Morgan, just move on.
Carr talks re Trent
The story sure has changed, eh Trent?
+1 to Carr for addressing this publicly.
-1 to Trent for calling him Lloyd.
As one of the pitchfork and torch bearers demanding a response from Coach Carr, I pronounce myself 100% satisfied. It was the right thing to do and Coach Carr did it. Case closed.
Yet again, a random pseudo journalist gets the internets all excited about what amounts to nothing. Lloyd Carr should never have even had to respond to such ridiculous crap...and then doesn't it come out that, according to Morgan Trent...well, it just wasn't quite like that at all.
Lloyd Carr deserved better.
A clear case of the Blogarazzi at its worst
I think Rodriguez is the principal vicitm here. I'm a little troubled by how long it took for Coach Carr to get around to this little detail. But having said that, it is done. Once again, 48 hours of character assasination aimed at Rich Rodriguez, for nothing.
So now you're faulting Lloyd Carr for taking too long (a day or two, in real time) to respond to this. I'm looking forward to a time when Lloyd Carr - who stopped coaching in January 2008, mind you - isn't going to be blamed for Michigan's football troubles anymore.
You're typically one of my favorite commenters, but you and I both know that the previous coach's impact doesn't disappear immediately upon his departure, and it's been VERY well documented (Misopogon's post is on the front page right now, for example) how lacking the defensive recruiting was at the end of the Carr era.
I don't "blame" Carr anymore than I "blame" any individual player -- his poor recruiting at the end of his tenure is just one small part of our struggles. But you can't deny that it's had an effect.
we will no longer have regular brushfires in the press thanks to guys like the Borens, Braylon, Manningham and Trent.
These are needless distractions for Rich Rodroguez, his staff and his players.
I didn't blame Coach Carr for ANYTHING other than allowing this story, now said to be a false one (per Rodriguez, Carr and Trent) to gain traction in places like the Free Press.
"I didn't blame Coach Carr for ANYTHING other than allowing this story, now said to be a false one (per Rodriguez, Carr and Trent) to gain traction in places like the Free Press."
It is truly sad that he let this fester in the MSM for approximately 24-36 hours. He should have known that angry bloggers and dozens of message board posters would be calling for him to apologize quicker.
Lloyd Carr is old school (in his mid-60's). If he is anything like my parents, his knowledge of the internet and "angry bloggers" is almost none existent. I would think that that a couple of days to respond to this is pretty reasonable. He is retired for goodness sakes.....
Yeah . . . I was being sarcastic.
Boy, somebody is in a mood....
I bet Lloyd Carr is looking forward to that day too.
And I agree - for Lloyd Carr to even come out and issue a statement, much less do it in 48 hours, is amazing.
(The new boss seems to want to attack these things head on.)
So are you the secret police for Rich Rodriguez? Anyone who is related to anything said under the rainbow and sunshine level gets the kiss of death from you.
He's a putz.
Exactly. Another perfect example of Freep hack journalism. All they had to do was pick up the phone--like Angelique did--and get a straight confirmation/denial from Lloyd before running this POS story. Their omission in doing so just proves their malicious intent.
"Nothing to see here folks. Please move along."
Any Carr-bashers out there willing to eat crow?
Does it taste like chicken?
oooooo.... must try this, this... thing. this thing of such Brilliance!
num num num num num...
RR-bashers/Trent supporters?? Were there any Trent supporters out there besides the MSU poster?
Anyone who's 'eating crow" about Carr should instead be shoving it down Morgan Trent's throat. I think everyone who bashed Carr did so on the assumption that Trent was telling at least some semblance of the truth -- instead he appears to have thrown both of his Michigan coaches under the bus. Classy.
Although I thought Brian went too far, I held Carr in my mind as very non-supportive of RR. I'm not sure this has fully changed my opinion, but he's done what he can and that's all that can be asked. I hope there's a day soon when they both drink champagne or Shlitz or whatever Real Michigan Men drink to toast a BCS win.
developing the publicity for their own self-published book. It's in their interest to generate controversy. If Deren had stuck to proven fact and kept the Trent quote out of his magnum opus, nobody would be talking about him or his book. He got what he wanted out of it, and the Michigan football family was collateral damage. He doesn't give a shit; his affiliation is with Rutgers.
I was screaming for Lloyd to make the statement that he did. Not that Carr was evil.
I'd suggest that maybe it should be Morgan Trent apologizing, but Morgan is denying the substance of this fiasco as well.
So that leaves Bobby Deren.
He didn't need to make the statement because the material attributed to him was complete bs and without accurate context.
He did so because he is a stand up guy for the program.
I will say it again, Lloyd Carr deserved better.
Man, the offseason sucks.
but I disagree with you 100%. Coach Carr did need to say something ESPECIALLY because the statements attributed to him were BS.
He is an employee of the AD at the U of M. When an issue like this comes to light that you are involved in and it has the potential to drag the AD through the mud yet again, you definitely have an obligation to set the record straight IMHE.
It doesn't matter to me whether it is a previous coach who has been employed by the university for 30 years or a desk clerk who has worked for a month. If you are employed by the university and your name is brought up PUBLICLY in a situation that could cause more turmoil for the AD you have to step up and clear the air.
