"I hope, and I think, we're done with the dead era of Michigan football," former U-M tailback Chris Perry [2000-03] said. "Everyone I talk to, all my former teammates and all the Michigan Men I saw at the Mott fundraiser a few weeks ago are convinced we have the right person in charge and everyone is committed to getting on board.
"We didn't have that the last few years because we didn't have the right guy as coach but we've learned from our own mistakes. Coach Hoke is the guy that wanted this place. Jim and John Harbaugh were the sexy picks but if you have to throw all kinds of money at them and woo them like you're asking a girl to prom ... to me that says that those guys aren't invested in the program. Coach Hoke is invested and he's going to get this program back and when he does Michigan State is going to go back to its place.
"They can talk trash right now. They should be talking trash. They've taken advantage of us when we're down and that's how a little brother beats a big brother. Maybe you're playing basketball and the older brother has a sprained ankle and he's not himself. If you're not beating him then you're never going to beat him. But when he's healthy again, you better watch out because he's been embarrassed and he's going to be motivated. I know Michigan is motivated."
Awesome Chris Perry Quote from Rivals
"I hope, and I think, we're done with the dead era of Michigan football," former U-M tailback Chris Perry [2000-03] said. "Everyone I talk to, all my former teammates and all the Michigan Men I saw at the Mott fundraiser a few weeks ago are convinced we have the right person in charge and everyone is committed to getting on board.
That quote just insured I keep my #26 Chris Perry Bengals Jersey.
My favorite Michigan running back of all time.
really fits in well with the post. It's actually kinda tough to tell that it's not part of the quote!
I actually thought the sig was part of perry's qoute.
I very impressed that Perry pulled of adding the quote about climbing back from hell. It added a bit more flair (not Ric or pieces of).
The season needs to get here now!
The last line just gave me chills!
Al Pacino gets me all the time.
This system is messed up. How can you have a trolling post with positive points? Does the "system" not agree that this is trolling and dish out a point? Not to say this is even trolling.
That make me want to suit up and play in this terential downpour we are experiencing!! GO BLUE
saying the right things is all that's required to get fans and ex-players fired up and super confident.
I don't have a single criticism of Hoke. As far as I can tell he's done an EXCELLENT job so far. But I guess saying the right things is all that is needed for all of the little brother talk to begin all over again. As for me, I'd rather wait until we actually play games to declare that we're back, and that Hoke is the greatest. Clearly I am in the minority though.
I really dont like this, I feel like a true Michigan man and fan would stick up for the coach and the school no matter what. I didnt like everything RRod did but he was Michigans man to me.
Seriously. Why is it so damn hard to just say "Rich Rod and the boys on the team tried hard but it didn't work out. I think Hoke's a great coach who will win lots of games". Rich Rod didn't work out, now he's gone. What the hell good does dancing on his grave accomplish?
Besides, if RR was the wrong guy, who, in 2007-2008 was the right guy?
It was the guy who could convince Ryan Mallett to stay in Ann Arbor even though rumor has it his former coach disliked him and wanted him to transfer, he was homesick and he was losing all his playmakers and 3 starters on the Oline.
It was same guy who could convince Manningham and Arrington to forgo NFL dollars to hang around and catch passes from A. Ryan Mallett, who looked wildly erratic and by all accounts looked as if he was hated by Manningam or B. Steven Threet/ Nick Sheridan. Remember, unlike Henne and Long, these guys couldn't be lured back by the idea that they were going to win a National Championship, a Big Ten Title and beat OSU.
The same guy who could magically heal Brandon Minor and Greg Mathews, thus helping prevent one of the worst possible offenses in Michigan history.
The same guy who could then make Michigan's 2008 defense, a solid unit, into the 2009 Nebraska defense, an unstoppable unit that nearly completely made up for its terrible offense's ineptitude.
Whose that guy you ask?
Oh that's right, he doesn't exist.
You know, when you look at it, it looks like Lloyd got out just in time.
You know, when you look at it, it looks like Lloyd got out just in time.
I'd bet Lloyd himself feels 180 degrees differently. He's probably horrified at what happened since his departure, and wishes he hadn't left at a time when there wasn't a clear successor in place. If Carr had stuck around simply one more season, we likely would have avoided a great deal of unpleasantness.
Carr may have thrown transfer papers in Mallett's face at one time, but he did that regularly - it was one of his pet motivational tactics. I don't think he actually wanted him gone, and I suspect Mallett would have stayed had Carr still been here. Boren certainly would have, and Arrington probably as well (Manningham was gone regardless.) Alex Mitchell might have stayed - that one's harder to predict. In any event, instead of having one returning offensive starter, we could have had four or five, playing in a system in which they were familiar. Instead of being one of the absolute worst offenses in the country, we probably would have been about average, something like in 2001. On defense, with the staff that recruited them in place, there wouldn't have been issues of guys "not buying in." The D might have been the strong unit we were expecting it to be. All told, I think we could have eeked out a bowl bid that year with Lloyd still around.
Had Carr retired in 2008, instead of 2007, Brady Hoke would have now been a serious candidate, on the heels of his 12-win season at Ball State. We could have thus had a much more seamless transition from Carr to Hoke, with probably significantly less attrition than what we experienced. Unfortunately, what happened was that Carr retired at a bad time, we were forced to scramble, and we would up with a coach who, despite a good résumé, was not a good fit for the program we'd established.
Is that had Lloyd Carr returned and everything went perfectly, we would have maxed out at eeking into a bowl bid?
So perhaps, if that was the ceiling of the 2008 squad, maybe there shouldn't have been a firing squad at RR's door considering not everything went perfectly - and far from it - and they ended up 3-9.
I think Lloyd Carr was happy to go out on a relatively high note beating Florida. That 2007 season suggested from the very beginning vs. Appalachian State that he was done. In all honesty, had Henne and Hart not gutted out the games they did, we could have easily found ourselves in the 5-7, 6-6 range that year. Penn State, MSU, Illinois...
