Desmond Howard looks to Gator Bowl to decide RR's job status
New article posted on AnnArbor.com
"Desmond Howard believes Gator Bowl outcome could affect Michigan football coach Rich Rodriguez's job status"
“Unfortunately, the patience or tolerance level is becoming like the pros. They anticipate you do it sooner. … Look at Rich, he’s shown improvement with the offense at Michigan. But they have to improve on defense or the improvements won’t matter. I think it takes four years for a system and personnel to match.”
December 23rd, 2010 at 7:53 PM ^
This sound very familiar, hmmmm. I figure it out sometime. (sarc)
December 24th, 2010 at 12:04 AM ^
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. :-)
December 24th, 2010 at 12:17 AM ^
Unless you are referring to your shorts.
December 23rd, 2010 at 7:59 PM ^
I really have grown to hate the "we aren't the best, fire the coach" attitude people have now-a-days.
People who know nothing about anything have much too much pull in decisions purely due to the information era and the ability of the majority(who are unknowledgeable fans) to be heard over the minority(who actually have the intellect to assess the situation based on criteria other than wins).
The amount of coach firings going on is ridiculous.
The epitome of this is the giants embarrassing loss and everyone calling for Tom Coughlin to be fired literally hours later. Thank god sports aren’t democratic.
Good to see Desmond making a rational for keeping Rich Rod even though he has been visibly disappointed with the team.
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:59 PM ^
December 24th, 2010 at 12:05 AM ^
It's totally "what have you done for me lately?" Really, so much is out of your control, but the fans get angry and want to blame someone. It's really not rational. Whoever said it's great that sports aren't a democracy was right on.
December 23rd, 2010 at 9:17 PM ^
While I understand your anger at the fickleness of fans, I will point out that the fans are not being unrealistic if you use coaching changes at other premier jobs(i.e: peers of UM). Tressel, Stoops, Carroll, and Meyer are the most notable of the coaches who have taken over at elite schools and experienced great success. All since 1999. So the fans are not being irrational to expect UM to bounce back to elite status quickly. Not when schools liike Florida, SC, OSU, Oklahoma,Auburn and Alabama have made rapid ascents in the same situation that Michigan was/is in.
Of course, there are guys who it took a little longer to coach their teams back to elite status. Mac Brown's Longhorns did not truly hit elite until well into his tenure.It took Oregon a better part of a decade to get where it is now. Bowden's Seminoles took a long time to become elite. So just because it has not happened immediately for RR that it doesn't preclude it from ever happening..
UM is in a tough spot. The record has improved every year, but the defense has gotton worse and the team was not competitive versus the best teams in conference--all of whom were physical teams.That is a definite sign of concern for the future. People say chalk it up to youth, but that does not explain the first two years of awful defense. Then again, the offense is on the verge of being spectacular.Whatever Brandon does he is taking a risk.
This program is at a crossroads. It is going somewhere, but where? No one really knows. People predict greatness or catastrophe, but that have no idea. They are just guessing.
December 23rd, 2010 at 9:31 PM ^
Had trouble with physical teams. Maybe because it was Juniors, seniors and RS seniors going up against mostly freshman. Seriously, look at the depth chart and tell me which of those other premier jobs had such a glaring weakness of talented upperclassman as we have had. They weren't in the same situation we were and they didn't have total philosophical changes in the way the program was being run including scheme.
If you can't see this is a talented team that happens to have one of the youngest if not youngest two deep of any BCS school then you're just not paying attention. We have been a perennial 3 or 4 loss team for most of this decade. The administration decided things needed to change and that takes time especially considering the youth of this team.
December 23rd, 2010 at 9:56 PM ^
.SC was left a complete mess by Hackett. OU was also left a mess by Blake/Schnellberger.
Mostly against freshmen? That is factually incorrect. The defense had as starters: Ezeh, Mouton, Martin, VanBergan, Kovacs,Banks, Roh, Gordon, Floyd, Vinopal, Avery, and Rogers. I see three freshmen in that grouping. That is not "mostly". Not even close. I see mostly third year sophs and juniors with a few frosh thrown in. If you count Fritzgerald and Demens, those are two more third year sophs.
Offensively, UM had true sophs at QB and RB with a junior and frosh thrown in;mostly sophs and juniors at WRs, and an OL constructed primarily of sophomores and juniors.