I will go one step further and say that I am not completely statisfied with his statement either. Coach Carr still hasn't clarified what he said, he simply said what he was quoted as saying is a distortion. We know the two talked and something was discussed, but have no idea what it was Coach Carr said.
I'm not implying he said anything against RR, but he could have easily said EXACTLY what he told MT, but chose not to.....
IME, people who simply said that coach Carr needed to step up and tell the world what he said have nothing to apologize for. People are always quick to say we owe Carr this and that for all he has done (and he has done a lot, don't get me wrong). However, I believe he owes the University a lot as well. After all, he has been very well compensated for the time he has given U of M.
Morgan Trent picture as the "Butt Kisser"...... Well done....
Should have made it to the front page!
I've watched M football for 40 years, MT is NOT a Michigan Man in the sense of Bo‘s model! If he was we would not be addressing this RR bashing. Trent should be banished from the M tent! What makes it worse is that he brought a former coach into his distasteful argument and misquoted him to address his grievance.
Trent should not go away mad, he should just go away.
You're asking a rhetorical question, right?
This is exactly what needed to happen. Now we are looking at one of two things - Morgan Trent looking like a dickbag or Bobby Deren looking like a dickbag. One of the two's pants are on fire. I seriously doubt this was some sort of "misunderstanding" between the two.
. . . or Rich Rodriguez looking like a dickbag.
Or are we not ready for that one yet?
Not to nitpick too much, but this could be an AND rather than an OR. It's still possible that he cut loose AND lied about it later.
goddamned reason to even suspect it.
Let's see; in this particular game of telephone, involving (supposedly) Rich Rodriguez, Lloyd Carr, Morgan Trent, and Bobby Deren, we have Rodriguez, Carr and Trent all saying the story is untrue. Let's not forget the unnamed NFL scout(s). Who've never said anything, and probably never will, because nobody knows who the fuck they are. Helluva story.
But Magnus, I think I'm ready for you "looking like a dickbag."
Read blueheron's post above yours.
The story here was "RichRod badmouths Morgan Trent to NFL scouts, according to Lloyd Carr and Morgan Trent." The clear implication is that a rift remains between Lloyd and RichRod.
RichRod has denied the statements reported in the book. Trent has denied the account of the story in the book. Lloyd Carr, the person who reportedly relayed the information to Trent, calls bullshit (and if you can think of a more unequivocal statement Carr has made in the last 20 years, I'd be surprised). And we have no statements from any named NFL sources.
What we're left with seems an awful lot like the Free Press reporting of the practice time Jihad. RichRod MAY have said things to scouts, and Michigan may have exceeded practice time. But even if some of the underlying facts turned out to be accurate, that wouldn't make the reporting of the event any less bullshit. Sure, RichRod may have said some negative stuff about Morgan Trent to scouts, but the parties involved have pretty much bitch-slapped the account in the book.
How about: "Well that's a stupid question" *walks away*
Is far more skeptical about things being attributed to Rodriguez than he is about things Carr supposedly said through the same game of telephone.
Read what I wrote. I said that I doubted the whole story, from the beginning; the whole thing was multiple hearsay.
Then, what I said was that Carr happened to be in the perfect position to refute a story that was basically injurious to Rich Rodriguez. And the reason that Carr ought to refute the story was for the good of the entire Michigan Athletic Department. That it would be an easy thing for Carr to do. Pick up the phone, and say, "The story is completely untrue."
Did you have problems in Reading Comprehension?
At *worst*, RR may have told scouts what he actually thought about Trent. This whole fiasco is full of so much 2nd hand he said-she said that we have no idea who really said what. Still, if we assume the worst, RR was honest about what he saw in Trent. Is that a dickbag move? I say no. When I am asked for evaluations of former employees who are applying for other jobs, I won't mis-represent my evaluation of them. There is a spectrum of how much information you can give, from 'no comment' to full didsclosure. Who the hell knows what RR may or may not have really said, but as far as I'm concerned, there's no dickbag move there unless you assume he was somehow actively going out of his way to punk Trent. Do you really think he was doing that? If not, then there's really no possible dickbag tag on RR for this.
God I'm getting sick of this shit.
Don't misconstrue my post:
I'm not saying that Rodriguez is a dickbag. I'm saying that's one possible outcome.
Look, there are 1-4 people in this situation who aren't telling the truth. I don't know which one(s) are lying. But it's entirely possible that Rodriguez badmouthed Trent (which some people would say is wrong) and it's entirely possible that Rodriguez lied when he said "I said the complete opposite about Morgan and I wish him well."
It's also entirely possible that he said very nice things about Morgan Trent and that he was 100% truthful when he responded to the alleged defamation.
I just think that in the list of possible dickbags, Rodriguez was conveniently left out.
the only way RR is a dickbag here is if he *actively* trashed Trent; and that I think the chances of that being true are very small. But that's just my opinion and I know I could certainly be wrong. I just don't think RR would go on the warpath like that, but I've never met the man.