You are right though: Rich Rodriguez was not the guy to take over the 2008 Wolverines. I've said it before, if Rodriguez was going to coach Michigan, the optimal time would have been 2006: the program was ripe for change after the mediocre 2005 season, he would have had a ton of offensive talent to work with and a good defensive foundation. It's all hypothetical, but if he comes in when the team is stocked, he's still here today in my mind. I just don't think he was savvy enough to navigate the minefield of being an outsider at Michigan.
As for Hoke now, he's done everything right. But the real reason that I was excited about Rodriguez, even if it wasn't why he was hired, is because I thought he could take us to the next level, where we could be a perennial BCS bowl team who was frequently in the hunt for a national championship. Maybe I was just wrong, maybe the timing wasn't right, maybe Rodriguez just benefited from his Big East schedule, no one will ever really know. The feeling I get from Hoke is different. I feel that he can take us back to where we were. But if that's the case, then that just puts us on the second level of national powers: better than most, but rarely taken seriously.
I agree with you to a point... I loved the idea of RichRod bringing the spread to Michigan. Was the timing right probably not, but I think if he could have adopted a hybrid pro/spread combo it would have worked better.
Here's where RR got me, he was the flashy pick that never adjusted to the criticism of his peers. He is a great offensive minded coach and even offensive minded recruiter, but when it comes to defense he's a flub. The 3-3-5 was never ever going to work in the Big Ten... He needed a good recruiter and defensive mind to hold up the other side of the ball that he never really had. The bottom line was the defense could never stop anyone at all and how are you supposed to win a game with no defense or special teams. He showed he could get the right people in there for his offense, but never really lured any big defensive players. When it's a big time program, you are going to be criticized by everyone and their brother about how you do everything and it seemed like he wouldn't buy into that. I think in a perfect world if Rich Rod would have found a Hoke-esq. defensive/recruiter to run his defense Michigan faithful would have came around.
Bottom line.. RR didn't win fast enough and now we have Hoke. He has had an amazing start to his tenure, but like it was said above... It's all about what happens on the field.
Yeah, I would have loved to see Chad Henne running the zone read. And wouldn't the '06 defense have played better if it had run a 3-3-5?
Rodriguez had a grand total of one really good season at WVU at that point, which was I think the second season in the post-Miami/VT Big East.
The 2006 team was not a better fit to run Rodriguez's offense than the 2008 team, and I have no reason to believe he could have produced a defense anywhere near as good as the actual 2006 team.
Rodriguez isn't as bad a coach as he seemed the last three years, but he probably isn't as good a coach as he seemed his last three years at WVU in a putrid Big East conference, either.
Do you really think that Rodriguez would have run Chad Henne 10 times a game?
Come on man.
If Rodriguez actually stepped in with those guys, we would have seen the 2008 Capitol One Bowl for the next two seasons.
And I know, the Big East isn't the best conference, but you don't just beat the SEC and Big 12 champs by being putrid.
And who knows, with the right PLAYERS the 3-3-5 can work. That Michigan defense had a ton of talent. People act as if the Big Ten is some mystical football conference of the Gods in which there is only one way to survive, then conveniently ignore the fact our teams get smacked around come bowl season.
combined for 118 carries in 12 games, so, maybe.
Whatever we might have gained in a more competent version of the Rodriguez offense (debatable) would have potentially been offset by a not as debatable mishandling of the 2006 defense, which was very good (and looked downright great until OSU and USC). The 2008 defense had talent, too. It was just mishandled. Taylor, Trent, Graham, Brown, and Mouton were all drafted and Jamison and Warren have spent time on NFL rosters.
I didn't mean to insinuate that WVU was putrid under RR, just that one and two loss seasons in the BE don't carry as much information as one or two loss seasons in the BIG.
There is a difference between inheriting Sheridan/Threet and an NFL quarterback.
The rest isn't even worth arguing because it's all so vastly hypothetical.
Edit: I mean to say that it's not worth arguing because you seem to think that Rodriguez would have coached the 2006 team exactly like the 2008 team and I think oppositely and there is no reason to continue.
I think you missed the point on Threet v Henne. Threet was just as much a slow, lumbering pocket passer as Henne was and RichRod still ran him all over the place. I bet RichRod would've run the same offense whether it was Denard/Pat White or John Navarre
You clearly missed my point.
Chad Henne was a two year starter who was going to the NFL. I believe - purely hypothetically and because it only makes sense - that with good knowledge of what Henne could do, Rodriguez would have run a far more quarterback pass oriented spread offense than he did in 2008.
With Steven Threet, who is not Chad Henne, who was a first year starter on a bad team, you help your offensive line adjust for the future by running the offense you will be running over the next few seasons. Furthermore, Steven Threet didn't even give me the slightest confidence when he was throwing the ball that our problem was we weren't throwing it enough.
Yes they are similar in build.
That is where the similarities end.
Henne obviously would have done better than Threet did in '08, but I don't think he would have reached his full potential under RR. In RR's offense, the passing game is not as sophisticated as it was under Carr. Routes are dependent on the QB being enough of a running threat to be at least a decoy on every play. This posed problems for us in obvious passing situations the last three years. What success we did have generally was due to Forcier improvising, because the intended route was not open.
RR had trouble adapting to Threet and I'd guess that he'd have had some issues with Henne. He's a guy whose offense requires a very precise combination of talents. Without those talents he's a fish out of water.
This is a dead horse par excellence, so, apologies.
Say you're RichRod in 2008. (I pity you.) You have the choice of (A) playing to the strengths (such as they were in his RS Freshman year) of Threet and going half-a$$ with G0d's offense (PRO-STYLE, YEAH) or (B) teaching your hogs the spread offense and sucking it up. (Aside: You also have the choice of not @#%$ing with Scott Shafer, but that's a 'nother story.)
