Casteel to Arizona tomorrow. Unofficially officially official.

91 posts / 0 new
Login or register to post comments
Last post
January 10th, 2012 at 7:13 PM
#1
Section 1
Section 1's picture
Joined: 06/29/2009
MGoPoints: 14295
Casteel to Arizona tomorrow. Unofficially officially official.

A source indicates to the Tuscon Citizen's Anthony Gimino that Casteel will be announced tomorrow afternoon.

http://tucsoncitizen.com/wildcatreport/2012/01/10/source-arizona-set-to-annouce-jeff-casteel-as-defensive-coordinator-on-wednesday/ 

It's not any great surprise, of course, and it won't end any arguments here about Rodriguez, defense, the 3-3-5, what might have been, etc.

But one argument will be ended for good.  It was the notion, advanced without the slightest substance as far as I could tell, that maybe deep down, Jeff Casteel might have just not liked Rich Rodriguez, 'cuz why else didn't Casteel get on the plane to Ann Arbor with the other guys?  'Cuz a friend of mine had a friend who knew a guy who saw on WeMustIgniteThisCouch.com that Casteel and Rodriguez yelled at each other, and...   Myth.  Busted.

I've been looking forward to this day (tomorrow, I suppose) for just that reason.  Gettin' the band back together indeed, lol. 

The interesting news tomorrow might be that Casteel has insisted on bringing 2-3 WVU assistants with him, which may necessitate positional shifts among the other assistants already hired.  As well as news on contract terms.  Tomorrow should be interesting.

 

 

Top
Tags:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
January 10th, 2012 at 7:14 PM | Damn. (Score:-1 Normal)
January 10th, 2012 at 7:16 PM | ...We might not have Hoke pooping gold all over the place (Score:5 Normal)
Mitch Cumstein
Mitch Cumstein's picture
Joined: 10/02/2009
MGoPoints: 9641

I like this version of space and time just fine.

"A flute with no holes is not a flute. A donut with no hole is a danish"

January 10th, 2012 at 7:20 PM | I missed who Arizona hired (Score:5 Funny)
coldnjl
Joined: 12/31/2009
MGoPoints: 2427

I missed who Arizona hired for their special teams coach. Can someone start another thread to let me know. 

January 10th, 2012 at 10:18 PM | Mila Kunis (Score:1)
coastal blue
Joined: 11/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1791

the ultimate brunette girl. 

January 10th, 2012 at 11:26 PM | Tony Gibsons doppelganger. (Score:1)
htownwolverine
htownwolverine's picture
Joined: 09/02/2009
MGoPoints: 3361

Tony Gibsons doppelganger.

Who is Jon Falk?
January 11th, 2012 at 9:01 AM | ST coach (Score:5 Funny)
GunnersApe
GunnersApe's picture
Joined: 11/19/2009
MGoPoints: 4097

Vince Lambardi?

Fuck it, Dude, let's go bowling.

January 11th, 2012 at 11:54 AM | Lambardi? (Score:1)
markinmsp
markinmsp's picture
Joined: 10/18/2011
MGoPoints: 493

Oh yeah, I remember him. He used to work for Lomborghini, didn't he? /snicker

                                          

January 10th, 2012 at 7:19 PM | Given time and athletes, the (Score:1)
house of pain
Joined: 02/27/2009
MGoPoints: 220

Given time and athletes, the 3-3-5 should do well against Chip Kelly's, and Mike Leach's offense.

It's better to hate to lose, than love to win.

January 10th, 2012 at 7:22 PM | Better overall fit in the (Score:5 Normal)
Butterfield
Butterfield's picture
Joined: 01/15/2011
MGoPoints: 1941

Better overall fit in the Pac-12 with it's wide open style, that's for sure - with the one exception being that I expect USC to routinely trounce that defense with it's pro-style power packages once they get back to full scholarships. 

The swag is back. 

January 10th, 2012 at 8:15 PM | SC (Score:4 Normal)
thethirdcoast
thethirdcoast's picture
Joined: 08/01/2008
MGoPoints: 382

...is likely to stomp AZ pretty well next year with Barkley in his senior season and not having the full effects of the sanctions hitting them yet.

"Stats are for losers. The final score is for winners." -Bill Belichick

January 10th, 2012 at 8:53 PM | Casteel did a frustratingly (Score:2 Insightful)
justingoblue
justingoblue's picture
Joined: 11/16/2010
MGoPoints: 10858

Casteel did a frustratingly good job of bottling up Pitt's power running game through 2010. If he struggles against USC, it will be because USC has a four-deep of freak athletes at every single position (next year and post-sanctions) in a way that Arizona will never have.