Look, here's what I think has happened. A scout asked RR for his opinion of Trent. RR told him the truth. (In my opinion, if he stayed toward the 'no comment' end of the spectrum, that is the honest and honorable thing to do all around.). Trent heard RR trashed him. Lloyd heard the same. Lloyd and Trent talked about it. An author who needs to make a name for himself ran with it. And MGoBlog blew up. Fuck we need some wins around here. (But we shouldn't.)
"the only way RR is a dickbag here is if he *actively* trashed Trent; and that I think the chances of that being true are very small."
So it's a possibility. That's all I'm getting at.
“The comments attributed to me are inaccurate and absolutely ridiculous,” Rodriguez said in a statement. “I said just the opposite about Morgan Trent to NFL scouts and wish him well with the Bengals.”
That's a very strong statement, and it is incompatible--at least somewhat--with some of the above-posters' remarks about how RR may have some some negative or lukewarm things about Trent. Also, it seems questionable that RR would have only good things to say about Trent.
So I'm not sure why Magus is getting hammered so much for this.
I don't think any scenario makes Rodriguez look like a dick here. That 08 defense was a flaming bag despite having some experienced vets like Trent. It's pretty clear in Trent's comments on the program that he'd rather see Rodriguez fail than Michigan win so that tells you how toxic their one season together must have been. I wouldn't blame Rich Rodriguez for giving that scouting report to somebody that deserved it if that was the case. How damaging could it have been for Trent's draft status anyway? It's not like the scout couldn't have picked up his phone and called any number of Michigan coaches from the old staff knowing how far he had regressed in 08.
Ah ha. When you can't formulate a cogent response, you start hurling petty insults. Good to know.
Magnus acting like a dickbag.
Right. Half the board melting down about how Carr is a traitor, and you say Magnus is the one acting like a dickbag. I've had my share of bitchfests with the guy, but sometimes these fickle monkeys need a backhand across the face to bring them back to reality.
Let's set the record straight here. Most of the board never melted down at all. Those who did mostly vented at Trent. There were a few (including Brian) who did attack Carr, and they've come clean. Magnus needs to let it go. He's becoming a reflexive devil's advocate and it's frankly annoying.
I'm okay with being a "reflexive devil's advocate" when many of you are flying off the handle about he-said-he-said BS like has happened the past couple days (and several times in the past). As far as I'm concerned, we need more devil's advocates around here - people who don't always look at the world through maize-and-blue colored glasses.
There wasn't a traditional meltdown because most people were just content with saying "bravo" to Brian's own reasoning meltdown. There were a lot of negs thrown around to comments that now look prescient. It's safe to say it wasn't the board's finest moment.
Look at the point total of people who vocally disagreed with Brian's argument on that thread. It will vindicate my summary.
What's "annoying", much more so than Magnus is assholes who are eager to throw a legend of the program under the bus for the expediency of a man who is 8-16.
I support RR. I think he is the right guy for the job. But assholes who talk about Lloyd Carr and "loyalty" need to examine their own dedication to the fucking term.
If you want to pretend that what happened didn't, go ahead. But yesterday was the closest I've ever come to being disgusted with Michigan football, and it was because of this site, and the rising idiocy of the people who post here.
This is the kind of hyperbole that leads to any supposed Lloyd Carr bashing. Are Phil Fulmer and Larry Coker legends of their respective programs? Both have essentially the same coaching resume as Carr, but Coker owned his chief rivals (8-2 against FSU and UF, as opposed to Carr's .500 record against OSU and ND, despite getting to face coaches like Cooper, Willingham, Davie, and Weis) and Fulmer was a great player at UT with the team going 30-5 during his playing career. Yet nobody here would give them that kind of praise because they coached at different schools.
Lloyd Carr was a solid coach and is a fantastic human being. He has been a great ambassador and representative of the University of Michigan. Still, guys like Yost and Bo are legends. Lloyd Carr is not.
Phillip Fulmer - yes, I'd say he's a Tennessee coaching legend. He coached there for 17 years, won their first NC since 1967, and won more games than anyone but Neyland.
Larry Coker - no, not a legend. He only coached for six years and Miami's NC drought was only 10 years at that point.
It's opinion, so you're free to disagree.
But Carr was 122-40 (75.3%), with 5 Big ten Championships, and the only Michigan NC in the modern era (which I continue a huge, huge deal). He was 6-7 in bowls, and .500 against OSU.
Bo's winning percentage was equivalent (76%), won more Big 10 championships in 60% of his seasons (tought to compare, as the Big 10 under Lloyd was a different place than it was under Bo), was 5-13 in bowls. I can't find it off-hand, but IIRC, he was about .500 against OSU as well.
Aside from longevity (Carr was hired as an older man), the resumes, IMO, are pretty comparable.
I also find it odd that you want to denigrate Carr by calling John Cooper, whose team's lost a total of 12 or 13 games during the years carr beat him 7 times, a lightweight, but conveniently omit that Coker's "owning" of FSU and Florida occurred against an obviously slipping Bowden (putting up 7-6 teams annually) and Ron fucking Zook. And he did so, for 2 years, with Butch Davis' players. He inherited a team that immediately produced like 15 first day draft picks the next year. At least Cooper's OSU teams were good.