How many more wins does A get you? Two, maybe? Three? You're still 6-6 and howling will still occur. (It would occur with anything less than eight wins.) And, you're behind on your project (bringing the spread, the offense of unconverted heathens and pitiful midgets) to Ann Arbor. Why not go with B?
This line of reasoning might have been defensible had 2009 and 2010 not also been horrendous seasons. Were we any better off for all the pain we went through in 2008? We were actually a game worse in the Big Ten standings the next year.
An entire class of Michigan players has gone through nothing but rebuilding. When was the payoff under RR ever going to come? 2013? Given his gross mismanagement of the defensive side of the ball, I wouldn't have expected national-title contention any sooner than that, and even that would have been a stretch, given that it would have been Gardner's first season.
It's time to let it go with RR. He's not the coach anymore. People are defending/rationalizing everything like he's still here.
Rational people defend him when he is unfairly attacked as the sole reason Michigan football has been bad from 2008-10.
And yeah if you want to say he was the primary reason that's fine. He's the head coach and in the end when you're the head guy success and failure falls on you.
But I like Rodriguez. I liked his teams at WVU and I'll like his team wherever he coaches next. So I'm going to keep defending him against people who act like A. He walked into a perfect situation and destroyed it and it was all his fault and B. That the reason our team wasn't up to "Michigan standards" the past 3 years was because he was an outsider.
But the reason those things happened is in part because of what he had left to work with once he took over.
And there in lies my point.
Edit: and it seems Chris Perry thinks that way, as well as many of the alumni that are vigorously defended on this board.
FWIW, I'd be OK with that.
We're talking about the possible world (which you posited, by the way) in which Rodriguez becomes coach in 2006 instead of 2008. My point was that given what we know about what he did in 2008-10, I don't have a lot of confidence that things would have turned out that much different.
for confirming exactly what I just said!
Look, 2008 was always going to be a rebuilding year by our standards. Anytime you lose a ton of players it will be. But it did not have to be a program-killing 3-9 debacle. It probably would have been a 7-8-win season, followed by improved play the following seasons. Instead, things collapsed so much that people were celebrating a 7-win season last year.
Going from Carr to RR resulted in a collapse of the program. The transition was so rough that we still aren't where we typically would be, three years later. RR was not the right guy to hire. His offensive scheme was terribly suited for the players we had, and his mismanagement of the defense squandered a unit that had a decent amount of talent. Maybe at some other school he would have fit in better. Here, he was a horrible fit. This shouldn't be a controversial statement. Even RR himself acknowledges that it was a mistake to come here.
"If Carr had stuck around simply one more season, we likely would have avoided a great deal of unpleasantness."
If you mean Carr would have won more than three games - fine, probably, but if you mean that team would have made a bowl game, I can't go there. You have no way of proving that all four of those players who left, would have stayed, let alone stayed out of trouble.
Had Carr stayed, that 2008 team would still have been bowl-less, or at best, 6-6. You really believe Lloyd would have had MORE clout after a crappy 2008 season than after the reclamation job he did on the 2007 season? Hoke's 12 win season at Ball State would not have been enough to warrant him consideration, and Carr wouldn't have had enough pull to bring him in after Appy St and an (assumed) 5 or 6 win season.
The "unpleasantness" of the three win season was only partly Rodriguez' fault. That was one of the worst teams, talent-wise at least, that Michigan's fielded in decades. 2008 was going to be a low point in Michigan football history regardless of who the coach was.
6-6 was not the ceiling for the team with Mallett, Arrington, Boren and possibly Mitchell, and Carr's staff coaching them. 6-6 was the ceiling as it was - the Utah, Toledo and Purdue losses could have been wins. I would say with the added players and a staff better-suited for them, the ceiling was more like 8-4, with 6-6 being a more median projection.
The "unpleasantness" continued a lot further than 2008. We're still in rebuilding mode three years later. Absolutely no one expected this back in December 2007. You can go back and look at the archives of this site. Each year thereafter, expectations were lowered as the program failed to make significant progress.
and not presided over The Horror. Even if Lloyd would've left a year later, Hoke still would not have been a serious candidate. Hoke does not become a candidate with such a paper thin head coaching resume unless 3-9, 5-7, 7-5 happens. 12-1 at Ball State without the good season at SDSU is a tough sell. Odds are Harbaugh or Miles would've been more likely choices.
Any time that Carr would have left would have been a bad time if you're looking to replace him with a "Michigan Man". The coaching tree established under Bo was mostly old and dried up. Outside of Harbaugh, Miles and Hoke, there were not a lot of options unless you wanted to give Mike Debord a shout.
And all these people that want to throw Lloyd or RR under the bus for Mallett/Manningham/Arrington forget (a) Mallett's 420 obsession, (b) Manningham's likely departure regardless of coaching change and (c) the multiple times that Arrington had to be disciplined. Even without the attrition and coaching change, I don't see our teams the last three years being better than OSU and probably about even with MSU, Wisconsin and Iowa. It might not be 3-9 bad, but that's probably not BCS Bowl worthy either.
Hoke would have gotten the job in December 2008. The season he had then put him on our radar.
A lot of people were seriously pi$$ed that he got the job this time. Can you imagine it being any better in '08? A MAC coach with one memorable season? I just don't see it. That doesn't mean it wouldn't have worked.
Brandon is the only guy who wanted Hoke. He's the only decision maker this time around who wanted Hoke. He wasn't hired until December 2010, so you're making a big assumption to think another AD would've made such a big reach for a relatively unproven-at-the-time head coach.
If Lloyd would've left after 2008, you would have had the same pool of candidates that you had in 2007, except Harbaugh would've been more attractive and not on the NFL radar yet. In your scenario of Lloyd staying another year, I still see RR getting the job unless Martin offered it to Harbaugh or WVU paid him 5mil a year to stick around.
