Fanpulse: What Would It Take to Save GERG?
So I'm not sure if GERG is coaching for his DC life right now or if the defense is actually beginning to gel and show the jump in productivity that a defense fielding 7+ freshman often will given some time together... but either way, the defense has improved pretty significantly over the past two weeks.
While Illinois did put up 65(!), our defense had several key stops and kept us in it despite a very lopsided TO differential; they also ended the game at the end of 3OT. We didn't give up an offensive touchdown (!) (!) (!) this week at Purdue w/o Martin or Mouton, and while yes their offense is in shambles, I recall the same thing being said about PSU, about cockiness regarding UMass, and that Purdue was leading Wisconsin at halftime last week.
I realize Brian among others has totally written off GERG, and I certainly wouldn't say no to Casteel or another elite DC if we had a shot a them. That being said, I wonder if GERG's firing is a foregone conclusion among the fans? Is there anything (reasonably, e.g. not "if we pulled in every 5-star defensive back left on the board due to GERG's recruiting!") that would convince you that GERG deserves a shot at staying at Michigan for another year?
For me, it would take a win at the end of the season featuring good enough defense to let our offense not have to score on every drive, + further signs of our incredibly young D progressing. I'd be neutral on GERG coming back if that were to happen. What about you?
November 14th, 2010 at 12:33 PM ^
I think the way the D has played the last two weeks has saved GERGS jerb. He'll be back next year imhe.
November 14th, 2010 at 7:00 PM ^
The last 2 weeks? We played 1 good gm defensively and all of a sudden hes saved....Did you forget we gave up 65 pts against Illinois and 315 yards on the ground.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:35 PM ^
November 14th, 2010 at 5:04 PM ^
Somehow, I don't think that's too likely, w/ Paul Mitchell being dead and all.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^
If we win one of the next two, and it has anything to do with the defense, and we win our bowl game, I think 9 wins will be enough that no one will really want any changes made, and it will show that our D is improving. Anything less than that and it's a toss-up.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:49 PM ^
+1, sir. I think you've nailed the threshhold. It would make sense that no one would want to tinker with 9 wins.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:31 PM ^
I don't think it matter how many wins we have. I would personally be happy with playing solid defensive games again Wisc and OSU. If we play solid games and lose, so be it. However, if we play crappy games on the D side of the ball and get embarrassed, then I think he will be in trouble.
November 14th, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^
I think he stays, regardless of wins, esp. if we play decent defensively the next two games.
November 14th, 2010 at 5:33 PM ^
Gerg can stay but only if he adopts silvery dreadlocks.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:37 PM ^
I'm starting to worry that Robinson will likely be back next year. I just hope that they do some re-organizing of the defensive coaching hierarchy and allow Robinson to actually make decisions instead of just being bossed around by the position coaches like a parent of spoiled little rich kids.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:57 PM ^
I wish the 3-3-5 guys let GERG do his own thing instead of forcing him into a scheme that he doesn't know.
November 14th, 2010 at 2:25 PM ^
Let him handle personnel (hiring/firing) on Defense (obviously with RR's input). Bottom line is give him the authority to run his defense the way he needs and wants to.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:37 PM ^
in the next three games would seal it for me
November 14th, 2010 at 12:52 PM ^
how happy I am that I was about to correct you in saying that we only had two games left, and then realized we're going bowling?
November 14th, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^
Wait for the next two games against very solid teams to measure whether things have gotten better. Purdue was terrible - how can you draw any conclusions from that game?
November 14th, 2010 at 12:45 PM ^
truthfully, because our defense has been terrible. It's not just Purdue, though. More importantly, our defensive progress for the season looks like its on an upward swing (somewhat laughable given 2 weeks and right after a game giving up 65, I know), but I'm just saying, we're seeing bright spots for the first time in a long, dark season. No matter how bad Purdue is, our defense has been torched by everyone, and was down 2 senior starters to boot.
That being said, I agree, 2 more games will tell the tale.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^
End of story.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:42 PM ^
Yesterday's game is a weird data point. The D did play well, and I'm happy for them - I hope they come away from the game with renewed confidence. But Purdue was so anemic that the game couldn't tell us much of anything about GERG's ability to coach. I would be very, very cautious about drawing conclusions from a performance against a team playing genuinely Sheridanesque QBs.
November 14th, 2010 at 2:09 PM ^
I don't know what sort of conclusions you can draw from that other than "hey, maybe this defense is salvageable against MAC-level offenses".
November 14th, 2010 at 2:29 PM ^
I am surprised you didn't say FCS level offenses. Is that really necessary to add that dig in there. Yes, the results yesterday did not prove anything.
November 14th, 2010 at 4:59 PM ^
I think serviceable is the word you were going for, but that's ok, we knew what you meant. Thanks for dropping by...