The Carr/Coker comparison is closer than anyone would like to suggest. If you just look at their first six years on the job (which is all Coker got at Miami and is when Carr had his greates success), Coker had a better overall record, both won a national title and two major bowl games (though Coker also made another national title game). While Coker certainly inherited a strong program, Carr inherited two NFL starting quarterbacks, one of whom is a surefire future hall of famer (while Coker got Ken Dorsey) and one of, if not the greatest defensive player in college football history and another likely NFL hall of famer in Charles Woodson.
As for the Carr/Bo comparison, Bo's teams finished in the top ten nationally (not just in the Big Ten) in 16 of his 21 seasons on the job. Carr did it 5 times in 13 years. His bowl record was poor because he was playing the very best teams in the country every year (notice I did not criticize Carr for losing to very good Texas and USC teams in the Rose Bowl). Carr was just as likely to lose 4 or more games as he was to finish in the top ten (he did both 5 times). Carr was 6-7 against OSU (not .500) and 1-6 when they brought in a coach with a pulse. Bo went toe to toe with Woody when he had the best program in the country and ended with an 11-9-1 record against the Buckeyes. Bo's winning percentage overall is adversely impacted by his eight ties (which count as losses for the purposes of winning percentage). His record is much better when this is accounted for. In his first ten years on the job, Bo finished in the top ten every single year. In his last ten years on the job, they still went to 7 major bowl games (winning three) and finished in the top ten six times. Other than the fact that Carr got the bounces to all go his way for one season, Bo dominates this comparison. Michigan was always an elite team under Schembechler whereas under Carr there were just as likely to be mediocre.
But, IMO, you can't be a legend in six years.
Also, Schembechler coached in a different time period. With scholarship and recruiting limitations, you're not seeing the same perennial juggernauts as you used to. Now the great teams have about 6-8 years in the spotlight before they wilt and make way for another "powerhouse."
And I'm not suggesting I think Coker is a legend, merely that his entire run at Miami is comparable to Carr's best year's at Michigan, so I don't consider the latter a legend (not that this is necessarily a knock, there are a lot of non-legendary coaches out there who are very good).
I also think the parity thing is overblown a little bit. Coaches like Stoops, Carroll, Brown, Tressel, etc. (guys like Saban and Meyer look poised to do the same) have shown at big time programs the ability to be an elite team (top ten while making and occasionally winning big bowl games in my view) the majority of the time, which is something Carr didn't do, especially in the last eight years of his tenure.
Trying to define a 'legend' from quantitative data will only get you so far. Legends are born both in the statistics and in qualitative data. What really matters is perceptions - how these coaches exist in the minds of the fans. I think the Fulmer-Carr comparison is much more valid than the Coker-Carr comparison. Like Magnus said, tenure matters, and I would argue that other actions also matter, such as all Carr has done off the field to forever solidify his status as a 'Michigan Man'. Perceptions matter, just as wins and championships matter. I know that Fulmer is legendary at UT (as it is called there). Carr I would say is slowly being given legendary status here, but perhaps more time has to pass (hell, he is still being partially blamed for 2008).
Scholarship and Recruitment limits started in 1973 with 105 scholarships and 25 per year. In 1978 the scholarship limit dropped to 95. Then 92 in 1992, 88 in 1993, and the current 85 in 1994.
Also, Bo went something like 50-4-1 from 1970-1974; Lloyd never had a stretch like that.
Bo was very likely gypped out of a MNC in 1973...
Because it sounds too much like knocking Bo, which is a sin. But if you want to say the teams Michigan played in Bowl Games were elite too (damn USC), like was done above, I can roll with that. But let's be honest that up to the 90's the Big Ten BLEW. It was a 2 team League. They were great, and did what they should have, and ruled the roost there....but the rest stunk. It didn't even change that much in the 80's either. Just the 2nd of the Big Two bounced around between OSU, Iowa, and even latter a bit...MSU. Then later, in the era were Wisconsin (a team that used to be worse than Northwestern, regularly), Purdue, et al., got decent to real good, it because a lot harder to dominate the Conference. Throw in Penn State, which happened before Lloyd took over, and you're looking at a MUCH tougher conference (along with the more tight scholarship restrictions...that not only doesn't allow you to keep all the talent, but they have to go somewhere...you're rivals). Along with that, tv was different. Michigan and OSU may have been on tv regularly, but now EVERYONE is regularly.
I mean, Bo's Bo. And Lloyd had a great run too. But to compare who they played during their times is hard, because it was two truly different eras. (Especially the early part of the career of Bo).
With Magnus is the circular arguments, it gets old sometimes.
You never offer up any content, but by golly, you sure are good at ad hominem attacks. You're like MGoObes, except his comments are useful.
Magnus. I'll go sulk away now...
Actually, I won't. Other than my last comment to you, since when do I offer up ad hominem attacks? I'd like to think I'm fairly level-headed, I just get tired of your whole devils advocate schtick sometimes. And I may not offer up "content" in the form of breaking down a players strengths/weaknesses, because I don't know what I'm talking about. Why don't you tell me what I should do to be of more value to the community? Stop posting? You've never heard me attack Carr, Trent, or anyone associated with the program like all the panicked posters the last few days, and you won't. Please Magnus, tell me how to be a better poster...