...in retrospect, he was an awkward choice at best, and he tried (unsuccessfully) to bring a philosophical change and a "lighter" brand of football to Michigan that was an uncomfortable fit vis-a-vis the historical characteristics of the program. This created tension, dissention and lots of questions.
That said, I wish him well in his future endeavors.
Sorry -- I don't think that was 100% awesome.
* He's high on Hoke. I am, too. I realize that the games haven't been played, but Brady is doing very well so far.
* Fired-up, inspirational, etc. ...
* He doesn't think we had the right guy as coach. Complicated issue, but certainly not an unreasonable statement.
* Perry doesn't acknowledge the spotty performance near the end of Lloyd's years. What exactly does he mean by the "dead era?" The Appalachian State and Oregon losses were epic embarrassments for the program. There were other games over the last few years of Lloyd's term where Michigan turtled in the 4th quarter (Minnesota, anyone?) and blew leads.
* Good people cost money. I don't know for sure that Harbaugh was worth all the "BRING JIMMY BACK HOME!" wailing from the fan base, but that's beside the point. Sometimes you have to spend big $ to get the right guy. Following Perry's reasoning, why not hire Jerry Hanlon?
I know you will never get off the "Lloyd decline into RR's tenure" train, which is fine, b/c it does have some merits, but I just can't agree with that. I don't classify a season in which we play for the b10 championship on the last game of the season and then win the cap1 bowl as part of the dead era. Sure the first 2 games of the season were terrible and embarrassing. But given how the season turned out (We were ranked at the end of the year!) I don't understand how you can even begin to lump that in with 2 sub .500 seasons and a 7-5 year with an embarrassing bowl game.You point to 3 games specifically over 3 years of Lloyd, which isn't a whole lot. Were they the greatest years in Michigan football history? No. Were they even close to as bad as RR's three years? Not even close.
Calling it a "dead era" is a bit extreme, and seems like a knock against the players and yes, even coaches, who worked hard to bring success to Michigan. It's entirely possible to state a fact (Rich Rod was not a successful coach at Michigan), or even praise by contrast ("Hoke is better than Rich Rod"), without continuing into insulting hyperbole (it was a "dead era").
But considering your hardline stance (WORST YEARS EVAR!!!1!), your final sentence is probably more appropriate than you realize.
Umm, no. What I'm saying is that there's nothing positive about bashing the last three years of Michigan football.
It's a simple distinction:
1) expressing optimism regarding current staff and possibilities for future wins = good press
2) bashing previous staff (which by the way recruited most of our current players) = bad press
3) implying only "Michigan Men" (i.e. coaches who coached for coaches who coached for Bo) can succeed at Michigan = self-destructive press
So telling Denard, "hey, you know that guy you worked your tail off for because he's the only one who believed you could be a successful BCS QB? Yeah, he's an idiot. All those guys you play with? They weren't competing for Big Ten championships" would be a positive thing?
"today will be better than yesterday" != "yesterday sucked"
So Denard shouldn't care about what has been, but Chris Perry should?
If Hoke is a good coach, he'll distinguish himself from his predeccessor by making good decisions and winning football games, not by saying how awful it was before he got here. Note that Hoke has so far avoided the "dump on Rich" route. I'll side with Coach Hoke on this one.
Jeebus, how is it defending Rich Rod to say that ripping on him publicly is not at all productive? You'll note that in multiple places on this thread I state that RR
didn't work here. We don't need to trash RR to support Hoke, and in fact I think ripping on RR detracts from the current positive attitude around the program by unnecessarily stirring up bad blood.
Saying RR wasn't the right guy does not equal bashing the previous staff.
Saying that hiring RR was a "mistake" is bashing the previous regime (besides being a great example of Captain Hindsight-ism). Calling it a "dead era" is definitely bashing the previous regime. That said, Chris Perry's quote is not as bad as some I've seen, but I'm annoyed that he felt the need to pile on when being gracious would have been just as easy.
Keep in mind that I was replying to a poster who declared anyone who doesn't shout from the rooftops about how much RR sucked is a member of a "lunatic fringe".
I don't consider saying that hiring RR a mistake "bashing" when Richrod himself proclaimed coming here to be a mistake.... IMO there's nothing wrong with what Chris Perry said. But yes, I realize you were trying to prove a point.
Fair enough, though I'd still say "we're done with the dead era" is needlessly negative/provocative. As another quibble, RR may have made a mistake by coming here, since he had a better option (stay at WVU). I'm not sure Michigan had a better option when RR was hired, and any argument that they did would require some judicious use of hindsight.
You've dug so deep with this that you're obviously not going to change your mind now, but I would wager a large sum that grab-bag coach X from any BCS conference would have posted a better record than RR in 2008 with U-M's then roster.
You've proven my point. It's easy to say that NOW, but at the time RR had a lot of promise and seemed like the best guy we could get. "Grab bag BCS coach" would have had the same "Not Michigan Man" problem, and wouldn't have had RR's WVU resume.
I don't consider saying that hiring RR a mistake "bashing" when Richrod himself proclaimed coming here to be a mistake....
Rodriguez did not "proclaim" that coming to Michigan had been a mistake.
The full quote:
"I think it's easy to go back now and say, 'Gee, made a mistake.' And you can say that now because of hindsight," Rodriguez said in the interview. "But at the time, some of the things I was looking to do and the opportunity that was there, you kind of make the move.
"The frustrating part for us was that we thought we battled through the tougher times to get it to this point where we had a lot of the team coming back and we thought we were getting ready to take off. But you know hindsight is always easier to look back and say, 'It was a mistake.' Because we did have a good thing going at West Virginia, and we really enjoyed it. As you look back at it, wasn't the best move. Easy to say now."
The headline in that story, and dozens of other similar headlines, Rodriguez Says Going to Michigan a 'Mistake' were all as misleading as your own misquote.
But I recognize that people will pick away at words and dissect quotes well after they are made. And so with people picking apart Rich Rodriguez's quotes, I think I'll just continue to pick apart the quotes of Rodriguez's critics.