If you read my post I was not arguing for either, so you missed the point.I even gave examples of where it took a coach more than 3-4 years to flourish. I was summarizing the situation as I saw it. I was not trying to say that he should or should not be fired.
There are very legitimate doubts and hopes for this program. I think it is perfectly reasonable to wonder where this program is headed considering all that has gone on the past three years.
In my opinion, the future is cloudy. If that offends you, so be it.
December 23rd, 2010 at 10:18 PM ^
Lots of first year players: Carvin Johnson, Vinopal, Cam Gordon, Avery, Demens, Rogers, and Thomas Gordon. Those are all first year players. It is valuable to discuss freshmen because they are typically smaller than their opponents, however first-year players are also often at an experience disadvantage. I too am curious about where the program is headed...especially the defense, but I wouldn't use the word "doubts".
We return the following starters on defense next year. (I'll assume a 3-3-5): Roh, Martin, VanBergen, Demens, C. Gordon, Kovacs, Johnson, Vinopal, Woolfolk (I count him as a returning starter), and Floyd.
That is 10 guys who have been starters for us, and will likely be starters for us next year. There is room for improvement and some guys we aren't counting on may steal a starting job or two from the guys on this list. I'm optimistic about the future, I'm excited about that list of players, and I do not have "doubts".
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:35 PM ^
and Rogers is a senior. I forgot Johnson. So 4 frosh out of 20 guys. That still is not "mostly" freshmen.
December 24th, 2010 at 12:35 AM ^
The youth excuse is so wrong. i was bored the other day and found the average age of our defense and it came to about 21. I get that the secondary was young and the Twolf injury hurt us, but lets be real this defense was just bad. Next year i don't see a huge improvement of the D. We loose our experienced depth up front. Lets face it JT Floyd and Twolf are not shut down corners, and we are going to be inexperienced at Free Safety still whether it be Vinopal, Robinson or another true frosh coming in. Also at the Spur and Bandit position we will have Kovacs who is a stats monster but has limitations, and cam gorden who will be learning a new position again. Can we expect moderate improvement on the D.... I hope. But that is like saying our defense next year will be as good as the 2009 defense. Which is one of the worst defenses in the history of Michigan football.
My bigest disapointment in the D was how terrible we are at stoping the run, and that is part of the defense filled with Juniors, Seniors, and 5th year seniors. Our rush defense ranked 94 nationally, how do you expect to win in any conference if you can't at least make teams work to run the ball.
December 24th, 2010 at 11:45 AM ^
" We loose our experienced depth up front". What do you make of fifth year seniors that have never started a down in a football game? I would say that speaks to their talent level. I just really think you over looked some things to support your argument. JT and Twolf's experience should not be discounted no they were not seen as shut down corners but adequate would also be an understatement of the leadership those two brought to the discussion. As for Cam Gordon he did switch to a new posistion in the middle of the season and played his best ball after the switch..
One other poster ref. Ok, Auburn, Ala re: their relative quick turn around really? each one of those programs were rocked by some serious scandals. To his credit he ref Mack Browns turnaround of Texas and it took a little longer but that 10 win streak was pretty good.
I read the article and I put my money on the Oregon AD and former coach Belotti he alluded it takes four years.
December 24th, 2010 at 10:39 AM ^
Is not a typical Senior starter experience wise. He bounced back and forth from Offense to Defense. He played hard and admirably but was basically a utility player...
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:36 PM ^
My guess is; in 2011, on the defensive side of the ball, we will still be full of players in their second year of playing. That will be an improvemnet over 2010 but, the team will be out-matched by teams with more depth and experienced players.
There is a bonus with the amount of time the defense spent on the field this year, it has been like getting almost two years of experience for the younger guys who had to play. All the time they got videoed will only help them to learn that much more about how to play the game.
2011 is going to be the year for the defense to gain experience and depth.
I am looking forward to 2012 when the team ought to be one of the best Michigan teams in too long a while.
I enjoy watching the team play, especially when they are winning. I think 2012 is going to be an exciting year for Michigan football. Denard and Tate will be seniors. Devin will have learned a lot. The offense ought to be just hammering opponents. And, the defense ought to be full of guys who know what to do and have grown physically enough to get their jobs done.
December 24th, 2010 at 1:03 AM ^
"I am looking forward to 2012 when the team ought to be one of the best Michigan teams in too long a while."
Just curious, do you think that the 2012 team is set up to be better than the 2006 team? It wasn't THAT long ago.
