Coleman stands behind Rich Rodriguez
I'm glad that she came out and supported RR. I hope this makes the people who are calling for his head to calm down a little bit. We're not getting rid of him, stay behind him, make the big house rock for the last two games and hopefully we'll get some recruits in to help the situation.
http://www.annarbor.com/sports/michigan-president-mary-sue-coleman-stan…
“I don't think it's fair to coaches to bring them in and say, 'We're going to give you three years,’” Coleman told the paper. "When (former Michigan basketball coach) Tommy Amaker came in, we stuck with him for six years. It just wasn't going to work; it wasn't the right fit. But it wasn't a rushed decision.”
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:34 PM ^
6 years to figure out Amaker "wasn't the right fit", sheesh!
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
Will not be happy about these comments. Not in the slightest.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
I thought that point was funny too. Not something to brag about.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:03 PM ^
But realistically, would any AD have fired Amaker before year 5?
His first season we were bad, but no worse than we were the year before.
His second season we contended for the Big Ten title and may have made the tournament if we weren't banned from the postseason. A good year.
His third year we just missed the NCAAs and won the NIT. It was a little disappointing we didn't make the tourney, but the NIT run was nice.
The fourth year we had a horrible rash of injuries, and Daniel Horton was suspended (by the school, not by Amaker) over a somewhat murky domestic-abuse issue. Bad year, but there were definitely extenuating circumstances.
The fifth year we were expected to make the tournament (if not contend for the Big Ten title) and collapsed down the stretch. I would have let him go then.
I think we kept Amaker around one year too long. That's forgivable.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:50 PM ^
I respect Amaker for at least getting the program clean. While a student, too many of the players were absolutely atrocious under Ellerbe and he seemed to tacitly condone it (backpack incident). I seemed to notice a change in attitude once Amaker took over. I can't blame them for keeping Amaker 6 years.
Is Amaker as good of a coach as the one we have now? No, but Amaker was a good guy who helped straighten out an ethically challenged program.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:39 PM ^
Amaker was a mistake, yes. Rodriguez, not so much. If she stands behind Rodriguez, we'll take in some more disappointments in the next couple years but in 6 years we'll look back and thank god we stuck with it (god I hope I'm right)
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:42 PM ^
Why is this even a fucking issue? We need to stop pandering to idiots who think any coach could do any better with this program right now.
I was just looking at the depth chart, and since Woolfolk had to move to corner, we have one player at safety who isn't either a walk-on or a true freshman. One player! At a position where you play two guys. Yet we bitch about the defense and act surprised when they get gashed and then wonder aloud if Gerg is the right man for the job. This team has glaring talent deficiencies in the Jr./Sr. classes at linebacker, o-line, and defensive back. The receivers are virtually all underclassmen and the quarterbacks are true freshmen. The only position group that wasn't an unmitigated disaster when RichRod took over is running back.
Now look at the depth chart by class and see all the talent in the Freshman column. When these guys are juniors supplemented by additional incoming talent, we can expect to be really good. Until then, expecting more than we are getting is downright idiotic.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:48 PM ^
It less about the fact that she should have to do it and more about the fact that she did do it. You seem to have common sense and can look at the player and go "it would be tough to win with these guys". Not everyone can do that. Case in point all of the people who called into WTKA this morning wanting to fire RR.
Hopefully this will make the people who just figure we have a cast of great players step back and think before they call for RR's head.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^
I get that she is just sticking up for her coach in the face of bad public perception, I just wish she had made specific reference to our situation rather than using platitudes about giving a coach more than three years (if a coach is obviously doing a shitty job I'd actually be okay with firing him after three years).
I'd have been infinitely happier if she just quoted my buddy (a Colorado alum) who called today to bitch about the state of their program. When I mentioned that some people in our fanbase wanted RichRod fired, he just said, "Yeah, yeah, those people are retarded," and promptly moved on to other business (namely 30 minutes of "Cody Hawkins sucks at football" talk).
