Dr. Saturday on UM's return to glory
Thought the folks on this board would be interested.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Road-to-Rec…
February 27th, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^
I think that that is an accurate assessment of where we need to be next year.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:00 PM ^
Anyone with half a brain knows that Tate Forcier is the second coming of Jesus and will lead us to victory next year, an easy 17 wins.
Thats my conservative take on things.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^
I really think 17 may be a little optimistic. 15 wins out of 13 (bowl game) is more realistic.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:13 PM ^
I thought this was a ridiculous prediction until I saw that you factored in the bowl game.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:04 PM ^
Let's not call this a return to "glory." Stirs too many "echoes" if you catch my Irish-hating-drift. Let's leave it as road to recovery.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:39 PM ^
Road to respectability?
February 28th, 2010 at 12:02 AM ^
So true. My neighbor has been wearing the same ND "Return to Glory" shirt since about 1994. I don't want to be "that guy".
February 27th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^
But I think that this team could really make waves in 2011 (as opposed to 2012), provided (obviously) that continued improvement is seen on the field thus leaving the coaching staff in place.
February 27th, 2010 at 4:30 PM ^
I think it is dangerous, however, to get into this habit every year if we have a fairly mediocre season next year. It can't turn into "I think this team will be really good in 2011 (or 2012 or 2013) if we just keep the staff intact!" every single year. It's a slippery slope that gets all too easy to get caught up in.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:14 PM ^
However, I had us pegged for 6 wins at the beginning of last year, and my opinion of the situation hasn't changed. I have been thinking 2011 will be our renaissance season for a while now.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:27 PM ^
Would you agree that there were some things that have undermined that on-the-field success of this team the past two seasons that the coaches (and maybe the players) had no control over?
February 27th, 2010 at 4:21 PM ^
Every game on the schedule will be a baby seal game for us...
Then again, the world might end due to armageddon before we finish the season. Has RR ever thought of recruiting Mayans?
February 27th, 2010 at 4:28 PM ^
Try REALLY heading south (and ...er...back in time) to recruit.
Pre-Columbian speed BITCHES!
February 27th, 2010 at 4:59 PM ^
"That's a dramatically lowered bar relative to anything Michigan has considered a reasonable standard in 40 years."
Sad but true. It is very much an iffy proposition that we get 7 regular season wins, most would be satisfied with 7.
Here's hoping RR's damn system finally gets put in place and we see dramatic improvement this season. I think it can happen but I am taking a wait and see approach.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:05 PM ^
I wouldn't be satisfied with 7-5. I'd be satisfied with 8-4 which was a record I wouldn't have been meh about 10 years ago. 7-5 would be better, obviously, but it would not be okay with me.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:51 PM ^
Maybe I should start a thread "would 7-5 be okay with you?", that would go over well.
February 28th, 2010 at 12:03 AM ^
You're going to see that thread only 300 times between now and September; good call not to be first.
February 27th, 2010 at 10:06 PM ^
Anything less than eight wins would be disappointing, while anything more than eight wins would be a pleasant surprise.
If the NCAA comes down hard and makes them ineligible for a bowl, RR had better win nine if he wants to stay in AA.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:00 PM ^
I never thought an excellent news source/editorialist like Doc Saturday would write about saving Rodriguez's job with seven wins in his third year. It's been a crazy few years, eh?
Obviously most of us have no insider info, but I have to wonder if seven wins guarantees his job security. Michigan loses to ND, MSU, Penn State, Iowa/Wisky, and OSU might not be enough. I just don't know anymore.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:28 PM ^
I just can't be more optimistic given our defensive crapitude during the last 3 years. Yup, our defensive woes didn't start with RR — the bad omens were there for anyone to see in 2007. Unless 7-5 includes a win over OSU and is followed by a bowl victory, I'm skeptical that would be enough for RR to stay on for 2011.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:33 PM ^
He discussed the secondary and some key young players, but failed to address the key to Michigan's poor run D - IMO. Ezeh and Mouton need to step up in their Senior years. They are really the key to this year's success (which is why they are getting the coaching focus they are.) No matter how much poundage Bell puts on, help from Leach or Moundros - Ezeh and Mouton are physically dominant relative to everyone else. I'm really hoping they can make it happen.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:44 PM ^
but he better get 7 regular season wins or I really think the brass will fire him.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:58 PM ^
I hate to admit it, but if he doesn't get to 7 wins, he's done. I will support whoever our coach is 100%, and I give plenty of money to the University for both academic programs and a multiple club seat owner. But enough of my friends who are alums and in the same situation (including several former players), will not stand for another 5-7 or 6-6 season. Their general consensus is 8-4 or its time to make a change. So a big late season win at 7-5 is likely needed, or 8-4.