Go Blue!

January 10th, 2012 at 8:59 PM | Pitt has been irrelevant (Score:3 Normal)
Butterfield
Butterfield's picture
Joined: 01/15/2011
MGoPoints: 1941

Pitt has been irrelevant since Marino.  Because Casteel stopped a mediocre at best offense means the only reason he wouldn't have success against USC is because of depth?  Disagree.   

The swag is back. 

January 10th, 2012 at 9:06 PM | If you want to argue that the (Score:2 Insightful)
justingoblue
justingoblue's picture
Joined: 11/16/2010
MGoPoints: 10858

If you want to argue that the 3-3-5 can never stop a pro-style offense, and that USC's skilled depth won't be what kills Arizona (not scheme) I don't know what to tell you.

If you put a high school team on the field against USC, and have the high school run a pro-style game and a 4-3 under, while having USC running Oregon's offense with a 3-3-5, who's going to win and why?

Go Blue!

January 10th, 2012 at 9:40 PM | (Score:2 Flamebait)
Butterfield
Butterfield's picture
Joined: 01/15/2011
MGoPoints: 1941

SCs first string talent will destroy that defense. Depth is nice but won't be required. That's all I'm disagreeing with you on.

The swag is back. 

January 10th, 2012 at 10:05 PM | If the 3-3-5 is (at least) as (Score:0 Overrated)
January 10th, 2012 at 10:20 PM | Casteel's defenses (Score:2 Normal)
coastal blue
Joined: 11/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1791

have routinely finished in the top 40 or so by any metric you want to use, including many years in the top 25. 

Honestly, the amount of skepticism and loathing over a very good DC that this site spews because there is belief that he might have helped RR succeed is depressing to witness. 

January 10th, 2012 at 11:20 PM | The 3-3-5 is basically a 3-4 (Score:1)
BigBlue02
Joined: 06/29/2009
MGoPoints: 1853

The 3-3-5 is basically a 3-4 with one of the linebackers able to play up or back to help in pass coverage. A 3 man front is a 3 man front. It can be extremely successful just like the 3-4 if you have the right parts (a space eating D lineman to occupy double teams comes to mind).

January 10th, 2012 at 11:33 PM | The comment after me is (Score:2 Normal)
justingoblue
justingoblue's picture
Joined: 11/16/2010
MGoPoints: 10858

The comment above me is better (BigBlue02's), but I'll share the board wisdom I picked up (I had this exact same question, not being a master of x's and o's football by any means). Basically the problem lies in the inability to get top recruits to commit to playing "spur" or "bandit" instead of more traditional roles; if you could get elite players, it wouldn't matter if you ran a 4-3, 3-4, 3-3-5, 4-2-5 or whatever other combination you want to put together, you would be successful based on their abilities.

Go Blue!

January 10th, 2012 at 9:00 PM | Redundant? Not really. (Score:3 Normal)
Jasper
Jasper's picture
Joined: 12/30/2010
MGoPoints: 995

I should mod you "-1/Redundant," but you stated the obvious out of necessity. Too many people on this blog forget the basic importance of talent. On that note, I think Hoke's performance this year will look even better in hindsight. The last few NFL drafts have been sparse as far as UMich guys are concerned and I don't see changing soon.

"500 channels and nothing but cats."

January 11th, 2012 at 12:16 PM |  Depends on what the (Score:1)
markinmsp
markinmsp's picture
Joined: 10/18/2011
MGoPoints: 493

 Depends on what the definition of soon is.  I can see us returning to the usual 3-4 draft picks in the top 2-3 rounds, and a sure first rounder with Hoke’s first class this year.  I am excited and hopeful to what Kalis, Pipkens, Ross and the rest (not to mention a possibility like Garnett) bring in the next 4 years and beyond. Plus we may even return with Ryan and others from this frosh class.

                                          

January 10th, 2012 at 7:20 PM | Really (Score:5 Normal)
MGoCooper
Joined: 04/21/2011
MGoPoints: 1025

I don't know how much of an impact he would've had. Tackling and size doesn't change regardless of what scheme you run. This years defensive improvement was created by three things. A vastly more simplified defensive play calling, a return to teaching fundamentals, and of course Greg Mattison.

January 10th, 2012 at 7:23 PM | I don't really know anything about Casteel (Score:2 Normal)
Wave83
Joined: 03/09/2011
MGoPoints: 544

I don't really know anything about Casteel, but how can you say that a different DC wouldn't have made a difference when this year is proof positive that a different DC can make a huge difference?