December 25th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^
it sure seems like that was a long time ago. These last three years seems like an eternity.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:38 PM ^
I said doubt AND hopes. That basically is our fan base right now.
December 24th, 2010 at 12:14 AM ^
December 23rd, 2010 at 7:59 PM ^
but seriously, this adds absolutely nothing whatsoever
December 23rd, 2010 at 9:29 PM ^
Do any of these threads "add" anything to the situation? We all know DB will make his own decision on his own timeline. So, really, nobody is adding anything to the situation. These threads are just a way for all of us to self-medicate... regarless of pro/anti RR.
So, you may as well just let everyone post what they want to post and stop riding them for it!
December 24th, 2010 at 12:07 AM ^
Especially the dude with -89.
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:04 PM ^
Did tweet this recently:
"Receiving much advice re: our FB program. Appreciate the passion & interest. Many thanks to @desmond_howard for his confidence & support."
Telling? Nah. Two more weeks and we'll know once and for all.
December 24th, 2010 at 9:43 AM ^
Does anyone else find it strange that DB uses twitter in this way, or at all for that matter?
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:21 PM ^
I think it was bellotti who said your main quote of needing 4 years. I did find this quote from howard interesting though. Didn't know the whole weight room was gutted
Offering a detailed example of how a small change affects the whole program, he said, “I think they gutted the whole weight room because they needed a strength-and-conditioning system that was in line with their style of play. The training regimen has to match what they need on the field. (But) for me, I would say three years.”
December 23rd, 2010 at 10:27 PM ^
They gutted the whole weight room because they needed to move our S&C into the 21st century, not because "they needed a S&C system that was in line with their style of play." Being a former professional athlete, you wouldn't think Desmond would be completely fucking ignorant on the subject.
December 23rd, 2010 at 10:36 PM ^
You know that Desmond is a former professional athlete who came out of the Gittleson system...
Listen, Gittleson was different from Barwis. But that doesn't make him the totally ineffective moron the pizza-and-deadweights meme makes him out to be.
December 23rd, 2010 at 10:41 PM ^
pizza and dumbbells turned out some pretty good football players
December 23rd, 2010 at 10:46 PM ^
I think the Gittleson meme is dying a slow death. He was an innovator in his prime, and served Michigan athletics very well for a very long time. Brawls is top notch as well, just a different era.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:03 PM ^
Exactly. I'm not trying to belittle Gittleson or pump up Barwis irt the equipment upgrade. I'm saying that the whole issue of revamping the weightroom was hyped up to be something it's not. Was some of what Gittleson did outdated? Absolutely. Is Barwis as good as anybody in the country? Yes. Is Barwis doing things that no other S&C program is doing? Probably not.
It's just that I don't see how somebody like Desmond walks away from Michigan's weight room with the ridiculous idea in his head that "they needed new equipment for their style of play." They just needed new equipment. They're not trying to create some radically different type of football player. They're just trying to create better players. The whole thing is overblown.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:18 PM ^
contained a rant about Gittleson, Massey, and pizza. Every one of those posts or articles traces back to one single interview. One. On that damning evidence, the meme was born. It would take a fair amount of reading to even find a reference to the original, let alone the original interview.
December 24th, 2010 at 11:51 AM ^
Do you think Desmond was maybe being a bit diplomatic? You know, instead of saying that the old facilities and strength coaches sucked balls?
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:31 PM ^
Weight room was gutted when RR brought in Barwis, whose Strength & Conditioning program emphasizes free weights and flexibility over Gittleson's use of pizzas and machines. RR's "war of attrition" style of offense required the change.
I wonder will Barwis stay if RR is let go... I think he has done a wonderful job and would like to see him be a fixture for the next several decades.
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:43 PM ^
Barwis is extremely loyal to RR.
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:43 PM ^
Woody would suspend him on GP just for selling the gold pants. Let's play What Would Woody Do? #WWWD
Interesting Tweet by Desmond Howard but how are those "Gold Pants" not a Gift? I understand it is because of "The Game" but how come MICHIGAN cannot give out a "Gold Winged Helmet"
December 24th, 2010 at 3:38 AM ^
The gold pants aren't a gift that can be sold because any income that comes from something associated with the football program that a ordinary student can't get is improper. Since their is no way a OSU student can have a pair of gold pants to sell, it is against rules.
December 24th, 2010 at 7:40 AM ^
He's not talking about the improper selling of a gift. He's asking why the receiving of the gold pants as a gift is okay in the first place.