If people can't acknowledge that the 3 worst teams in the history of this program (CONSECUTIVELY!!!!) can be rightfully called a dead era, then you probably have some biases that should be reflected upon.
There is something positive about ripping the last three years. Since the 2012 and 2013 recruiting classes have begun thinking about college over the last few years, Michigan football has been an embarassment. Press that convinces people that things actually have changed (we got rid of that awful staff) as opposed to just saying "well, things are improving" is you're only shot of convincing kids that they will be part of a resurgence.
Blame the predecessors, whether it is true or not, in order to "sell" kids on the program going forward.
What an essentially dishonest, disreputable, disgusting way to operate a major program of the University of Michigan.
But I gotta say; I like the fact that you not only favor a program of "convincing" kids; you've tied it into a "Press" campaign, to help out that goal.
This is the perfect exemplar of absolutely everything that Michigan should not be. (Deception, reinvention of history, co-option of a press corps that has proven itself to be notoriously abusive to Michigan when it happens to serve the press' purposes.)
...watching Denard. That is probably the one and only positive from the RR years. I think that offense would've been more efficient if they ever has a good upperclassman lead the offense, but you don't keep a coach around just to wait on one position to improve.
But nothing good comes from players, alumni, press ripping the last three years. You're ripping on the kids who were part of those teams. There's a reason why "Where were these former players the last few yearsm, when..." was talked about around the Spring Game. Do you think they need to be constantly reminded how tough that time was?
And kids are not as gullible as you think. There's a reason why kids visit a school and talk to people before committing. They want to see how things are for themselves. We're getting Michigan kids because we're taking the state seriously again. The media has nothing to do with it.
Where's the "douche" button on this Moderator thingy? Seriously, it's the only response left to the ad hominem attacks of the RR Haterz Club because they even hate the people who call for civility in commenting on a Michigan coach and his players. Regardless of how Chis Perry feels about RR, as a public figure and de facto spokesperson for UM by nature of his prominence as a former player, Mr. Perry and the rest of the former players need to toe the company line. I cannot imagine Bo suffering through 3 humiliating years of Michigan football very easily, but I also cannot imagine him tolerating a single disrespectful word for those coaches and their teams, RR included.
Why did I use that as my subject line?
Here's why: I don't see anyone arguing that the RichRod years weren't the worst in the modern era. The numbers don't lie.
It's simple-minded, though, to act like Rodriguez was handed the keys to a fully loaded stretch Hummer. For example, have you seen the results of the last few NFL drafts? Historically bad ...
It doesn't seem like a reach to argue that the program's trajectory wasn't up to Michigan standards when RichRod took the helm. (For a microcosm, look at Andy Moeller's O-line. Only David Baas and Jake Long made the NFL over a period of several years. Contrast that to the four guys from a single draft who made NFL rosters in '00.)
Did it get worse under RichRod? Sure it did.
But ... this is Michigan! Let's have some orientation to detail. Perry sounds simple-minded at times during his rant. If he's going to talk about a dead era (spicy language), he shouldn't be surprised if someone calls him on the specifics.
I wouldn't have referred to RR's years as the 'dead era' if it hadn't been thrown out there by the post I responded to. My point was with regards to Lloyds final years, "not the best seasons in Michigan history" does not equal "worst seasons in Michigan history". That was the point I was trying to make.
Exactly. People lose all sense of perspective in trying to defend Rodriguez. In Carr's final three years (2005-2007), Michigan finished with the 19th best winning percentage overall. Among BCS conference teams, they were 14th! Think about that. Only 13 BCS teams had better records than Michigan during Carr's worst years.
If you spot Rodriguez a mulligan for 2008 and look at his 2009-2010 record, you'll find Michigan finished with the 47th worst record among all teams and only 15 BCS teams did worse. Yes, it's easier to count how many teams did worse than Michigan than to count how many were better!
The takeaway point is that Carr's worst years were as good as Rodriguez's best years were bad. Try wrapping your head around that.
Or wrap your head around a team that has 5 offensive players drafted into the NFL but still becomes the first team in the history of college football to be ranked and lose to a DII team. Or how about that same team getting the worst home beating in 40 years in which the opposing team was joking in the huddle at the end of the game, wondering which defensive lineman was going to give up next. But you are right, RR is at fault for the dead era. No one else.
We almost lost to UMass last year. We then had the worst bowl loss in history. These are not points you want to make.
The only thing I can do to counter is say that losing to App St with a senior backfield and stars at the skill positions is pretty inexcusable. And getting blasted the next week by Oregon with that same lineup should signal that there's something wrong (maybe depth???). Comparing a preseason #5 team to one that was unranked in August in 2010 is a tough job.
And this year was not our first blowout loss in a bowl game. 45-17 to Tennessee happened in 2002, which was our worst bowl loss ever. And a late, meaning less touchdown in the 2007 Rose Bowl kept us from losing that game by 20 points.
Arguing between which was the worse loss is a painful exercise, but I'll submit that losing to a pretty mediocre (we're talking Illinois in the Big Ten mediocre) UMass team with zomg Denard would have been very, very embarassing. It also might have ensured we didn't play Mississippi State in the bowl game, but whatever, that happened too.
The loss to Mississippi State isn't really comparable to any other bowl loss in the modern era for a variety of reasons. First, we didn't lose by 28 or 20, we lost by 38. It was the worst loss since 1965. While I think Miss. St was massively underrated going into the game, it doesn't excuse the abysmal job of the defense and offense.
I agree mostly with your comments. I would just say this about the Jim Harbaugh comments is I think Perry was trying to say that Hoke wanted to be here. He didn't need to be wooed or convinced that this was a good job, for him, his dream job. I think that that was the turn off for him with Harbaugh. Michigan men still view Michigan as a dream destination.