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^
You really think that no coach in the country could do better than what RR has done so far? The reason to ignore that issue is because RR is our coach for this season and the next and it would be foolish to fire him so far. It's still dumb to suggest that RR is the best coach in the country for Michigan; he's just the best one that we've got for this season and the next.
Expecting to beat a one-win Illinois team is not idiotic. This team, with a signature win over 22nd-ranked Notre Dame, played worse than a team whose two wins are now over a 5-4 team and a 1-AA team. It's entirely reasonable to have doubts about the coach and the team; that doesn't mean that I think RR should be fired. This crap where people demonize people that have doubts about the team needs to stop.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:03 PM ^
So because they beat a team they shouldn't (ND) and lost to a team they should have beaten (UI), you have doubts about the coaching staff? Expecting everything that happens in college football to proceed in an orderly fashion is idiotic. Purdue isn't better than OSU, but they beat them. It happens all the time. This team is not as good as their best day (ND) or as bad as their worst (UI). Having doubts about a coach who is overachieving based on the experience level of his team merely because he doesn't win the "right" games is ridiculous.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:37 PM ^
This is something we need to absolutely remember. So far, we've won all the games we were supposed to except for the Illinois game, been VERY close in two of the other games we lost, got blown out by a superior PSU team, and beat a probably superior ND team.
Is the record as rosy as we might have hoped? No. Was this team capable of beating Illinois? Probably, but the way Juice showed up in the second half, they were much better than their record suggests. Is RR partially responsible for some of the miscues in several games? Probably.
I'm glad Coleman came out and said this, and I love the fact that she's not jumping to any conclusions. Reevaluate after next year and see if things are progressing acceptably, and go from there.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:29 PM ^
The general consensus going into this year was that Michigan could reasonably expect a 7-5 season and an unexciting December bowl game. At the moment, it appears that we will go 6-6 after losing to a horrible team.
We were just blown out in two consecutive games and we may not finish with a winning record. The year before, we went 3-9 and lost to Toledo. This is not overachieving.
I personally do not have any desire to see Rodriguez fired and think he deserves at least three seasons. At the same time, however, I certainly feel some doubt with regard to the coaching staff, considering that the offense and defense seem to have regressed* over the course of the season and they were unable to keep the team in the game against Illinois.
*To be clear, this is not entirely Rodriguez's fault. The offense is running at a reduced capacity behind two freshman QBs, and therefore their struggles are forgivable (though at the same time, I am really getting annoyed with the turnovers). The defense, meanwhile, is starting walk-ons due to lack of depth and skill. At the same time, Illinois, running an offense nearly identical to our own just shredded us and made the defense look awful in the second half. We were consistently out of position, especially at linebacker. This is inexcusable and is in no small part the fault of the coaching staff.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:49 PM ^
This is an inexperienced team with serious talent issues at linebacker and in the secondary, but if they play like one (turning the ball over and missing assignments) even for one half against Illinois, then it must be the coaches' fault. No excuses.
That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
The general consensus thought Michigan was the #5 team in the country pre-Horror. The general consensus is full of idiots.
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:05 PM ^
Did you sleep through October?
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:17 PM ^
Are you saying RichRod should be criticized for not upsetting MSU and Iowa on the road, or losing to a PSU team that is going to go 11-1? Other than that, it is just the second half against Illinois that everyone is whining about.
This team is not any good yet. I'm sorry if they fooled you early in the season (in one game against ND). They have a lot of young talent, but that talent doesn't win you 8-9 games when the Jr./Sr. class is as crappy as ours is. I'll say it again, true freshmen quarterbacks turn the ball over and walk-on safeties take bad angles. That isn't coaching. It is talent and experience. Every criticism of Rodriguez I've heard so far requires a complete ignorance of that fact.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:36 AM ^
I guess when senior running backs fumble and kick returners fumble for the second year in a row, that's the same as true freshmen fumbling. (And if you know certain true freshman QB's are turnover machines, why do you keep putting them in position, like, say, 3rd and long, to turn it over?). Not coaching then, either? Then we're really overpaying, because they apparently have control over nothing.