December 23rd, 2010 at 8:52 PM ^
Air Raid Siren
December 23rd, 2010 at 9:24 PM ^
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:12 PM ^
decide the future.
Lynn Henning just had one of his grandkids Tweet for him; that, fer sure, the San Diego State game, next Saturday, September 24, 2011, is it -- it's the make or break game for Rich Rodriguez. Lynn's expecting an announcement from David Brandon at 4:45 p.m right after that game. Mark you calendars. It's just a guess, he reminds us.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:56 PM ^
The Hoke Bowl!
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:13 PM ^
I actually agree with Desmond on this one. Win and RR gets 2011, lose close and it's iffy and lose big and he's gone.
I think DB's looking at a reasonably healthy team with 30 days to prepare. How does he do in that match up will decide things.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:49 PM ^
That 30 days to prepare comment is kind of interesting. I read somewhere that they were saying RR was good with extra time to prepare citing the '08 opening game where we lost to Utah by 2, which was disappointing at the time, but Utah turned out to be a very good team that year. Also that year we knocked off a top 10 Wisconsin team after the bye week. No bye week last year I think. Then the UConn game this year was a fairly well played game (I think I read someone calling it our most complete game of the season - I'm no football analyst so I defer to their judgement).
That sounds nice and all, but I just can't get over the disappointment with how we played Penn St this year coming out of the bye week. You have to admit we were pretty aweful. So that makes me a little nervous about the long layoff before the bowl game. Hopefully we have more to gain with the extra practices since we have so many young players. I don't really buy the "we'll get healthy argument" as being in our favor because I have to imagine MissSt is getting healthier in this time period as well. If anyone knows more specifics about MissSt's health let us know.
December 24th, 2010 at 11:47 AM ^
Wisky might have been ranked fairly high when UM played them, but Wisky finished the year 7-6.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:23 PM ^
Are you MICHIGAN or not. Take the advice behind the scenes. There is no way I overly criticize or compliment at home or at work. Don't get the EX-players. Except the Dez is getting paid to say these things.
December 23rd, 2010 at 11:46 PM ^
They also all have opinions as to state and direction of the program they support. Being a free country, they can speak their minds freely. If their opinions goes against the current regime, so be it. If you are not a fan of the current president, no one is stopping you from commenting on the subject.
If your place of employment goes in a different direction and you disagree, you are allowed to say something, whether be at the bar, at home or on the street. Just because a player played somewhere doesn't mean they have to always agree with the state of the program.
We don't know all the details of the relationships between former players and the current staff. I know someone very well who is close with several former players and there is very little love for this staff. They have said numerous times that they don't feel welcome at Schmebechler Hall. For the record, each of them played for Bo, some very prominently. I can't speak directly to the relationships between older former players and this staff, but I have heard from several places that it's pretty rocky.
I think the former players knew a history and tradition at Michigan and things seem different now and they are uncomfortable with it. They have a right to voice their feelings. I, for one, am interested in the discussions. During this incredibly boring bowl season thus far, there is much to talk about, aside from suspensions to gift-giving/selling.
December 24th, 2010 at 5:32 AM ^
I support Rich Rod, but I don't understand why one game will make a difference in the decision.
December 24th, 2010 at 8:52 AM ^
Maybe brandon wants to see how focused RR can get his players when the ramifications of a loss are pretty all encompassing for the football team? Thats the only way I can make sense of it, I have a hard time believing he is just drawing a line in the sand for a win total
^^just an imo
December 24th, 2010 at 9:31 AM ^
I don’t care which side you’re on, keep RR or get JH waiting for the outcome of one game to decide the future of the U of M football is stupid.
December 24th, 2010 at 6:32 AM ^
And I know one alumni player who played for Bo—along with his brother— and he says the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you assert—that is, that RR is far more accommodating to former players than LC was, and that RR has gone out of his way to reach out to alumni players. Former UM QB Michael Taylor, who played for Bo, has a regular radio gig on WTKA, the local station covering UM sports, and he has stated unequivocally on numerous occasions that former players have been welcomed with open arms by RR and his staff.
If RR didn't want alumni players around, why in God's name would he have created the alumni flag game during the Spring Game? It wasn't LC who did it.
In other words, the notion you're peddling that ALL former players hate RR and feel like they've been unwelcome at Schembechler is complete and unadulterated bullshit.