You've done it a handful of times. I can't point out the last time, because I don't keep track. But you've made several comments calling people (including me) dickbags, douchebags, assholes, stuff like that.
You can call me what you want, but I don't make it a habit to go around calling people names on the board. That's just childish. In fact, it probably annoys people more that I argue with fact and opinion rather than petty insults. Names are pretty easy to let roll of your back. When the integrity of one's thought process is put into question, then that's probably more difficult to deal with.
How can you be a better poster? I don't know. That's for you to figure out. Not everybody on here has to be knowledgeable about football to "add content." You can post all you want. You get tired of my "circular arguments," but at least they're usually discussions and don't revolve around one-liners that add nothing to the conversation. AFAIK, in this entire thread, your only comments revolve around me being a dickbag and that you find my "circular arguments" annoying. And that's fine. Being called a "dickbag" by an online poster named TIMMMAAY isn't going to make me curl up into a ball, cry my eyes out, and stop posting. But I don't see why you would consider that a productive use of your time.
I didn't call you a dickbag, I said you were "being" a dickbag. There is a subtle difference. And I don't make a habit of calling people names, I just don't, it is childish. Find an example, and I'll retract.
There are many times that I agree with you, but I don't think I'm the only one here who gets tired of you arguing in circles, even when you're wrong.
As far as "a productive use of your time" goes; uh, yeah. I don't spend my entire days on this board commenting on every damn thread because I have a busy schedule, and a life. That's also part of the reason most of my comments are short, and to the point. Also, the reason my only comments on this thread "revolved around" you being a "dickbag" was because I don't have all of the facts about the situation, and I don't rush to put in my two cents on this type of thing without knowing what actually happened. Anyway...
One more thing. When I do call someone a douchebag etc... it's generally deserved.
Also also, I generally appreciate your perspective, and I often agree with you (probably more than not), but you do make some unreasonable arguments. I'm not saying that this particular point was unreasonable, it's the way you go about it...
I didn't call you a dickbag, I said you were "being" a dickbag.
And I don't make a habit of calling people names, I just don't, it is childish.
One more thing. When I do call someone a douchebag etc... it's generally deserved.
You're accusing someone of making circular arguments.
You're taking one example here, and they're not even similar situations. I'd really like to spend a while explaining my point further, but I have to get some work done right now. I'll further my response later...
Well, whether you're saying I "am" a dickbag or that I'm "being" a dickbag, there's not much of a difference. So forgive me for not making the distinction.
You might say I "argue in circles" but when I do that, I'm generally trying to clarify my point. There are some people here who deliberately choose not to accept facts for truth, and that boggles my mind.
If you don't have all the facts about the situation and the only thing you have to offer is "________ is being a dickbag", then wouldn't it cross your mind just to move on to another thread?
Anyway, you can disagree with me all you want. You can neg me all you want. You can even keep making silly, one-liner comments. I can't stop you. I just don't see the point of some of them.
I rarely neg you, and I didn't on any of the above posts. Gotta go...
Oops, there's that one line post again.
Look, I had an intern who did a half-assed job for me. Had he have been foolish enough to use me as a recommendation, I'd have said he did a half-assed job. He was, however, self-aware and did not ask me to be a recommendation. He is apparently doing a good job as a professional at another university.
Would it have been dickbaggy for me to say, "I do not think his heart was in our internship"? I think not. You have to know that any time you are performing for someone, someone else may ask for their opinion. It may just be opinion, and it should be taken as such, but you shouldn't count on the world to sing your praises 24-7.
Oh, and Mr. Deren looks like Mark Wahlberg with an endocrine problem:
Some open issues:
* "When we spoke, I brought it up to him, and he said he had heard some of the same things." Umm, OK. Did Morgan ask Lloyd who said what? Did Lloyd tell him anything specific about Rodriguez? Who TF knows? I think it's too early to exonerate Lloyd. To put it another way, he still may have exercised poor judgment. (How? By taking the chance that he would, for all practical purposes, end up publicly bad-mouthing one of his fellow employees. He should be above that. Why not keep it internal? He doesn't have to keep completely quiet.) Aside: I didn't realize how tasty Deren's description of the encounter was. Lloyd's worst-case scenario has certainly improved.
* "The comments attributed to me are inaccurate and absolutely ridiculous," Rodriguez said in the statement. "I said just the opposite about Morgan Trent to NFL scouts and wish him well with the Bengals." I'd like to believe that. I _really_ would. But, I don't.
so you'd rather believe Bobby Deren who paraphrased a game of telephone over Rodriguez who has done nothing and said nothing to cause you to doubt his honesty in this situation?
No, Deren looks like a buffoon of the highest order. I'm just having a hard time believing that RichRod's remarks were spun 180 degrees. I'd guess more like 120 degrees. Does that make sense? I'd guess that he made some neutral remarks and let the scout(s) read between the lines. Admittedly, all guesses on my part...