We got blown out by Oregon, but I don't see it as an "epic embarrassment" in the same way that Appalachian State was.... We were favored by 7 1/2 in the Oregon game, but that's nothing like the Appalachian State game where they wouldn't even put a line on the game.
that we didn't prepare for App State, we prepared for Oregon. So we lost ot App State and then turned around and got pummeled by Oregon.
We go beaten by App State. It was soundly embarrassing. (I did not wear Michigan gear until we beat ND - couldn't bear the local harassment at every turn.) OK, I thought, we screwed up and overlooked a lesser team. Surely we'll recover for the next game. Oregon the second week sealed the deal. Season over before it started. That is when I first felt like I felt going into the Ohio State game the past three years: like a dead man walking.
There is an argument to be made that Oregon that year WITH Dixon was the best team in the country. Not saying it was OK to get blown out at home, but losing to them wouldn't have been the end of the world. Just saying.
That seems fair. I could have honestly tolerated (say) a 10-point loss. In some ways they reminded me of Florida State in '91.
We went into the Ohio State game with a chance to be Champs and go to the Rose Bowl (and probably would have had a really good shot if we had a healthy QB and RB). And that's been over by mid-October the last 3 years. So your view of "season over" seems a little skewed.
Kids these days. Always focused on the MNC and forget about the Big Ten title.
we supposed to be contenders for the National Championship run, not loose to App State and then Oregon out of the gate.
Beating App State, even in a close game, and loosing to Oregon in a closer game than it was would have been acceptable in that context. The way it happened was an absolute embarassment.
The Dead Period started with App State under Lloyd Carr. We were a program in transition from that date.
and regurgitating Brian Cook makes you more of an expert than Chris Perry. Congrats!
That was awesome!!!!
I am starting to see which players actually support Michigan Football, and which ones want it the other way around
Gets more obvious everyday that Rrod never had support from a lot of former players/alumni.
As the rallying cry on this blog has shown, what you say is probably true (at least for the vocal players/alumni). That being said, why does that matter so much to everyone? I agree its not a good thing when former players don't support the coach. On the other hand, and I'm not accusing you of this, but to some level I feel like a lot of posters are trying to use that as an excuse for the failure on the field. In my mind they are two completely separate issues.
Honest question - if it doesn't matter so much, why does it seem like this is the best thing Hoke could have done for himself? If it truly doesn't matter, then we wouldn't really care so much. If it also doesn't matter much, why do we have a shitload of former players coming out in support of Hoke? Do you think the AD has seen what a horrible effect this can have on a football program, as well as the former players, and have decided this is the correct thing to do?
We'd all better hope that Hoke works out because the coach has to ask out players and alumni "like asking a girl to prom". It'll be 50 years before we try to go outside of the Michigan family for another coach, especially if Hoke does really well
I have wondered what will happen if Hoke flames out here. At that point who could you go get? What coach in their right mind would want to come here?
We'll probably have to shut the program down.
It's always been said that Michigan is a top-of-the-line coaching job but after how RichRod was handled and is still being handled, I'd think twice about taking the Michigan job if I were an outsider. It's exceedingly obvious that former players and alumni not only think that coaches should have the privilege of coaching at Michigan but that coach also gets the privilege of kissing their ass and if they don't do it right then "He ain't a MICHIGAN MAN"
Obviously, we'll be able to hire someone, but what big name would ever come here knowing what RichRod (another former big name) endured.
"That other kid's name" is Devin Gardner, Chris.
I'm confused...where in the post does he mention "that other kid?"
...the audio of the interview with Mike Spath, Perry asked "What's that kid's name?" about Devin Gardner and Spath helped him with the name.
paging section 1 for a chris perry rant
Perry said the Michigan program had gotten "lazy... You know, 2006-7-8-9..." (Whatever that means; you'd have to ask Perry.)
I'm happy Chris Perry is back on board with the program, but as I've said throughout the entire RR/Hoke transition, I don't need to hear from guys who never played for RR badmouthing him and what he did at UM. I get it - you hate to see UM lose, and instead of acknowledging the problems that existed toward the end of the Carr era and understanding that changes were needed regardless of whether RR was the right choice, just blame him and say "now everything's better."
I hope Perry feels the same way if Hoke and UM still lose to UM or MSU this year, or struggle through a transition year like RR did. My guess is that his front-running may have a different tone if they struggle to 7-6 again this year.
""We didn't have that the last few years because we didn't have the right guy as coach but we've learned from our own mistakes."
I know I'm so pissed that Jeremy Gallon and Denard Robinson play for our team. And that offensive line? I mean Taylor Lewan who schools like USC missed on until late in the recruiting year....and Omameh and Christian Pace? WTF RICH ROD?
And how do you explain the destruction of Brandon Graham under RR and Barwis? Andy Reid said he was impressed with BG's core and technique, sure...but Reid is nothing more than an NFL coach. Rich Rod was a plant from that school in Ohio, book it.
Magnus made this response to a similar argument a couple of days ago. Not to disparage any of the players that you mentioned because they're nice players, but aside from Denard and Graham (who was a Lloyd recruit) the guys that you mention have not accomplished much on the field by Michigan standards.
Hint: Don't throw Gallon in next time when you're trying to make this point. Trust me.
Anyone have the link to this article? I am just curious if there is more about Chris Perry and what he is doing these days. I haven't heard much about him lately.
(Click on "Chris Perry audio")
Like it has been said, can't we just have support for Hoke without even mentioning RichRod? I know they aren't trying to but it's getting old. IMO, the whole RR-Michigan Man disconnect was two way.
I meet Chris Perry (and his wife) last fall while tailgating for the USC/Oregon game (so the afternoon before PSU smacked us!). Great people (he and his wife). As an alumni who attended UM during Perry's dominate years, I was super pumped to meet him.