But more directly to your question, I don't think beating MSU is an "upset". They're a team that might not even make a bowl. They're not a good team. That was the game they should have won along with the last one.
But you seem to be ignoring HOW things happen, and only acknowledging what happened. MSU they got hammered, and it was disguised by a minor miracle at the end of the game. Iowa shouldn't have been a win going into it, but on the field it certainly should have been. PSU shouldn't have been a win, but it shouldn't have been a gang rape either. They're not THAT good. And one bad half was really an utter crushing by one of the worst teams in Bowl Division football.
I know they're not any good. I'm just saying they should be at least competently good. Maybe you can't see the nuance between a team that's 5-4 and should be 7-2 (with more losses to come) based on who they play, and how. They're not a good football team. Newsflash - the Big Ten is as awful as it's EVER been. When we get older, more experienced, we're going to get better, but so is the rest of the B10, which is young too. So if you can't be competent when the teams you're playing are awful, what happens when they get good?
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^
Saying you are okay with the results but not with how they happen is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. How do you think bad teams lose? They make lots of mistakes. If they played well and didn't fumble or miss assignments, they would be a good team with a better record. You can't say you don't expect better results (which you can't since the team doesn't have enough talent/experience) and then bitch about the way the bad results happen.
If you thought this team would win 8-9 games (especially after the best o-lineman went down and the paper thin defense got even thinner), then you don't know anything about football. If you didn't, then whining about how they got to 5-4 (still a vast improvement from last year) is just belly aching based on the fact that you want the team to play better when the reality is they aren't talented or experienced enough to do so consistently.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:45 PM ^
Ah, reading comprehension. You should try it sometime. Bad teams lose a lot of ways. If it's like the Penn State game, because that team has a lot more talent, than that's acceptable, in the now, if you're recruiting a lot more talent. If you're outplaying another team, and lose because of mistakes or turnovers (see Iowa), that's another thing. You know, all those freshmen mistakes...except for OOPS, all the senior mistakes too. Guess experience doesn't cure everything. And then sometimes you implode and lose to a team you have no business losing to. It's not beyond someone with a grasp of reality that in some of those cases, yes, coaching could be better. Just because it shatters this reality you've imagined for yourself doesn't make that not so.
Who said anthing about 8 or 9 games? 7 would be nice. 8 becomes a possibility after you beat ND..remember, you just set up shifting standards. If you want to say they shouldn't have beat ND, fine. Then they should have beat MSU. Illinois is the game that stands out there going WTF?
They may yet be vastly better than last year, because they have 3 more games to prove it. But you're delusional to say that now, at this point. They've traded for their two victories by dumping Utah and adding Western, and turning Toledo into Delware St. Are they playing better? Mildly, because they have a QB who doesn't shit himself every time he goes out there. Defensively? Not that much.
And the problem is that. There should be some improvement. It shouldn't have been that bad last year...and should be better this year. Because if you think we have no talent...man, most of the rest of the Big Ten would trade talent with us. That's who we're playing, and who we're losing to. The whole Big Ten is young. They're all going to get older and better. It's not a League of seniors vs. our poor kids. They're all going through the growing pains. And beating us while they do it.
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:13 PM ^
Please explain to me why they over-pursued every zone read Illinois ran when they can see the same damn things from our offense in practice every week.
November 3rd, 2009 at 6:00 PM ^
First off, explain to me when this team has played well defensively all year. They haven't. Playing poorly all season because you have no talent or experience or depth is not regression. It just means you have a sucky defense. This was also the first zone read team they faced all year, so hard to see how they are regressing against that particular offense.
