same
game that I did. I'm still steaming after yesterday.
I've been working for the Krauts for 20 years
so Ich weiß, was ich rede. So,
Fick Aus
November 1st, 2009 at 8:19 PM ^
I don't think repression is ever the answer, but regarding the points 1-4 that you raise, the frequency with which they're repeated over and over again ad nauseum is making the board start to get somewhat boring. I said my piece in the "We shouldn't fire RR" thread, others have said their pieces elsewhere. How many different times can we restate the exact same points before getting bored? There has to be other things to talk about.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:26 PM ^
It's not like any of those questions will be going away, however, until RRod wins two, maybe three National Championships (in a row)and only after beating TUofOS 211-0 (the year prior's 210 points being marred by a late OSU fieldgoal)...
Believe me, in 2006 we were 9 - 0 and in the second half of the 10th game there were "serious concerns" from people near us about the "quality of this coach and this team". It's Michigan, it's who we are...
I will now enjoy a fine wine while considering the implications of the "fine whines".
Thanks to everyone who has posted so far...interesting stuff.
Best wishes.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:59 PM ^
You guys are tough! I was trying to be honest.
I guess a little honesty and humor are just
too much to bear. Tomorrow we're all back to
work. Lighten up.
This is my first neg pronging, and I don't
think it is warranted. Bang away.
November 1st, 2009 at 9:16 PM ^
I realize this has nothing to do with this topic... that being said.
I'm considering trying to come up with my own QB metric for spread and shread qbs. Off the top of anyone's head, can you name me some recent teams that have run the spread and shread so I can get some more data? So far I have...
UM '08, '09
WVU under Rich Rod
Recent Oregon vintage
Last three years of CMU
Cinci?
November 1st, 2009 at 9:26 PM ^
I'll create you a topic for this
November 1st, 2009 at 9:39 PM ^
Much appreciated.
November 1st, 2009 at 9:37 PM ^
I fully agree that RR's rebuilding effort will separate the true fans from the bandwagoners. I just hope the new AD isn't swayed by the loud, angry masses that will go apeshit if we don't have at least 10 wins next year. Of course, if RR can right this ship and get to a bowl and/or beat OSU then he'll have the 2-3 more years that this project requires.
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:04 AM ^
With separating "true fans from the bandwagoners" for an institution like Michigan, is that both include big money contributors to the athletic and academic programs. While they may not publicly call for Rich Rod's dismissal, they can (and do) put heavy pressure on UM's administration. People with that kind of money to spread around are used to getting their way.
A couple of years ago, Boone Pickens was featured on HBO's Real Sports. The story centered on how much money he was giving Oklahoma State for both academics and (especially) athletics. The interviewer (I forget who it was) asked whether he would now expect to see a winner on the football field, and whether he would pressure the university administration if he didn't like what he saw.
His answer: "You bet your ass."