Yes you are, he is a legend and can say whatever he wants,
Desmond Howard at the Football Bust
Anyone have a transcript of what Desmond said ? I asked him about it on twitter and he seemed pissed claiming "i didnt say anything about rich rod, only the players did". Id like to read it for myself....
So Jim Harbaugh was just fine with his academic comments? Braylon has never said anything questionable?
Desmond's play really has nothing to do with how tasteful his comments are. Personally, I wasn't there and I'm not about to say that he should or shouldn't have said anything, but that's some bad logic right there.
Not that I disagree with you, but what exactly was wrong about Jim Harbaugh's comments? He called out the school for encouraging players to take "easy" majors, and for changing academic standards for athletes. Those are very valid things to call out, IMO.
They incited a lot of controversy with his timing, for one. I know a lot of people here view it as a cheap shot that he took, and I tend to agree. On top of that, I remember hearing that most of Stanford's football team were enrolled in a degree program that wasn't exactly mechanical engineering or mathematics. I'll look for the link here, since I think it was Brian's writing (kind of like he did with Purdue).
If Harbaugh was actually trying to help, I think he could have used other avenues to encourage M football players to study "more useful" fields.
I didn' t know him personally, but Jim Harbaugh was in one of my classes, and he never came to class. Maybe once or twice. It would be one thing if he had been a serious student, but when you don't go to class (and the rumors were that his girlfriend would take the same classes and get the notes), I don't know how you can legitimately call out an institution for its academic shortcomings. Pot calling the kettle black.
of the History classes I took. He sat in the back with a few other players, and seemed to generally be there. That said History is what he wanted to major in rather than general studies or whatever he claimed to be guided to do.
While he is egocentric, and does have a fast mouth, I think his point was in the right interest. I hosted a high school baseball player one year, who went on to pitch for Long Beach State, and now in the minors. His other interest was architecture. He wanted to study it, but his mother and his coach made him go through the easy program. I always felt it was a shame, and would really like to see student athletes major in something other than football or basketball.
Some of that is about being practical, not about having low expectations for your athletes' academic abilities, focus, or dedication. The reality is, you need to choose a major in which you can be successful despite a constrained schedule which might include frequent absences, the inability to attend office hours, the inability to attend study sessions or workgroups, the inability to be there for extended studio or clinical hours....the list goes on.
I completely understand the handwringing over it (I am a nerdy academic myself), and the butthurt from people like Harbaugh who feel insulted or cheated when are dissuaded from majoring in what they are passionate about. But when you talk to a Division I athlete who DID major in something with those kinds of time commitments, the stories are pretty daunting. I wonder how much sleep Huyge gets. Yikes.
the class at your own pace scandal seemed a bit ridiculous to me. For some subjects, flexibility isn't going to really impact what you learn.
First of all, we don't know if kids are directed into "easy" majors to keep them eligible. Secondly, IIRC Brian actually followed up on this at the time and found out that a significant percentage of Stanford football players had the same major, just like they do at U of M and a lot of other schools. Finally, to wait until after Bo dies to bring that type of thing up is inexcusable. If he has a problem with the program or the way it's operated, he should man up and say so, rather than waiting until Bo dies so he won't be called out on it. Basically then, he is either lying or, at the very least, being very disengenous about the whole situation, and being cowardly about it to boot.
That was the post I was thinking of but too lazy to look for. Nice find.
First of all, we don't know if kids are directed into "easy" majors to keep them eligible.
Actually, we do know that incoming freshman student-athletes who are academically weak are admitted only to the School of Kinesiology. (Stronger students can enroll in LS&A or another school.) From there they are generally "encouraged" into the Sports Management and Communications major. They can transfer into LS&A, but that's not a simple task.
As for Harbaugh not bringing it up until after Bo's death, that's probably just a coincidence, because he didn't get the Stanford job until after Bo died.
Why is his criticism tied to having the Stanford job? If he believed what he said, why wait until saying so gave him a recruiting advantage... wait, I just answered my own question. Nevermind.
If you really believe his statements were a coincidence, I just don't know what to tell you. Why did he stay mum about the topic for 20-some odd years and then just have to blurt it out.
Why didn't he bother to point out that fact that the vast majority of his own players at prestigious Stanford University either majored in "Undeclared" or communications?
I'm not going to bother to look this up, but I'm pretty sure this was all said during some head-to-head recruiting battles between the schools. If you can somehow reconcile these facts with your image of Harbaugh as a stand up guy, good for you. I cannot. Fuck Harbaugh.