I am confident the O will step up this year and continue its growth and progression. It all comes down to the D and special teams this year. If they step up, a nice season is on the horizon. If they struggle, I think the winds of change will be upon us.
February 27th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^
"So a big late season win at 7-5 is likely needed, or 8-4."
Beating OSU would go a long way in terms of RR's job security. 7-5 with a win against the Buckeyes should definitely do it. Wouldn't that be nice.
February 28th, 2010 at 10:22 AM ^
that he would get fired. If we don't win 7 next year I think he SHOULD get fired.
February 27th, 2010 at 5:59 PM ^
If we keep the bar low for too long it will simply be institutionalized there. RR had his years of low expectations, and that should be it. Now we should expect at least in the higher range of mediocrity, which is at least 8 wins (7 wins is just teetering on failure in UM standards). I think it is best for the program if he is let go for anything fewer than 8 wins. I am sure the AD has been in financial free fall for the past two years as related to previous years. The University cant take a chance on that fall continuing for a sustained period.
Face it - if RR doesnt have a decent season next year, something is very wrong (with him or with his system or with how he fits here or in the big ten) and it is more likely than not that he will only have a mediocre career at UM. If we want to settle for mediocrity, then we can settle for 7 wins. But there is no hard and fast rule that a coaching change means 3 to 4 years of recovery (e.g., GT, Alabama). A different coach could have us back on top sooner and for a longer time than RR could. If he gives us another mediocre or worse season (7 or fewer wins in my book) evidence will have mounted that the costs of keeping him (loss of revenue) over the long term will likely be greater than the costs of bringing in someone new.
I hope RR succeeds, his doing so is best for UM right now. But if he doesnt have a decent year, its just too much data testifying that he will be mediocre at best. And that is not best for UM.
February 27th, 2010 at 6:01 PM ^
the same time as you bbb...and you have hit the nail on the head. I think the RR saying is: "are you gonna be the hammer or the nail?"
February 27th, 2010 at 7:00 PM ^
" I am sure the AD has been in financial free fall for the past two years as related to previous years."
What makes you think this?? We had excellent attendance numbers (#1 again in college football), have a new and VERY lucrative deal with Adidas, and have been selling luxury boxes for the last year for the first time in our history. If RR's job rides on the financial health of the AD then he has more leeway than you are assuming.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:25 PM ^
Cant find the link right now, but we dropped this year from 4th to I believe 11th in terms of most profitable programs. It was discussed here.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:07 PM ^
Even if true, going from fourth to 11th (out of 300+ ADs) is hardly a free fall.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^
Last year we were constructing the Glick, as well as the Big House suites, and had just finished the baseball park, etc. I'd imagine all that construction ate into those profits quite a bit.
February 27th, 2010 at 10:47 PM ^
But accounting 101 tells us that these costs will be depreciated over the useful life of these assets, most likely 39 years or so. Furthermore, as work in process, the AD would (should not) have been expensing any of the costs related to the new construction (for the most part) during 2009. Just saying.
February 28th, 2010 at 8:09 AM ^
Finance 101 tells us that the enterprise value could be based on discounted cash flows.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^
Try reading what I said " as related to previous years" - if you dont think that dropping from #4 in one year to #11 in the next is a huge drop, then I just cant help you with your perception of reality.
And saying out of 300+ ADs is quite disingenuous - you think 300+ should really be compared to the likes of Michigan, Texas, and Florida? Give me a break.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:55 PM ^
Whoa there. Displaced anger much? Or is this subject really that important to you?
February 27th, 2010 at 9:07 PM ^
My bad. It's a rough night. Its not actually that important.
February 27th, 2010 at 6:40 PM ^
FYI I was in Vegas the weekend before we played our first game in 2009 and the O/U on our wins was 5.5. I am glad I didn't bet the over even though I thought it was a good idea.
I'd be willing to bet money the Vegas O/U this year is somewhere between 6.5-7.5. If you want to bet on Rich Rod keeping his job, you can bet the over on that.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:12 PM ^
Progress = 3,5,7,9,11,13 wins (2008-2013) In 2013 this year's recruits will be seniors.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:13 PM ^
If you guaranteed me that, I'd take it. Hell, if you could have stopped at 11 in 2012. I'd take it. If you offered me the 9 wins in this formula in 2011, I'd take it. Really, I'd take 7 wins in 2010.