January 10th, 2012 at 7:29 PM | Very simple (Score:5 Normal)
MGoCooper
Joined: 04/21/2011
MGoPoints: 1025

Brady Hoke says it all the time, that you should never assume a kid knows how to do something. Always preach the fundamentals, at the start of every year, teach them as if they know nothing. Nothing against Rodriguez's staff, but I think it was a simple case of getting back to basic fundamnetals. I'm not sure Casteel would've brought that, because I think RR didn't think it was needed.

January 10th, 2012 at 8:22 PM | Great philosophy we can all learn from. (Score:5 Normal)
thethirdcoast
thethirdcoast's picture
Joined: 08/01/2008
MGoPoints: 382

Hoke makes a great point that I've encountered in my own life. Even if I think I know a topic or technique well it's surprising how much benefit I've found from going back and revisiting the basic key points of the subject.

"Stats are for losers. The final score is for winners." -Bill Belichick

January 10th, 2012 at 10:00 PM | I would take issue with the (Score:1 Normal)
bronxblue
Joined: 11/22/2008
MGoPoints: 12582

I would take issue with the argument that this is a "vastly more simplified defensive play calling" because it really isn't.  The difference is that Mattison seems to have a consistent defensive philosophy that he has been able to implement effectively, which was something GERG never had.

Oh yeah, he also had two stud defensive linemen, a mistake-erasing safety in Kovacs, and a bunch of older players who finally started to turn it around.

Also, stop with the fundamentals crap.  That defense against OSU and VT didn't tackle any better than those GERG teams, and MSU found a way to run a pretty potent offense despite the improvements on the defense.  All coaches teach kids how to tackle effectively and maintain their gaps; the difference is that this particular group of defenders seemed to process it better (probably due to their overall experience level coupled with better overall defensive plans) than earlier iterations.

January 11th, 2012 at 9:08 AM | Our players (Score:3 Normal)
Reader71
Reader71's picture
Joined: 08/30/2009
MGoPoints: 316

Are all of our players liars, then?

There have been hundreds of quotes from the mouths of our players talking about going back to fundamentals, how they were coached in more detail this year,etc.

I was with you at one point. I thought that was just coach talk on the part of Hoke and his staff. I never thought a staff wouldn't teach fundamentals. But all season, our boys have told us otherwise, and it makes sense. The team was awful before Hoke got there; maybe RR's staff really didn't teach fundamentals (certainly didn't teach them well).

"In war, resolution; in defeat, defiance; in victory, magnanimity." 

January 10th, 2012 at 7:20 PM | Looks like Casteel is finally (Score:5 Normal)
yoopergoblue
yoopergoblue's picture
Joined: 02/11/2010
MGoPoints: 1976

Looks like Casteel is finally all in to hold the rope's hard edge...

"They will meet a dastardly fate here for that! There isn't a Michigan Man who wouldn't like go out and scalp those Buckeyes right now."

January 10th, 2012 at 7:26 PM | that defense is gonna raise (Score:5 Normal)
pasadenablue
pasadenablue's picture
Joined: 11/18/2008
MGoPoints: 4859

that defense is gonna raise RR up

This is home...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgijdypJUEQ

January 10th, 2012 at 7:21 PM | Part of me wonders if He (Score:0 Overrated)
January 10th, 2012 at 7:23 PM | There is three big things (Score:5 Normal)
NateVolk
NateVolk's picture
Joined: 07/19/2010
MGoPoints: 3827

There are three big things that "Three and Out" taught me that I now believe beyond a shadow of a doubt:

 

1. Rich Rodriguez was treated horribly during his time at Michigan.

2. Casteel not coming really hurt Rich's efforts to get the program off the ground.

3. It wouldn't have mattered because Rich was a bad choice for this program from day 1.

 

"because character wins in life and character wins on the football field....."  1-11-11

January 10th, 2012 at 7:24 PM | In the name of unity, I like (Score:5 Normal)
Butterfield
Butterfield's picture
Joined: 01/15/2011
MGoPoints: 1941

In the name of unity, I like this post.  It gives a nugget to both sides of the RR debate so we all come away from the dinner table full. 

The swag is back. 

January 10th, 2012 at 8:12 PM | 3a (Score:3 Normal)
TrppWlbrnID
TrppWlbrnID's picture
Joined: 10/29/2009
MGoPoints: 7875

Martin got caught with his pants down and had to make a splash

2013 resolution - make it onto the 2014 favorite MGoPosters post, not ironically
January 10th, 2012 at 10:40 PM | It was Lloyd Carr that (Score:2 Normal)
Hoek
Hoek's picture
Joined: 01/29/2010
MGoPoints: 1771

It was Lloyd Carr that reached out to Rich in the first place, do not put all the blame on Bill Martin.