He stayed mum because there was no reason for him to say it. When he got the Stanford job, he then had a reason to make a comparison.
I'm not sure where you got the idea I think Harbaugh's a standup guy. I said nothing of that sort. Of course he only said any of this to gain a recruiting advantage. But there is a lot of truth to what he said. Most of our football players are in Kinesiology, with the SMC major.
It's not what he said, but the context in which he said it; less than a year after Bo's death in a press conference at Stanford. It was basically like slamming your family behind their backs. I'm sure there was validity to what he said, but he simply shouldn't have said it then and there, and that is what pissed everybody off.
Someone correct me if I am wrong about Harbaugh. His comments were detrimental to the school. Implying that kids were pushed to easier majors. It was an insult to the whole athletic department. While desmond's comments, the little i heard, were saying how Rich was the wrong choice for Michigan. 2 very different things in my mind. the second is his opinion. whether the first one is true or not, you dont bring it out in public and try to address it in private. JH had enough visiability to do it. There is no reason to insult the school that gave him an education and allowed him to show off his talents.
Desmond's comments while I am not happy, are completely his opinion. Didnt JH also say he would have gone to Stanford, if he made it in.
constitution--ego free speech, etc.--and as a fan, otherwise, of Sir Desmond, would you mind if some of us also concur that his comments sucked?
Another name for "ego free speech" would be what? Humility? So you wanted Desmond to be a little more 'umble?
too late to go back and edit now, I see.
it is not OK for Section 1 to write a letter supporting John U. Bacon because it re-hashes old wounds, and the Rodriguez era should just be put to bed and forgotten, and it might be embarrassing to people present at a luncheon (Lloyd Carr was suggested to be attending a luncheon that Bacon was un-invited to speak at)
but, it is OK for Desmond Howard to re-hash old wounds and the Rodriguez era, (aptly) comparing it to the "New Coke" debacle even though that would clearly be embarrassing to the players present who were recruited by, and played for Rodriguez?
No, it was an awkward topic at best, and Desmond should have steered around the elephant.
At least he didn't give the remarks with the Grobester playing in the background.
I agree. He had the floor and had every right to share what was on his mind. However, after seeing what Molk had to say, you would think guys who are so close to the program would understand that the players don't want to hear it anymore.
What did Molk have to say?
Something along the lines of remembering that the people in the room clapping for them now were the same ones who were booing them a couple years ago. Basically calling out the bangwagon jumpers.
I didn't listen to the speech, but I can't say the analogy to New Coke is a bad one. However, that doesn't change the fact that he probably could have picked better subject matter.
Because I thought he was making some bad pun with "Hoke" and New "Coke". Till your post made me realize Desmond literally referenced New Coke.
Desmond deserves points off for that just because no one on the team probably has any die what the hell New Coke is referring to.
New coach, new team, so much to be thankful for. Why re-hash it all? If Desmond needs catharsis, he can talk to friends. The players are the ones who have been through hell, and they deserve to enjoy this season, not wallow in the past.
Same for alot of us on this board. Nothing wrong with celebrating this season, and even comparing to the prior season to note areas of improvement/backsliding. But attacks on the prior coaches don't help us now.
Everybody in that room remembers 08 - 10. I see no need to piss on a man's figurative grave, especially while 90% of the players in that room were recruited by that man, and played their hearts out while the fake Michigan Men shot cannon balls over the walls of fort Schembechler.
It was low class. I'm glad Molk spoke up the way he did. He's the definition of Michigan Man.
What did Molk have to say?
Said something to the effect of there being people in the room who have boo'ed these players, and the the seniors sitting up there with him are real Michigan Men.
I'm gonna miss Molk's warm and pleasant public speaking demeanor.
Specifically said that unless you are a fifth-year senior, you have no idea what the last few years were about. There was not one person that dared even make a noise at that point of the speech, because no one-not fan, nor former player, nor "Legend"-could question his experiences, and we were all taken to task. The collective "Michigan" had put themselves before the needs of 132, and it was a remainder of what the focus of college athletics should truly be.
I thought Howards remarks were in poor taste. Most of the guys at the bust were recruited by RR. To bash the coach that brought those players to UM is not OK. He should have saved those remarks for another time and place.
I don't think Desmond's statements were needed. We are at 10-2, Sugar Bowl Bound, and have a lot of hype around recruiting. Everyone is very happy with Hoke so far. So Desmond's comments were unneeded, but I can understand why he might set his sites on RR after some of the recent comments RR made (like how he'd have gone at least 10-2 and thinks he could have done better).