As long as we win at least 5, I won't be angry or upset. All I want to see is progression to the point that I won't buy the excuses. Our defense is still a huge question mark next year. I don't expect it to be much better. So if the offense can secure us one more win, I'll consider it improvement.
EDIT: Yes, I realize that won't secure his job in the mind of anyone else. The rabble rousers will call for his head for anything less than one more than he gets. That's just their thing.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:08 PM ^
the development of Brandon Graham into a monster under RR is a hopeful sign of hidden potential. 3-9 and 5-7 both seemed about two games worse than what I expected even for a rebuilding year, with close losses I would have thought a top-shelf coach could have tilted in our favor. Maybe this year those odds tilt in our favor, and the improvement exhibited by Graham will break out across the whole defense. At the very least, I want to see what RR can do in a fourth year. If we wanted to set a cut-off for year four, maybe 17-0, I would be fine with that. Dropping him before then, unless all hell breaks loose before then, seems like a waste.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:43 PM ^
It just kills me how close we are to never having these discussions. We have had more close losses/shit luck over the past 2 years to fill a lifetime. If we can pull out one of MSU, Iowa, or Purdue just this past year things wouldn't look nearly so grim.
In any case, if our offense can start to stand up to the big boys on the schedule and our defense plays at the same level it did against Ohio State then Rodriguez won't be in any great danger.
February 27th, 2010 at 8:31 PM ^
Until the OSU game last year we had no team leadership on the field. At least not the Mike Hart vocal kind.
The Wisconsin game the year before was the last time we had it.
February 27th, 2010 at 10:39 PM ^
Ricardo Miller on offense and one of the following guys stepping up on defense, Mike Martin / Demar Dorsey / Courtney Avrey / Carvin Johnson...
In a few years, I thing the team will be Loaded" with leadership....
February 28th, 2010 at 2:20 PM ^
why you mentioned the players you did, especially so many true freshmen, though I am sure leaders will come in time. On defense this year, I'll be looking at guys like RVB and Mike Martin.
Those two guys need to step up.
February 28th, 2010 at 2:30 PM ^
I definetly understand the sentiment.. If we beat MSU in MSU in OT... Tate keeps the confidence rolling and I think the Iowa game could have gone literally either way.. not saying we outplayed them but they sure as hell didnt outplay us.
The best point in that article is the turnover differential, which is just a statistical representation that our defensive backfield, especially our safeties, were below average last year. BG would cause the occassional fumble on a sack,and LBs are supposed to be your sure tacklers, but the real problem was we lacked a ball hawking safety who would hit someone in the mouth over the middle and knock a ball loose. Good defenses force turnovers. Great defenses make the offense afraid to execute.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:23 PM ^
Watching this awesome show on lightning on the Discovery Channel right now?
Holy shit. I never knew.
Yes, yes. I know--I'm forty minutes from whacking off to "The Ten Best Moments in Correct Salad Fork Usage" on The Too Ghey to be Ghey Ghey Party Planning Channel and then going to bed.
February 27th, 2010 at 9:42 PM ^
It's hard to predict anything because at this point so much could happen. We could see a potential repeat of 2009 and go 5-7 with a solid offense but a poor defense. Or if the defense is even just a little more capable we'll win 7 games IMO. Or.. if Greg Robinson is truly the magician we all want him to be, our defense is suddenly very solid and we win 9 games.
It'll be a fun spring and gut-wrenching fall to watch, that's for sure.
February 27th, 2010 at 11:14 PM ^
I thought this was a great article. Hit the nail on the head
February 27th, 2010 at 11:19 PM ^
I would be happy with anything from 7-9 wins. Just hoping our defense lets us win that many.
February 28th, 2010 at 2:16 AM ^
but the youth bubble kept bursting after mistakes. These kids should be more mature this season, so I don't think we'll see those total team collapses after a bad play or two.
Tate needs to take care of the ball more but may be he had so many fumbles late in the season due to his injury? And I hope more competition in the D backfield will help!
It should be fun to watch this team and I hope to see more improvement through the season. For RR sake I hope he finishes the season with 6 or 7 wins. Even if we did finish below .500 this season, I would give him one more season. Though, I'm starting to think the AD will not!