Anyway, we hang out for a few hours. Talked about the state of the program and what he thought of RichRod. In short, Chris told me that we will never be great under RR because RR doesn't understand what Michigan is all about. During this time I was still holding out hope for RR due to the recent success of the offense, but Chris convinced me after informing me about a split alumni base. Clearly he was right and hopefully he is again about everyone being on board with Hoke. I for one can't wait!!! Go Blue!!
+1 Interesting ... this is not a flame of your post.
As for Chris:
* "Chris told me that we will never be great under RR because RR doesn't understand what Michigan is all about."
OK -- we can safely class him with the dimwitted RichRod critics. Sorry, Chris. Loved (really) your awesome senior season and was genuinely moved by the story of your mom.
* "During this time I was still holding out hope for RR due to the recent success of the offense, but Chris convinced me after informing me about a split alumni base."
Oh ... so, it's the civil war in the alum base that's hurting RichRod?
So, because he was able to just look at the play on the field and see what RR was putting out there, he's dimwitted? What are YOUR qualifications for judgement? Odds are, his are better....
Reading comprehension FAIL.
"... because he was able to just look at the play on the field and see what RR was putting out there, he's dimwitted?"
No -- he's dimwitted because he's attributing RichRod's poor performance to "not understanding the rivalry." Taking into consideration GERG and other factors, I think it's safe to assume that RichRod would have been mediocre at best even if he could have recited the results of every UMich-OSU game ever played.
"What are YOUR qualifications for judgement?"
That's beside the point. Do I need to explain why?
He has the ability to claim status as a subject matter expert on UM football, in any forum. Unlike so many here who are butthurt that RR failed so spectacularly here (and that every alum didn't cheer as the ship sank), he has the credentials to say what he sees the problem was, from his point of view,and it has value to it. I would point to the clock we have now as being a part of what made michigan beat Ron Dayne senseless. They beat lesser teams because they prepared for OSU. Under RR, the preparation was so bad that they were rarely able to handle their own assignments, let alone worry about doing things tailored to defeat a weekly opponent. I point you to the famaous goal line incidnets in the bowl game where our players didnt even know where to line up, and that was after WEEKS of preparation.
YES, when you are going to presume to call a subject matter expert a "dimwit" in matters concerning his expertise, you have to back it up, otherwise, your argument cannot hold merit. It would be like me discussing the pain of childbirth. I'm a man, so my credentials mean my opinion doesn't count.
As far as I'm concerned, you lost all credibility the moment you used the phrase "butthurt". That said, Chris Perry is NOT a subject matter expert on UM football. Chris Perry is an expert on the particular type of football that he played at Michigan for four years. Chris Perry enjoyed success with that brand of football, so naturally he believes in it. He is not a sportscaster or sportswriter who has studied football in depth, he is a football player who understands the type of football that he plays. Chris Perry is nowhere near an expert in the spread. That said, it doesn't take a genius to realize that RRs teams weren't having success, but the "alumni split" and the on-the-field product are not the same thing at all. If RR had been winning on the field, it wouldn't have mattered if every alumnus hated him. Honestly, the "alumni split" was most likely due to the simple fact that the team wasn't winning. Therefore, it was reactionary, rather than causative, and not at all the reason RR didn't enjoy success at UofM.
Wow, still NO admission that PERHAPS all these players know something we don't.
Maybe, they've played football competitively for 10-15 years of their lives even if they don't go pro, and are capable of looking at the product on the field and making an informed conclusion.
I think RR is a fine guy, whose true class has shown in the way he HASN'T lambasted the university for the hell he went through here. However, the facts are the facts. The teams that hit the field under RR are the losingest teams in UM history, with all time records for futility to their name. Yes, that includes the players. Add to that the BS, but still existent NCAA violations, and the years speak for themselves. No UM team in a bowl game has ever looked the way the one that showed up did a Jan 1. At least not for the last 30 years or so that Ive been watching. As far as football goes, they are the biggest losers in football history, and nothing in Lloyd Carr's era compares.
I admire Chris Perry's willingness to call a spade a spade, as he sees it. I do not agree with a lot of what he said, but I also refuse to speak poorly of someone because he wasn't cheerleading in public for a program that is being run in a manner contrary to his morals.
And all the sportswriters and interviewers; if you want to go down the road of criticizing coach Rodriguez, you need to first understand that Coach Hoke and David Brandon don't want you to go there. They think it is not helpful to the program; there's no upside to it.
But if anybody does want to talk about it -- and like you, I think Chris Perry is a pretty level-headed guy who's been a good supporter of the program and who is a great guy off the field; I spoke to Chris last year at this time when we were both in the pro shop at the University Course at the Mott Outing, and he was saying much as CaliBlues described in his post above -- if anybody does want to talk about it, I'd expect a good writer or a good reporter someday to just say, Hold on; we keep hearing about how Rodriguez didn't get it, or how the program wasn't being run correctly... Let's be specific, shall we? What exactly are your complaints with Rodriguez? And follow it up with some serious, close questioning. I'd rather clear the air with a guy like Chris Perry, if there is going to be this continuous, tiresome drip-drip-drip of innuendo from Carr-era players.
btw, I am guessing that you weren't really talking about "morals" in your last line. "Expectations" perhaps?
Yeah, I was searching for a better word, but the kids were distracting me, and I just threw that word in there. I knew the RR horde would neg it out, regardless.
The problem is that all these players act as if the sole reason for Michigan being terrible the past three years is because Rich Rodriguez was not a part of the Michigan "family". Along the lines of another poster, their thinking is that Michigan was only a "Michigan Man" away from being 36-3 the past three seasons.
"The teams that hit the field under RR are the losingest teams in UM history, with all time records for futility to their name."
I wish people would quit saying this. It's false.
Really? What other 3 year stretch was as bad? What other years were the defenses WORSE than the ones weve seen? What other time did UM give up 65 points in football?
I may well be wrong, but I don't remember hearing of any stretch in UM history that was that bad, and it seemed we were treated to weekly graohics during games of how we broke new ground in failure, most especially defensively.