I'm mostly just unhappy he did it in front of guys who soldiered through the RR era. If he wants to support Hoke I'd rather Desmond do it by building Hoke up instead of tearing RR down.
Well said CRex. It wasn't needed, especially at a banquet that was honoring most of the players he coached for the past few years. Desmond should have waited and spoke in another venue on this topic.
"...I'd rather Desmond do it by building Hoke up..."
More like RAISING Hoke up, amirite? Seriously, I agree 100% with you. It's bad form to bash Coach Rod, especially in front of so many kids who played their hearts out for him. God knows we don't need another debate about RichRod's legacy, but if there's one thing we can take away from the RichRod years (besides stuffed beavers = bad), it's this: the more dirt Michigan men pile on his grave the more they forget about the role they played in the fiasco of the last 3 years. Coach Rod is hardly the only person who didn't live up to expectations at Michigan.
As an aside, I am curious who reprimanded RVB for his infamous but spot-on comments about "where were all the alums 2-3 years ago" RVB's comment needed to be said, but was admittedly impolitic
Must we pick apart the speeches or comments made by everyone and anyone associated with our program to the Nth degree to determine whether they have the proper respect for our previous coaches?
Are we doomed to try and make everyone speak Michigan football on a politically correct basis about the past, the present, and the future?
I think our football team, our university, and its alumni and friends can take a little reflection on the past few years and some differences of opinion without further turmoil.
We are not that weak, and we can see that the chain is being relinked to a continuous whole from Yost to Crisler to Elliot to Schembechler to Moeller to Carr to Rodriguez to Hoke. All these men are a part of the woven web and story, and each had their own unique and particular story to tell and part to add to the tapestry of Michigan football. None were perfect, and in RR's case his ultimate teaching for all of us was that we must be careful to nurture and teach the Michigan football traditions of excellence and team and Michigan first, last and always to any newcomers in our midst and not assume that we can count on others amongst us to do this job and to understand that we each are responsible to carry on this teaching to our children and our players forever!
This isn't complicated. There's a time and a place. This wasn't it.
Time and place. Nothing wrong with visiting where you've been but not at the Bust. The Bust is for celebrating the seniors on the team and to give them their M rings, which Desmond should know. Many of those seniors were brought to Michigan by Rodriguez, and for that, we should be grateful.
Just because 21 had a platform doesn't mean it was appropriate to use it. This wasn't the time or the place.
he is not always the wisest of commentators.
I couldn't figure out why he was bagging on"Cherry" Coke so much. That stuff's stood the test of time sells just fine. Then I realized he meant "New" Coke... then the analogy hit me. I didn't pay attention much after that, kept wondering how he could use that comparison as the main thrust of his analogy and not realize that he wasn't even referring to the right product.
his dumb comment? Cool. As a poster above pointed out, RR drafted most of those kids. They placed their faith in him, and don't need to hear Desmond criticize the guy in a forum intended for celebrating all that they have managed despite the BS they've endured. Just one man's epinion but. . . uncool.
I love cherry coke. He should have just said RR is a delicious alternative to the old staple. Like cherry coke to coke classic.
Right with you! I love Cherry Coke, and the mix-up derailed my whole train of thought.
I laughed when I read that and moved on. RR has taken shots at the school. Certain people like Desmond have taken shots at RR. It's only a big deal because people make it a big deal.
Wait, what shots has RR taken at Michigan?
is entitled to express whatever opinion he cares to about the football program wherever he cares to express it. As someone above aptly pointed out, it is his opinion. Each of us is entitled to his own. Anyone who actually wore the uniform and performed at a high level is probably more entitled to express what he thinks about the program than any of us is. And, yes, why do we feel the need to pick apart what everyone says and where he says it and how he phrases it?
Are you saying that to the OP or to Desmond?
Cuz you know, both would be right....
I'm only interested in talking about coaches who coach for Michigan.
Please identify one, by source and date.
And, "dumb and inappropriate remarks from Desmond Howard" is now a predictable, routine occurrence.
Didn't Desmond in fact garble his references last night? Didn't he actually say "Cherry Coke," when he meant "New Coke"?