If you want to go on a player by player basis, Kevin Leach played for the first time against Illinois, so by definition his play can't be regressing. Mouton continues to make boneheaded mistakes like he has all year (check UFR if you don't believe me). Brown has been consistently not-terrible all year, and probably was close to that against UI. As for the safeties, who I'm sure you noticed played as large if not more of a role in the disaster, Kovacs continues to be a redshirt freshman walk-on who is physically overmatched and Williams continues to play terribly (Did you forget the Iowa game?). These players also have virtually no backups who aren't freshmen or walk-ons to come in and improve things.
This defense has been bad all year because the players in the heart of the back seven either suck or have no experience or both. We don't have a good defense right, but the influx of talent in the freshman and subsequent recruiting classes will only make things better. We just have to be patient.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:25 PM ^
First of all, I'm not criticizing the coaching at the safety position. I fully acknowledge that a safety corps featuring Jordan Kovacs (no offense to him, but walk-on starting safeties are about as likely to work out well as giving a five year old ecstasy) and Mike Williams is doomed to failure. Furthermore, the corners have improved since last year (despite Cissoko's departure), so I have no intention of criticizing the coaching there.
I am, however, criticizing the coaching regarding the linebackers. Obi Ezeh is in his third year of consistent playing time. He was just benched because he is consistently out of position. He might just never be great, but at the same time, he showed a lot of promise freshman year, approached adequacy sophomore year, and was benched for playing badly in his junior year. This does not reflect well on the coaches. Mouton has also demonstrated the physical talent necessary to be a good linebacker, and has demonstrated great playmaking ability. He still, however, makes huge mistakes over and over again, leading me to wonder whether he's ever going to figure out his position.
Mouton and Ezeh are the only linebackers coached by Jay Hopson, who I personally feel should be fired. Ezeh has regressed since freshman year and Mouton has failed to improve. Furthermore, the overall performance of the entire team is the responsibility of Rodriguez, so he takes some of the blame here as well, for hiring Hopson if nothing else. I can accept some bad hires, but at the same time it raises questions about Rodriguez's judgment with regards to the defensive side of the ball, especially considering the fiasco with Shafer last year.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:12 PM ^
You mentioned players over pursuing on the zone read and I thought this was a bigger problem for the safeties (namely Williams) than the linebackers for the most part (not that they had a good game by any stretch) which is why I mentioned it. Sorry if it wasn't what you meant to discuss.
You may know more about Hopson's background, coaching style, and philosophy than I do (and therefore have a stronger opinion of him as a coach), but I am generally willing to give a coach the benefit of the doubt when he has two default starters to work with (meaning that there is nobody with any experience on the depth chart to challenge Ezeh and Mouton for PT). Some players just aren't good even if they have the physical ability (Mouton) and I've never been a fan of Ezeh's (I think he got the benefit of the doubt when he played early on for simply not screwing up too bad and making tackles because all middle linebackers make lots of tackles, but that that is about the ceiling on his ability level). Coach Hopson may not be getting the job done, but I think based on what we've seen (Ezeh getting benched in favor of a walk-on and Mouton's continued struggles with the mental aspect of the game) it is just as likely that he is stuck working with two subpar players. The changing coordinators can't be helping those two either (though I am more than willing to chastise Rodriguez for the Shafer hire that led to this).
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:11 PM ^
No one is saying that other coaches wouldn't have accomplished more. With the extreme changes Rod brought in we knew there would be a tough transition period. The coaching staff has been outdone recently, but that doesn't mean that Rich won't get things back on track. Firing Rich is a mistake unless he makes no progress next year. I'm disappointed with where this season is ending up and thought last year that I wouldn't be happy with less than 8 wins and I still won't be, but firing Rich after this year would cause greater disaster than giving him a chance to keep improving.
The only coach I would even think about other than Rod for the position at this point is Brian Kelly, and unless he is taking over at Michigan I want him as far away from the Big 10 as possible.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:36 PM ^
nobody is villfying anyone for their opinion.
If people cant take Michigan looking not so great, I just want them to cheer for another team for a year or two. For their own sake.
My gosh, I compared Saturday to a moment in the Mike Davis era at IU in my infamous diary. That's hardly demonizing people for daring the critique the current coach.