You said "losingest three year stretch." That's false, period. There have been worse three year stretches and there have been worse individual seasons than 3-9. You can get pissy about how many points we gave up and how horrible our defense was. I never said it wasn't and I have no idea what it has to do with my post.
As for this part of your post: "I may well be wrong, but I don't remember hearing of any stretch in UM history that was that bad." Google must be more difficult to use than I thought because every time I correct somebody on "we lost more games than EVAR" it's followed by some version "that's not what I heard herpedederpderpderp..."
won't be anytime soon
Rich Rodriguez has the worst winning percentage of all head coaches in Michigan football history. That is a fact.
This may be like strapping myself to the Titanic, but I'm kind of in the Section 1 general camp on this one. To me, when I read what Perry said, I think a.) mixed feelings, and b.) that quote by CP has a..."ND-like" quality to it. I definitely like Perry, though. We were contemporaries at Michigan, and he always seemed like a cool, funny, badass guy who was also really fucking good at football.
I had a buddy who played at UofM and always told me how winning was just the mentality and 'we just dont lose bro, not at Michigan'. Its good to see the old players support the new revived mentality. Pride WILL be reinstated and I know all of us know we are coming back to just winning. I know it seems like forever since we were good but Hoke is bringing back what was lost. Whooping that team in Ohio and bringing back back our powerhouse. Now we all know everyone is 'all in'.
Yes, because the previous guys just hated winning and were utterly shamed to have to wear Maize and Blue in public.
...they did lose. That team in Ohio didn't get whooped by us the six of seven years when it was Lloyd vs Vest. And USC smacked us twice in the Rose Bowl. And what was our worst bowl loss in history happened in 2002. Our stretch of dominance in the conference ended in the early 90s. With the exception of 1997 and 2006, we've been an above average, top 25 football team.
Fuck all these former players who decided to take the last three years off from being "on board." It's disgusting.
Carr and RR were two diff coaches. The records dont lie. Then everything changed when RR got here. Two diff coaches but many didnt accept RR. Everyone supports Hoke who was here with Carr and is bringing it ALL back.
Can I get a translation? Seriously. I have no idea what you're talking about.
And foolishness from the M alumni. Great job Chris. And anyone who thinks this is awesome needs to wake up and smell the Juan Valdez.
Why so much anger?
Why do we assume that Chris Perry, Braylon Edwards, etc. have any particular insight into Michigan football in the RR years? By their own admission, they were mostly or entirely absent. They are certainly experts on Michigan football in the years they were here, and probably have a lot of access to secondhand sources that the average fan doesn't, but other than that, if they weren't here, they're just spouting frustration and maybe repeating something they heard from another player who heard it from another player. They have their own egos and agendas, and it's naive to think otherwise. I get that A LOT of former players are saying things were off, but honestly, since most of them had minimal contact, I'd say they were all justifiably frustrated at on-field results and latched onto the "company line" (Rich Rod "didn't get Michigan Football") because there weren't any easy answers.
I think it's possible for a former player to be an expert on the current state of the team (Rick Leach, Mike Hart seemed to stay in touch), but it's not automatic.
I imagine dah was commenting more on the ability of the critics to diagnose problems, i.e., they are football players and former M alumns, so they know more about the program and when a program is in serious danger (though with the defense, who couldn't see that?).
But as to your point, some critics were around for the RR era. Navarre for instance. Perry appears to have worked out with Barwis in the summer of 2008. So I don't think he was gone either.
Columbus is in flames, Dantonio can't recruit the state anymore. Things are looking up. Point to the future.
Beyond watching the team lose when I was a kid, the saddest day for me as a Michigan fan was watching the video of Ryan VanBergen ask where some of the former players have been. Didn't they all wear the same maize and blue? Always a good reminder about what it's really all about.
It's still a bit astounding to me how Chris Perry inadvertantly described all of the whiny Michigan football alumni when trying to give Hoke some credit:
[Previous popular players are] the sexy picks but if you have to throw all kinds of [kiss-assing] at them and woo them like you're asking a girl to prom ... to me that says that those guys aren't invested in the program
He sounds like any other former player who speaks about Rich Rodriguez and I hate it all. Give the man the respect for the fact that he was Michigan's coach, whether you liked him or not. You could've disagreed with his style, but why undermine your own team by not supporting him? In the end it's simple, just say "The last couple years were tough and it didn't work out, but I think Brady Hoke is the man who can turn it around".
The team has worn the same helmets and represented the same university the last three years as they had the 100 years before Rich Rodriguez. Not supporting fellow Wolverine brothers because of dislike of the coach is just silly in my mind.
I'm sick to death of this "get's Michigan football" meme. Nick Saban and Urban Meyer have won championships and BCS bowls at multiple schools. I don't think their successes were a result of "getting it" at Utah, LSU, Bama, or Florida. I know Michigan's history and traditions, the words to The Victors, and how not to give the #1 jesery to a freshman DB, but If I were at the helm at Michigan, the only bowl I would lead the team to is to one that has blue water in it.
In reality if you come to Michigan you should know a freshman doesnt get the 1 jersey. You should know the victors. You should know all aspects of tradition here. I was never rooting against RR but those things should have been something not overlooked or not known. I think once the media reported this is when people really started to second guess RR. Not to mention shit heads like Boren crying to the media.keep trucking we're on the right path now.
I am positive RR reached out to Michigan about the coaching job. Meaning he wanted to be here...
I think that comment was meant as Hoke v. Harbaugh, not Hoke v. Rodriguez.
Harbaugh obviously didn't want to be here.
Which is why Perry didn't think we should have tried to woo him like a prom date. I don't think he was insinuating that Rodriguez didn't want to be here. Just that he wasn't the "right guy".
Did he actually quote Any Given Sunday or is that just your signature?
Thank god we fired that fuckin' Rodriguez again.
MGoBlog, Off-season, 2011:
Firing RichRod daily.