Anyway, let's recall this from the Desmond's Greatest Hits Collection (Speech Edition):
"I'll give you a perfect example: Michigan fires coach Rich Rodriguez. All the noise in Ann Arbor is, 'Is Denard Robinson going to stay or leave?' I'm like, 'Hey, if the kid wants to go, don't let the door hit you on the way out.' You looked fantastic for five games against nobody. That's what you did. I'm not going to deny his talents, but you ain't won nothing in Ann Arbor, son! Not so much we need to worry about if you're going to be here next year or not."
And don't forget; if you order Desmond's Greatest Hits now, you'll also get, free, Desmond's Greatest Hits (Twitter Edition), in which Desmond and Phil Simms face off for a fistfight, plus too many other unforgettable Tweets to list!
Phil Simms deservedly came out looking like the fool in that whole deal.
That likes cherry coke?
Obviously not. Cherry coke is the single most innovative idea in pop ("soda" for you strange folk from strange parts of the country) in the 20th century. It is far superior to Wild Cherry Pepsi, as evidenced by the fact that Pepsi felt compelled to add the "Wild" modifier to the name. Clearly, if you need to add unnecessary modifiers to prove your point, you know you have a weak case and are just trying to cover it with window dressing. Cherry coke is also superiror to Dr. Pepper. 23 flavors? That's way too many.
Given that Berkshire Hathaway has a vast holding of Coca Cola stock; Warren Buffett might want to question Desmond's careless discussion of Coke products, and the success or failure of Cherry Coke versus [New] Coke. It is the sort of thing that we'd like Michigan Men to recite correctly when they are, uh, professional commentators, doing paid public-speaking engagements.
Desmond was on the search committee the first time, and Bill Martin pretty much pulled an end around.
DH was opposed to RR from the beginning and spent most of the next 3 years biting his toungue on ESPN.
Can anyone rehash the Molk speech?
Amongst other things, Molk basically called out the fanbase for not standing by this team for the past couple of years and how hard it was on them.
Count me on the side of finding the comments self-serving and inappropriate. Given Desmond has been a pretty vocal critic of the Rodriguez tenure, they probably shouldn't have come as a surprise, though. Still it's a bit of a smack in the face to those guys who were recruited and played for Rodriguez for 3 seasons. You can love and feel loyalty to Coach Hoke AND Coach Rodriguez and still be a Michigan Man. Comments like Demond's continue to highlight the fractionalism of the fanbase and imply that people need to choose sides and we should be past that by now.
known for his insight. They make fun of him a lot here in cbus, and it stinks for me, that I normally agree with them. They also make fun of Braylon (in a derogatory way), in which I say to them two words, "Joey Galloway".
They make fun of Braylon because of...? Life decisions? Slippery hands? Because David Boston is probably a nice easy target too.
poster child for steroids. As for Braylon, it is alleged life choices, for which they make fun.
Well, Boston also punches women in the face and gets DUIs. So really, David Boston is your one stop Buckeye shop for terrible life choices.
I mean, it wasn't quite as bad as I was expecting, but he probably should have just praised the current staff rather than bring up the previous staff.
I find the Cherry Coke v. New Coke thing odd. He had to have meant New Coke, right?
I didn't really have a problem with the comments, moreso the venue at which he chose to share them. This event was about this teams success and the players finally being rewarded for their excellent season. There was no need to express opinions on the previous coaching staff because that's not what the event was about.
Having said that, I really don't disagree with his comments and really am having trouble seeing why everyone gets all huffy when someone makes a comment about RR that isn't flattering.
I think the issue many of us have taken is that it is downright disrespectful to the players who were brought to Michigan by RR, and who busted their asses to be good players for Michigan. Many of those players have a huge amount of respect for RR.
Is Desmond saying it was a mistake for them to commit to Michigan with him as its head coach? I hope not. I hope he's not in the same crowd of people were were telling recruits not to go play for Michigan because of RR being its head coach.
I'm sure that in the inner-sanctums of Michigan foobtall, Desmond Howard is going to say some real shit from time to time. I think he's earned that right.
But with all speech making, you're either informing, persuading or demonstrating something to the audience.
Personally, I think those kind of remarks were made in poor judgement and in poor consideration of the audience he's talking to, which obviously included Michigan football players who committed to and worked very hard for Michigan and their coach Rich Rodriguez. Some of those players still love coach RichRod.
Yes. If you're a Michigan football hero, Heisman Trophy winner and All-American legend I guess you can damn well say whatever you want if you choose.
But it doesn't mean you should.