I am soooo glad that I refrained from commenting on this one until all shoes had dropped. My opinion never changed though. Lloyd Carr is a good man that loves Michigan. Rich Rod might very well have said things he felt when he shouldn't have, but no where near the hearsay reported in the book I would guess. Morgan Trent is a douche bag of the highest order and would have made a better Spartan or even Buckeye, hindsight being 20/20.
It sounds like a passive-aggressive response to a poor work ethic.
Shut up Trent.
Remember the phrase, "It is better to say nothing and let those around you think you are stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
Good for Coach Carr - let the nay sayers hang their heads. Carr is a Michigan Man.
It's time to sit down and go away.
Everyone in the room is now dumber for having heard you speak. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
this was soo not worth 2 threads of 250+ comments of pure, unadulterated meltdowns.
At least it gave us something to talk about for a few days. I suppose.
and yet here you are, posting again.
Michigan Men's rowing won the men team points trophy at the ECAC championships this year. A nice accomplishment for a club team rowing against varsity teams.
Michigan showed good depth this weekend. Hopefully the V8 is able to bounce back at ACRA (natl club championship coming up). Should be tight racing, but FWIW I'd say we're favored slightly to edge out the field in the V8, the points title should be Michigan's in a landslide as it has been the last two years.
And even the Buckeyes recognized it:
So he got drafted where he deserved to - as a risk/flyer in the late rounds. Now he's whining publically about his own doing. (And Bo would have never allowed any of this to happen.)
Ah, yes. Bo was a saint. None of this would have happened two years after his watch.
Of course you know this because Bo coached in the time of blogs and internet speculation run amok. Right?
Good to see Carr address the situation. Trent is still dead to me. And the author of this book is an asshole of Freep proportions.
This is exactly how it is supposed to work.
- Totally unsourceable but plausible shit gets thrown out by unreliable hack (Deren) and understandably self-interested aggrieved party (Trent);
- Potential bad guys (Rodriguez and Carr) shoot down story, leaving unreliable hack to twist, and teaching an important lesson to understandably self-interested aggrieved party.
Bravo, Lloyd. Bravo, Rich. Fuck you, Bobby. Fuck you, Morgan.
I am very glad that Carr stood up and said something to defuse the situation. He has finally given me faith that he is still a Michigan Man, and that the team is still more important to him than any personal agenda. I am equally glad that it was Angelique who reported it. She is still the only person in the media besides Wojo that we can trust to report accurately and with no hidden agenda.
Angelique, of course, loves UM and would never hurt it, but has the ethics to tell the truth. She is sorta the Walter Cronkite of UM sports. Wojo, on the other hand, distances himself from all stories he writes, and never seems to have a stake in the outcome. As a result, his only agenda seems to be having fun. He makes fun of UM sometimes, but he makes fun of everyone, and it's never malicious like most things published by the freep.
It's sad that you would require anything from Lloyd Carr to "give you faith he is still a Michigan Man." I'm sorry.
The idea that LLOYD FUCKING CARR needs to give TATER, scion of MGoConspiracies, faith that he "is a Michigan Man" is possibly the most fucked up think you have typed here.
And that's saying something!
So how are we going to get Magnus back the 400 points you monkeys negged him for having his head screwed on straight?
Magnus is perhaps the most maligned of people who actually have reasonable opinions, but gets squashed because it often clashes with the masses. There have been literally dozens of topics where otherwise legitimate, well-thought-out posts he's made have been negged in the double digits. I really think people see Magnus and hit -1 without even thinking about it.
If anything, he should be getting back about 4000 MGoPoints.
The issue, I think, is that Brain is something of a Sacred Cow around these points, and there are a large, large, number of people that read these whose opinion is dictated by him. This isn't Brian's fault - he's a good writer, one I clearly enjoy. However, in my limited dealings with him, I don't think he considers his opinions unimpeachable truth.
Unfortunately, for a large number of trigger-happy neg-bangers here, disagreement with Brian is near-treason.
Or it could be Magnus decided to say "hey everyone, look, RichRod could still be a dick" when it looks lilke there is absolutely no reason to think so. When 3 out of the 4 people involved in the story say it's bullshit, it is busch league to pick one person out out of those 3 to say "let's not forget about him....he could still be a fuck." It kind of looks like you have an agenda at that point.
My "agenda" is simply to get Michigan fans to step back and take a look at the bigger picture or to look at things from a different perspective.
Style has everything to do with it.
I've learned to accept it, but he's lopped my head off a time or two for no reason at all. Not that I care because, you know, it's the internet.
You say a lot of the same things, just as tersely when warranted, and don't have anywhere near the stigma he does.
It's not because it clashes with the masses, it's because he often is pretty dickish in presenting his dissenting reasonable opinions. jaimemac posted once in the original shitshow of a thread to basically call BS on ripping coach Carr. His comment was something like +30 last I saw.
I mean, I might agree with him some of the time he's being dickish, but I can understand why his posts tend to attract the negbangers too. In any event, he'll never be in danger of going below a point threshold that matters unless he uses an Idiotic Team Nickname That Shall Not Be Named, so I doubt he cares. But it's pretty clear why he gets negged when others who are expressing a similar opinion but presented in a different way do not.
Of course, I have no problem having a few message board assholes around here. Good comments presented in a dickish manner provide great entertainment.