It's just the people that cry 'this is not the michigan football i deserve to cheer for' BS that I cant take.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:59 PM ^
I think that you point out the distinction between two types of people.
We have people like you who (quite reasonably) have their doubts about whether or not Rich Rod will prove to be "the answer" for Michigan. At first, I really thought he was. I still think he could be, but I'm slightly less optimistic. I think that he has a lot of obstacles to overcome, and some of those have to do with personnel. I'm really not learned enough in terms of football to be an accurate judge, and I also don't think enough time has passed. These are reasons why I don't want to see him fired, but will be more skeptical.
The other camp of people are the ones who were shouting for his head LAST SEASON and after jumping back on the bandwagon with a 4-0 start are now off said bandwagon and back to their "FIRE RR NOW!" ways. I think this is unreasonable. Once again, attrition, personnel, d-coordinators, etc. make me think that this may OR may not be RR's fault.
The thing is, I want to see if he can. In my heart of hearts, I'm hoping that he will "lead us to the promised land." At the very least, I would hate to see us get rid of a coach without a legitimate chance to prove himself. Then, I might always wonder what if.
Maybe he fails, maybe he succeeds. Right now, I don't see an alternative. I think that the fan who says we should fire him now hasn't really considered who would take his place. I think that is what makes that person unreasonable.
On the other hand, the person who says "those who question the awesomeness of Rich Rod and dares to question the 9 National titles that begin in 2011" is also unreasonable. I'm not even saying it won't happen. I'm just saying we can't predict the future.
I think someone having doubts is reasonable. For whatever reason, one might dislike Rich Rod. They might be right to. I think it's ok to be on the fence, regardless of which way you are leaning. The Illinois loss was really heartbreaking. I've heard all the excuses and all the statements that it was inexcusable. I don't know which camp is right; I just know it sucked.
So to sum up, doubts=totally justified. RICH ROD IS GOD or RICH ROD IS SATAN=not really justified just yet.
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:12 PM ^
You seem to have thought this out rationally but you are still mistaken in one respect. Having doubts about a coaching staff with a long track record of success because the current team's performance corresponds exactly with the talent and experience level of the players is not reasonable. It reflects a fundamental ignorance of how college football works and how a program is built. That, or the doubter in question has simply not done the leg work to understand the limited resources RichRod and his staff are currently working with.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
On the surface, this doesn't look like much. However, if you did deeper this may be a very profound comment aimed directly at certain specific individuals who have been out to get RR since day one. I see this as proof that there is a clique out to get him, and she is signalling that she won't allow it on her watch. I hate to see this get so ugly. If the factionalism continues, an archangel won't be able to put Michigan football back together. Look at the reason for the mediocrity of our fellow in state school's football program all those years - it was the same disease - factionalism.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:46 PM ^
A toast to Joel Ferguson and George Perles
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:56 PM ^
Look at the reason for the mediocrity of our fellow in state school's football program all those years - it was the same disease - factionalism.
Factionalism didn't help, but the South racially integrating was the real killer. MSU's pipeline of Southern black players dried up in the late '60s and their program has never been the same.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:26 PM ^
Wow, 1.5 years into his tenure and RR needs a "vote of confidence" from the University president. Ugh.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:30 PM ^
would have needed one at this exact point as well.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:40 PM ^
NOT BRIAN KELLY BRIAN KELLY IS THE BEST COACH FOR MICHIGAN OMGOMG.
/s. duh.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
Few were happy with Lloyd in years 1-4 of his tenure, either. In year 5, he went 12-0 and was sainted.
How soon we forget.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 AM ^
We forget because it was year 3. Doh!
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:47 AM ^
Lloyd only owned the latter 2 of those four 4-loss seasons.
Still, people were calling for his head after two 8-4 campaigns.