Go Blue

January 11th, 2012 at 11:27 AM | So you're saying... (Score:2 Normal)
Yeoman
Joined: 06/08/2011
MGoPoints: 2247

Martin got caught with his pants down and Lloyd had to help him pull them back up.

January 11th, 2012 at 8:20 AM | That's about as good a (Score:2 Normal)
BlueGoM
BlueGoM's picture
Joined: 08/25/2009
MGoPoints: 2838

That's about as good a summary as I've seen.  Although I would reword #3 to "bad fit" rather than bad choice;  but I'm splitting hairs.

And the biggest thing I've taken away from the book is a sense of embarassment.  The way some people behaved towards RR is just plain embarassing, speaking as an alum.

 

 

January 10th, 2012 at 7:31 PM | Prediction for 2016: (Score:5 Normal)
Erik_in_Dayton
Erik_in_Dayton's picture
Joined: 12/03/2008
MGoPoints: 6784

Michigan will meet Arizona in the Rose Bowl.  Tectonic plates will collide.  The ghost of John Wayne will wrestle a communist.  A golden eagle with a snake in its mouth will fly from the western sky.  The sun will wink in the direction of Ann Arbor.  The future and the past will smash together in the same space-time.  Alex from Family Ties will appear on a reality TV show - not Michael J. Fox, but Alex.  A wolverine will fight a wildcat, and they will realize that they should band together to fight yetis.  A Mayan will explain for the 100th time that the Mayan calendar does not predict the end of the world in 2012.   A bottle of Coke will cost $2.35.    

It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future. -- Yogi Berra

                         

January 10th, 2012 at 8:48 PM | Doesn't have to be Rose Bowl (Score:2)
Newk
Newk's picture
Joined: 09/10/2008
MGoPoints: 333

Doesn't have to be Rose Bowl with new B1G-Pac12 scheduling arrangement.

c/o '02

January 11th, 2012 at 8:11 AM | "A bottle of Coke will cost (Score:2 Funny)
BlueGoM
BlueGoM's picture
Joined: 08/25/2009
MGoPoints: 2838

"A bottle of Coke will cost $2.35. "

Now you're just talking crazy.

 

January 10th, 2012 at 7:25 PM | Prediction: Casteel will turn (Score:5 Normal)
snarling wolverine
Joined: 12/14/2011
MGoPoints: 4684

Prediction: Casteel will turn out to be just OK - not a liability like Gerg, but not the incredible difference-maker we've been told he is.  Rodriguez likewise will do decently at Arizona but won't win big.

January 10th, 2012 at 8:40 PM | You mean like *gasp* Barwis? (Score:5 Normal)
Eye of the Tiger
Eye of the Tiger's picture
Joined: 09/14/2009
MGoPoints: 1054

I had been led to believe that this person from West Virginia was going to give us an undeniable advantage in conditioning, and it would lead to a pile of victories during the years 2008-2010.

Seriously, Casteel is a good DC and Barwis is a good S&C guy, but those are only pieces of the puzzle, and its easy to inflate their worth based on a flimsy historical example.  WVU plays in the Big East, where everyone kinda sucks aside from WVU.  Big 10 and Pac-12 are different beasts.  I don't expect to see a lot of 'Zona wins over SC or Oregon.  But let UCLA beware!

 

When your team is winning, be ready to be tough, because winning can make you soft. On the other hand, when your team is losing, stick by them. Keep believing. -Bo

January 10th, 2012 at 10:08 PM | The Big East is horrible. I (Score:4 Normal)
Gorgeous Borges
Joined: 10/07/2011
MGoPoints: 680

The Big East is horrible. I fully expect whichever crappy conference champion team that they send to the Orange Bowl will get trounced. Damn auto-bids.

I can confidently predict that there is no way that TCU's 3-3-5 defense will stop the more physical, bruising offense of Wisconsin. The 2010 Rose Bowl will be a blowout. After all, non-AQ schools and Big East teams have a horrible record in BCS bowls. Just look at Hawaii! And... well, Hawaii! Penn State is going to put the hurt on Case Keenum and co. With Penn State's overwhelming advantage in the trenches it's going to be a rough day for those Conference USA frauds.

January 10th, 2012 at 10:20 PM | Well (Score:1)
oHOWiHATEohioSTATE
Joined: 11/22/2010
MGoPoints: 1370

The team they sent this year hung 70 on the ACC champ Clemson. Yes the same Clemson that beat VT twice.

If an OSU fan divorces his wife are they still brother and sister?