Why are so many people acting like Lloyd Carr was horribly wronged here? I think most people just felt that Carr should comment on the situation if in fact he was misrepresented in the article (which I think most people suspected to be the case, except maybe Brian). The fact that he did that and all controversy immediately ended should show just how important it was for him to come forward. I'm glad he did it so promptly and I think it confirms how most us feel about the man's character, but acting like it wasn't necessary ignores the entire day everyone just spent on this blog.
The entire day they spent on this blog ignoring the 20 years of service the man gave to Michigan.
He was maligned because the most popular Michigan athletics site on the internet declared, wrongly, that the man was THE ENEMY of the program. And Carr, frankly, deserves more than to have to assuage the fears and suspicions of assholes who are willing to set aside his decades of service to the program, the school, and the community, on unsourced rumors. Anyone who has paid attention to Michigan should have smelled BULLSHIT the second this was published.
I think Brian made a number of assumptions and got ahead of himself with the front page piece (which he has promptly and nobly apologized for), but I think myself and a lot of others merely expressed the need for Carr to comment (since the alternative meant he was either actively undermining or passively okay with others undermining the reputation of the current coaching staff). He did that and the controversy immediately disappeared. I don't think realizing what a big deal it would have been had he remained silent is the equivalent of maligning the former coach.
Did you read the other thread? People calling his "Michigan Man-ness", how they knew he had been working against RR. You're mis-characterizing what that thread was.
Certainly anyone who did that in a non-hypothetical situation (I even claimed he should have been fired from the AD IF in fact he had gone to Trent spreading rumors that RR was badmouthing him to scouts) and without all the facts was in error. My initial comment was directed more to those who still claimed that Coach Carr didn't owe the program anything in this situation, when in fact I think what happened showed just how easy it was for him to squash this entire controversy with one blurb and that as an athletic department employee he had a duty to do exactly what he did, given the falsehoods associated with the story.
And he did it, inside the same news cycle. So what's the issue?
He ended this thing about as quickly as possible and I'm glad he did. I just don't buy the "he never owed us anything and didn't have to comment" statements I saw as I glanced through these threads after I got home and learned that the fireworks had all ended.
For doubting that "maligning" is a word.
Any time the "Lloyd Carr should say something" card is played, it turns into a litany of the same people saying the same things about losing too many times to Tressel, getting torched in the Rose Bowl one too many times (hey, guess what, Bo did that, too!), "THE HORROR," etc. etc. There were ridiculous statements made about his character, about his commitment to Michigan, about his qualities as a coach and his merits as a man.
Today was one of those days where 99.9% of the board was once again calling for his head, and the guy who runs the show jumped in for good measure. And it turns out they were wrong. Lloyd Carr deserves more than to be a scapegoat.
As I've said before, this wasn't some BS "he needs to show he's all in" moment. He was openly accused in the media of spreading (now known to be false) rumors that the current Michigan coach was badmouthing a former player to NFL scouts/GM's with an insinuation that he disagreed vehemently with the current coach's assessment of said player and didn't like what was going on one bit. All he had to do was make a brief statement and the whole bag of nonsense would go away (which, duh, that is what just happened).
I don't think the villifying of Carr (or more accurately in my case, the posting of his record during the last eight years of his tenure) is prompted by those asking/demanding that he comment in this situation (though maybe it does with more ambiguous "he should show his support for RR" comments), but rather takes place when people say things like "He doesn't owe anyone a comment," or claim that his track record somehow puts him above reproach even when his failure to speak up is harmful to the program (what happened today is not good for anybody).
That man HATED the media with a burning passion. You expect him to run to the press for ANYTHING? How long have you watched this team, man?
And frankly, if the charge is "he betrayed Michigan" on un-sourced rumors and whiny fan-boys who can't get the fuck over Appy State, he is unimpeachable. He has EARNED our respect. He keeps it.
This wasn't "anything." I certainly don't expect Carr to shout from the rooftops on a daily basis how much he loves RR and supports UM football no matter what. This was a case where he personally was accused of making statements that undermine the current coaching staff. If he didn't make those statements (which turned out to be the case) I think he definitely had a duty as a continuing employee of the athletic department to correct things where it was obviously easy to do so and where that minimal effort effectively ended the entire controversy. I don't think that is too much to ask in this instance.
That's overstating it (99.9), Bando. I wanted to hear him say something because nothing made sense and the mud was draped all over his face. He needed to wipe that shit off, and I'm glad he did.
I have no doubt that Lloyd loves Michigan with every fiber of his soul and his character is unimpeachable; despite the clear blemishes on his coaching record at the end. He doesn't need you to be his lap dog, the vast majority of people recognize him with reasonable (or better) esteem.
How is Magnus maligned or squashed down? Not like it matters, but do you realize Magnus has over 22,000 mgopoints...more than even Brian?!? Doesn't sound to me like someone whose contribution/opinion is marginalized or undervalued on this site.
I was joking about MGoPoints. He clearly doesn't need them.
I was responding to Bando's comment. Clearly, Magnus gets unfairly negged when he presents a strong dissenting opinion in his usual dick manner (j/k!). But I bring up his insane point total to represent the far greater number of us that appreciate his typically well-reasoned input.