November 3rd, 2009 at 7:55 PM ^
True dat. They were really lumping all 4 in together.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^
In his press conference today someone asked him if he thought things would be easier for the team and his response was "not after i got here". they wanted him to expand upon it but he wouldn't. seems like coming in he saw the same things that everyone else did, winning tradition, coming off a "sub par" season that still had us ranked and having a immature but talented QB coming back. Unfortunately we couldn't just reload, he needs to rebuild. I think he can do it, I just hope it happens sooner than later.
Big Ten fans are very passionate. Look at OSU. Pryor threw one long completion and then two incompletions and the crowd had already turned against him against New Mexico State. Schools with winning traditions expect to win, even when the talent isn't there.
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:28 PM ^
I half expected a picture of her literally standing behind RR. I appreciate her comments.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:51 PM ^
also: sourceNovember 2nd, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^
The criticism I always heard about Carr was that he always had the talent but that we didn't live up to it and thus any perceived underachievement was blamed on the coaching. Carr leaves and now somehow people defend RR saying we didn't have the talent either.
I'm not a RR hater but I have had certain expectations from Day 1 and I have been extremely disappointed so far. What I really don't understand is how understanding everyone seems to be for RR when they were calling for Carr's head when all he did was produce winning teams. If we end up with only 1 win in the big 10, then I'm not sure we can even consider this season an improvement from last season.
I understood there would be a transition and that RR needed to get his players in place, but I also know that other schools go through the same and when they get a good coach (Meyer, Saban, Miles, Stoops, etc.) they don't go through the growing pains we have seen.
I don't know how people are judging the cupboard empty for RR. It seems to me that our recruiting was never really down so the players that are on the bench or not playing have just not been developed which is the job of the coaches. Also, other teams (Cincinnati for one) has done far more with far less talent.
I also expect that a coach that has a system that is going to drastically change the nature of the game for the players he's coming in to coach should be flexible enough to design the implemenation of that system to take advantage of the players he does have.
Probably one thing that might have helped in this transistion would have been to have held on to Ron English at DC. It was RR's decision to clean house and that clearly hurt us on the defensive end, including our recruiting. So our defensive struggles are linked to RR as well, and he shouldn't be given a pass just because people want to say we have no talent, or that it is because we are on our third DC in 2 years. That was something completely in his control.
Again, I'm not a RR hater, but I can't just give him a pass on what has occured over the last two seasons. I support the team and I support letting him have a chance to turn things around, but if this doesn't occur by year three, then well I don't want to Amaker it around for 6 years of misery. That being said... even Amaker was showing progress.
However, because of our choice in head coach and his "unique system" the next head coach will likely have an even more difficult job of making the transition (at least by then our expectations won't be so high).
November 2nd, 2009 at 4:46 PM ^
http://mgoblog.com/content/michigan-depth-chart-class-0
Check out the junior and senior class. When you realize that there is not nearly enough talent in that group to even field a team, much less compete in a BCS conference, then you can tell me the cupboard wasn't/isn't bare.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:07 PM ^
Thanks, that is interesting. I do see that we don't have much left in terms of juniors and seniors, but when I look at the recruting classes from 2005/2006/2007 they look strong and we seem to be missing a lot of the players that were recruited. I'm not assigning blame, just pointing out the inconsistency between recruiting classes, what we have left, and that somehow Carr is blamed for leaving no talent when Carr's critics always said he had the talent but didn't deliver on the coaching side.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:14 PM ^
http://mgoblog.com/
Top story explains it all.
This isn't about who is to blame (though I can hardly see how Rodriguez is to blame for the program he inherited) but about what the program is currently working with and how that should frame everyone's expectations. This team has little experienced talent and glaring personnel holes (having to start a true freshman d-lineman two years in a row, having one scholarship safety who isn't a true freshman, etc.). Complaining about losses or poor play without acknowledging that this talent/personnel deficiency is almost certainly the cause gets really annoying.
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:12 PM ^
So how many years till it becomes his program? Just say it now, so there's no back tracking later. 3? 4? 10?