Making disparaging remarks about the previous coach and the choice to hire him. Congratulations, you won over 20% of the room. Now what about the other 80% who are staring at you and who liked that former coach? What are they? Idiots in your eyes? At that moment somebody might as well have picked up a muzzled trumpet for the Debby Downer tune.....wha, wha, whaaaa!
Desmond's message could have been delivered with greater eloquence, but hey, there it is. I'm glad Molk got to contribute some real shit of his own.
Time for him to take more shots.
I'm guessing the whole overanalyzed, overdiscussed RR episode ends at the exact moment that the Sugar Bowl results are overanalyzed and overdiscussed. Desmond shooting his mouth off a little in the wrong place- Huh. Imagine. One of RR's players (barely old enough to buy his own beer) coming to the defense of his old coach and giving the fan base a little for not standing with the team-Holy shit. Another shocker. This topic will be so boring at this time next year that no one at the bust will think of bringing it up. Discussion of RR, his treatment, and his record could become a parlor game for people like us. But the subject has been so badly beaten that weariness will finally have set in and not even we will want to talk about it. It will finally be dead. (unless of course RR runs off about 3 straight MNCs at AZ)
If he called the Rodriguez hire a mistake and compared it to New Coke, he was right in both respects. It doesn't sound like he disparaged Rodriguez personally. It sounds like he said Michigan hired a guy to bring in the latest and greatest offensive system, ala new Coke, and it didn't work out. I think Rodriguez might agree, if he's not swearing he'd have won at least 10 games this season. So where's the controversy?
His comments just come off as being insensitive to the seniors and team in general who have gone through the the toughest 3-4 year span in recent Michigan history. Instead of making a speech that essentially says, "Whew, thank god we got Brady Hoke and Greg Mattison in here and don't have to watch that gimmick offense anymore"; how about acknowledging the commitment of the guys who went through the roughest of rough patches. How about acknowledging that these guys faced more adversity than any Michigan team in recent memory, yours included, and emerged winners. There's a lot of ways to highlight how much the last 3 years sucked for everybody who cares about Michigan without coming off as callous to the team.
I think the new Coke reference was to the Michigan defense and not the "gimmick offense" that was to be so controversial at the time, as it was actually quite successful at Michigan.
If everyone is going to be up in arms about RichRod talking about this season and his expectations and his time here, why is it ok for the university to talk about him?
Who, exactly, is "up in arms" about Rich Rodriguez talking about our season?
Sorry if you thought my response was to you...it was to the gentleman above you asking why this is a big deal. And I wasn't talking about anyone at the university, I was talking about this board. If we are going to be upset about RichRod commenting on Michigan football, then we should also get upset when Michigan talks about him. Sorry if that wasn't clear in my post.
No need to rehash the past. Desmond should have kept his mouth shut about the failures of the team over the past 3 years. When a majority of the players in the room were the guys on the field, the guys losing the games, why not just celebrate the great season and the commitment that they made instead of highlighting the negative aspects.
His inability to us the correct analogy is irrelevant, but highlight his inability to understand the impact of his words on the people that matter the most - The Team.
that you're telling the audience that they bought the New Coke too and that they should have known better.
It's his opinion. He can say it all if he wants. But it's not going to be well received by all.
It's not something I would say. I'd want my presentation at such a football bust to be positive for the audience, congratulatory all-around and recognizing everyone in the room for their sacrifice, perseverence and positive contribution. It makes no sense to yank the Rodriguez chain, but I acknowledge that there's alway going to be an "I told you so" crowd that just can't resist making the jabs about the past.
Oh well, meanwhile Michigan is 10-2, beat Nebraska decisively and OSU, and is headed to a nice BCS bowl game.
Both of which are delicious - hello Hawaiian style!
His comments were fine. RR WAS a mistake to hire in hindsight. (At the time I thought he was a great hire) But if you say RR wasn't a mistake then your delusional. (He won 15 games in 3 seasons....For something to compare that too, LSU is going to win 14 games alone this season)
Back when Desmond was with the jax jags he took a few hours from his day to visit the small rust bucket I was stationed on. He chatted with the crew and was very cool. It was not a
PR stunt, just saying thanks to the military.
Desmond has lots of good karma points in my book. Although these comments seem like a poor choice for the venue.
Alot of you people need to chill the hell out and stop puckering up whenever there is any kind of mention of the rich rod era as if its some how not as real if we just dont talk about it.
"First rule about living through the rich rod era is we don't talk about the rich rod era!" mentality is childish.
So what if Desmond made some jokes at a social dinner event... he can say whatever he wants about the subject and he kept it within reason.