It helps he's one of the more active MGoPosters. He makes up for it.
The fact remains he gets negbanged far too much for posts that are well-written and well-reasoned. Going against the grain of popular opinion with a well-written post is not a valid reason to -50 negbang.
Still making Trent out to be some devil is ridiculous. People love to invent histories - intention on the part of the actors (Trent), relationships among the actors (RR and Lloyd) - all inventions by onlookers; then you all even, unbelievable enough, tie your story of intentions and relationships to Trent's on-field play to make it seem more plausible.
Here is my interpretation:
- RR: RR didn't praise Trent's attitude to the scouts, but he did praise his athletic ability. RR didn't say "Morgan was lazy, he had an attitude problem and he was a big reason why the Wolverines finished with a 3-9 record" - hence his denial was true. But this all started somewhere.
- NFL Scouts: These guys reported RR's take to Trent, and something was invented in the telling (which is what always happens)
- Trent: Trent believes RR badmouthed him. He believes this because what folks told him Trent says "I heard it from enough different sources as far as coaches and scouts, obviously it wasn't make believe". I believe this. Trent may have done some interpretation on his own (AS WE ALL DO), but I believe that Trent believes what he says, and simply reported what he thinks.
- Book author: The author of the book gave what he heard life, embellished it as most authors do (like many here, including Brian, have done).
- Lloyd: Lloyd and Trent talked about the scouts' construal of RR's reports on Trent. Lloyd likely sympathized with his former player to make him feel better. Trent reports Lloyd being sympathetic to the book author.
Now, tying this to Trent's on-field performance is too much of a stretch. it only helps you all make sense of all this.
- The only way any of this seems plausible is if RR DID say some negative stuff about Trent's attitude - this didnt get started out of thin air. But, for RR's denial to be true, he had to have praised Trent for something. Which only seems plausible to have been Trent's on-field play, his effort. Hence, saying he "gave up" is wrong.
Lloyd having to come out and respond, after simply having a conversation with a former player, because of the world invented by the author of the book, by scouts, by Trent, by RR, and especially by people on the internets, is shameful.
I agree with everything in your post except the very last sentence. I have never understood this attitude. It's shameful that when your reputation and the reputation of the head coach at the school you love is impugned, you have to say something publicly to disavow those claims? That's not shameful, that's the fucking real world. Lloyd Carr, despite being famously cranky with the press, is, I think, an employee of the University of Michigan, one of the most celebrated schools, and possibly the most celebrated football program in the world. Yes, sometimes you have to play ball, you old codger, Lloyd.
I find myself agreeing with Chitown on most points, but here is one he occasionally makes that I vehemently disagree with: the syllogism that
P1: Lloyd hates talking to the media;
P2: This is a situation that calls for talking to the media;
C: How can you possibly expect him to talk to the media?
I have never understood that. Sometimes you should do things you don't want to do. I'm sure there were hundreds of things Lloyd didn't like to do as HC, but he did them because they came with the territory.
As others have said, my claim is and has always been that Lloyd should present a more united front with RichRod. He may hate him, he may be bitter that Brady Hoke wasn't given a look by Martin, whatever. Get the fuck over it. Be all in, and publicly. Doing it publicly matters.
The fact that Lloyd did this in this case (by denying Deren's claims) is exactly what should have happened. Lloyd didn't "earn back" his mythical Michigan Man status yesterday. He always had it and always will. My point is that he behaved honorably. I always believed he was honorable, and always will, but sometimes you need to show it, no matter how despicable you find it.
I'm going back to making my stupid charts and bad metaphors.
uh... How many of these stupid witchhunts will the freep get in before the season starts? They are frantically trying to stay alive doing anything they can to increase traffic on their site. The RR bashing has gotten some of the writers interviewed on ESPN and the like. They will never stop because it's making them money, giving them exposure, and keeping the ship from sinking. Please don't ever go there again. Don't post a link to the freep, and remove them from your explorer history. They are dead to us.
and Jack talk Thai. This is all so overblown. Can we please start the season already?
Good column by Dave Birkett at annarbor.com that sums up this whole "flap" and includes some good inside info and quotes from NFL scout Gil Brandt.
Perfect summary of this fiasco in the headline: "Much Ado about Nothing."
Unfortunately this is just one more thing out there to feed the anti-RR crowd. The first headlines are usually the ones that stick the longest in people's memory, especially for the majority of people out there who don't follow things as closely as we all do. There are going to be tons of casual fans/people around the country who will have this vague recollection now of "yeah, but RR trashes his own players."
I think because there was such an overreaction to this story on this very site, you are exaggerating how important this story was on a national basis. Few people around the country ever heard about this. I did a search at espn.com and could not find any actual stories written about this (could only find a couple of links from Adam Rittenberg blogs).
During his appearance Wednesday on WTKA, Eric Adelson made this same point--this story did not play nationally. See podcast here.
Maybe everyone else is getting sick of the drama too.
Hey, injecting facts into the discussion, and talking to someone with actual experience in this sort of situation! The rampant, uninformed speculation was way more fun . . . .
Seriously, thanks for bringing attention to that column.