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:21 PM ^
I am right. If you can't see the massive holes in the roster when you look at the depth chart, then frankly you don't know anything about college football. When the players Rodriguez recruited are upperclassmen (2011), this team is going to be really fucking good. I hope shitty, uneducated fans like yourself aren't around to enjoy it.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:43 AM ^
Son, I've forgotten more football than you'll ever know. And have been around it a lot longer. And by saying that Rich Rod is not an angel sent on from heaven, and that he's made some mistakes isn't a calling for his head, it's just an acknowledgement of reality. Something you seem to have little grasp of.
And with those holes, if you think we're 2 defensive recruiting classes away from "Really fucking good", I wonder how much football you've watched. Can't have it both ways. Of course, our bigger problem is the offense which can't score points anymore...we know what we have with the defense.
Luckily for me guys on message boards who are all over the coach's jock have no say over who gets to be a "fan".
November 3rd, 2009 at 12:25 PM ^
You have to lose your virginity first to have a son, partner. Everything you have said proves you know absolutely nothing about the game. If the holes on defense are too big to even be good with two more recruiting classes, then what the fuck are you complaining about the coach for? You are the only person trying to have it both ways. Acknowledging reality is a lot different than crying like a bitch because the team isn't as good as you want it to be. Realizing that we have one of the finest coaches in the country who is in the middle of a massive rebuilding effort while taking the struggles of young or less talented players with a grain of salt is not "riding the coach's jock." It is being an intelligent fan. You should try it some time.
November 3rd, 2009 at 1:59 PM ^
That would be funny if you hadn't posted your picture so we know who has the greater likelihood of being a virgin on here.
I don't need to go into my background or credentialing here..suffice to say, you lose.
Ah, so you try to turn around my argument, rather than explain your own gapping holes in logic. It's easy to explain on my end...all those other guys, they aren't the coach anymore. We're 3 months away from the 3rd recruiting class of the guy currently coaching the team. The one who affects whether we win or lose still. Even if the cupboard was pretty darn bare coming in, it's kinda his job now to realize it, and recruit for it. And so far, the guys who will be playing in 2-3 years haven't been the kind ON DEFENSE to make us into that undefeated beat you seem to think we're having every year. Because, boy, if it was that thin, and the guy who knows more about football than us put together, the COACH didn't spend most of his scholarships on defense too, he either must have missed it or been negligent.
And no one was crying...just pointing out how you're arguments continue to make no sense. No one was even saying "SUCKY RICHROD" or FIRE HIM!! Not really. It's just this thing you've imagined in your head because the dreams of National Titles every year 98% win percentage are fading away because he might just be a GASP really good football coach who makes mistakes! "Noooooo...our old coach did that, and that wasn't acceptable!!! How could I ever live through that again!!" Worrying that he may actually be a coach who was doing a good job, moves up a job, and might not be as good there is just looking at some worrying evidence. It's not drawing any conclusions. He's got another year or two before that.
Thinking he is such a great coach that he's beyond reproach or question, and nothing that ever goes wrong could be partly his fault, isn't intelligent, it's blind faith. Now go drink some Kool Aid to quiet you down, before you embarrass yourself some more.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:39 PM ^
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about at this point. This all started because I pointed out the lack of experience on this team to another poster while linking to the team's depth chart. Your response was essentially, "stop making excuses, when will it be his team?".In another post, I stated my opinion that as a whole this team has overachieved based on the talent and experience level of the players and your response was, "OMG we lost games and got smoked by Illinois." When I explained my full position/opinion with respect to the state of the team, you (weakly) attempted to insult me personally while continuing to ramble inanely about kool-aid and "riding the coach's jock, citing your imaginary football expertise as justification for your incoherent and misguided stance.
If you think Rodriguez should be fired, fine. You are entitled to that incorrect opinion. If you think the results on the field with this year's team indicate he is underperforming as head coach, fine. You are entitled to that incorrect opinion. If neither of these is your official position, then you are just being a whiney douche, and the Michigan fambase and this blog's readership will do just fine with one less of those around.