January 10th, 2012 at 11:08 PM | False. ALL of these things (Score:1 Flamebait)
Gorgeous Borges
Joined: 10/07/2011
MGoPoints: 680

False. ALL of these things happened. ALL of them.

.

.

yes

 

.

January 10th, 2012 at 10:26 PM | Yeah these guys had no idea what they were doing (Score:1 Normal)
coastal blue
Joined: 11/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1791

I mean in a three year stretch they won two conference titles, three Top 10 finishes and had 2 BCS bowl wins (same number Michigan has managed from 1998-2012) over the SEC and Big 12 champs. But yeah, it was probably all because the Big East sucked. 

January 11th, 2012 at 12:11 AM | I'm not sure I disagree... (Score:1)
Yeoman
Joined: 06/08/2011
MGoPoints: 2247

...but in the interest of fairness, here's a complete list of the last five years of regular season games. It's advantage B1G for sure, but it's skewed more than a bit by the fact that our worst team over that stretch (Indiana) doesn't appear but their worst team was in 7 of the 12 games. Take the Syracuse games out and it hasn't been ugly:

2011:

  1. Iowa 31, Pittsburgh 27

2010:

  1. Michigan 30, Connecticut 10

2009

  1. Cincinnati 49, Illinois 36
  2. Minnesota 23, Syracuse 20
  3. Penn St. 28, Syracuse 7
  4. Syracuse 37, Northwestern 34

2008:

  1. Pittsburgh 21, Iowa 20
  2. Northwestern 30, Syracuse 10
  3. Penn State 55, Syracuse 13

2007:

  1. Michigan St. 17, Pittsburgh 13
  2. Iowa 35, Syracuse 0
  3. Illinois 41, Syracuse 20

 

January 11th, 2012 at 1:31 AM | No (Score:2 Normal)
coastal blue
Joined: 11/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1791

Its that those WVU teams were legit. 

We can sit here as Michigan fans and cry about how USC and Texas had such great recruiting classes that there was no way we could beat them because they were so talented...yet there were the RR/Casteel WVU teams beating Georgia and Oklahoma (seriously, when was the last time Michigan beat a conference champion from the Big 12/ACC/SEC/PAC 12?) with a huge recruiting disadvantage. 

January 11th, 2012 at 9:23 AM | Stop (Score:2 Normal)
Reader71
Reader71's picture
Joined: 08/30/2009
MGoPoints: 316

Two BCS bowl wins! Wow! That 'stat' only means that on two days from that three year period, they were better than their opponents. To compare programs in that way is ridiculous. If they had lost one of those games, would you hold it against them?

The rest of your stats have merit, but why throw that heap of shit in there? WVU was good during that time, and still is. That doesn't change the fact that their conference sucks.

Yes, the Big East sucked, and still does. The Big Ten and Pac 12 aren't fighting off extinction every year. The Big East is.

For the record, WVU's records in conference play during that stretch were 7-0, 5-2, 5-2. Good, not great.

"In war, resolution; in defeat, defiance; in victory, magnanimity." 

January 11th, 2012 at 10:37 AM | So avoid the real argument (Score:1 Normal)
coastal blue
Joined: 11/13/2010
MGoPoints: 1791

Those who hate RR downplay the fact his teams beat Georgia and Oklahoma - two BCS conference champs, something Michigan never does - while being the same people who cry about how we have no chance of beating the Texas/USC/Alabama's of the world because they recruit so much talent....while RR and co. did it with far less talent. 

No one is saying the Big East is good - even though it was better than you give it credit for during that time frame - I'm just saying that you can't discount those WVU teams. Which you agree with me on. 

And yeah TWO BCS wins. In three seasons. The same amount Michigan has from 1998-2012. Even though for all be three of those years we had the "right" coach". Considering how excited everyone was to beat the ACC runner-up in one of the worst football games ever seen, I'd say that is quite an accomplishment. 

January 13th, 2012 at 4:22 AM | Accomplishment (Score:1)
Reader71
Reader71's picture
Joined: 08/30/2009
MGoPoints: 316

Winning a couple of BCS games is an accomplishment, but the tiny sample size means it cannot be used as any sort of metric.

WVU won more BCS games than UM, but we won more games with the 'right coach' and we were in the better conference. Our BCS and general bowl performance sucked. But Bo sucked in bowls, particularly the Rose; is RR a better coach than him?

Do you see how using bowl records (or a subsection of them) is stupid for comparisons?

"In war, resolution; in defeat, defiance; in victory, magnanimity." 

January 11th, 2012 at 8:08 AM | Except that even the players (Score:0 Flamebait)
Theme provided by Roopletheme; sidebars adapted from Chris Murphy.