November 14th, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^
If we win one of these games he'll probably be safe. If we lose and give up a ton of points I would still say get rid of him.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
If Michigan beats either Wisconsin or OSU and it's not a shoot-out victory, then there's a good chance GERG is back. Now, if either of those games is a blowout, then GERG is probably gone.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
"what would get him fired" is an easier list.
- if he shaves his head, depriving us all of his silver-haired goodness
- if he installs the new 1-1-9 defense he's been tinkering with in his spare time
- if he picks his nose again, but this time wipes it on rich rod
- if his strategy against wisc or osu is to "get out of the way, those are some big boys"
- if he straps it on and gets on the field, to "show the boys how to do it"
November 14th, 2010 at 2:34 PM ^
November 14th, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^
freakin miracle.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
Isn't that the time when miracles happen?
November 14th, 2010 at 12:42 PM ^
He's so gone
November 14th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^
Well, if our defense looked solid in our remaining games, including not blowing as many assignments and tackling in space, then I would be willing to reconsider Robinson as DC. As it stands, I'm in Brian's camp. I'm still confused why tackling practice doesn't seem to have been a part of our weekly preparation, but I suppose that reflects on the whole coaching staff rather than just Robinson.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^
Shutouts vs. Wisconsin and OSU.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:46 PM ^
Mark it down in ink. Picture Dave Brandon and Rich Rodriguez in Brandon's office about 10 days after the OSU game and going over the positives and negatives of the season. At the end, Dave Brandon asks RR how he plans to fix the negatives. I hightly doubt RR's answer will be "let's just wait 12 months" so the players will be older and have more experience.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
As much as I like Coach Rod, if Brandon asks him how to fix the negatives, he should answer by not meddling in the defense and give the DC a chance. Whether is GERG or someone else, he needs to allow the DC some more freedom. This is so interesting because so many people complained that he wasn't involved enough a month ago.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:57 PM ^
really underlines your point, and is perhaps one of the best points working in GERG's favor. Not only are we young, but RR has already driven out one DC who turned out to be excellent at another school when given more freedom. GERG may not be excellent, but he also may not be as bad as the past two years have indicated.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:28 PM ^
I always thought that as Coach Rod should get at least 4 years to implement his system, GERG should be allowed his time as well.
There are alot of issues for this defense, which are similar to the problems we saw on the offense 2 years ago. Only difference is Coach Rod came into '08 with a strong record and GERG has not had similar recent success.
November 14th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
Only difference is Coach Rod came into '08 with a strong record and GERG has not had similar recent success.
And that's why GERG will justifiably be fired. He is not the sole reason for our poor defensive performance, but the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that he will not be the long-term solution. Any coach can perform poorly with subpar personnel; that takes no special skill.
November 14th, 2010 at 5:29 PM ^
Gerg ain't the problem. Name one facet of this team that looks well coached after 3 seasons? Quick answer: none.
Maybe all the coaches suck or maybe our players were too inexperienced. The offense is potent but prone to self immolation, the special teams are bad and so is the the defense, I just find it hard to believe all the coaches are this bad, and then we need to scapegoat one and Gerg won the lottery.
Greg Robinson has had more success as a DC than RR has had as a head coach. Anyone who thinks Gerg is incapable of directing a defense is a tard.
November 14th, 2010 at 8:58 PM ^
Pardon me? GERG has had ONE good year as a college DC. RR has had roughly five. GERG's one year was with championship level talent which won a MNC the year after he left.
And, if you are wondering which areas of the team that look well coached? I submit the QBs do, the Offensive Line does, and the WRs do as well. THe quarterbacks are great, particularly considering we are staring a first year starter for the second year in a row.
Last, please pardon my use of the word "we." I don't play for Michigan, but I do have an unhealthy obsession with the football team.
November 14th, 2010 at 9:34 PM ^
Gerg not only has the Hair he also has the Ring. Can't touch this.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:01 PM ^
however DB probably knows that the 3-3-5 is RR's baby and if he has any inside sources (I bet anything he does) he knows that RR forced the scheme onto Gerg. I talked with a former player and grad assistant that told me RR wanted the 3-3-5 and that was final. While it can be a fine defense it does take some getting used to, player development and coaching familiarity. DB is a wise man and these factors will not be lost on him. Not saying Gerg won't be canned but don't count on RR getting his choice (presumably Casteel) without input from DB.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:45 PM ^
Gerg?....his hair care secrets, that would do it for me...oh! and real money or gold.
s/
November 14th, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^
GERG will be back next year (unfortunately). DB knows the consequences of having his DC position be a revolving door as it has been the past few years. Also, not many premier coaches willing to work with RR at this point given his hot seat + he does not give his DCs any autonomy.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
In 1997, we were on our third DC in four years.
In 2002, OSU's national-championship team was on its third DC in four years.
In 2005, Texas's national-championship team was on its third DC in three years (and the guy they hired actually replaced, and improved upon, GERG).
The notion that a bad DC deserves more time for the sake of continuity is crazy. A new DC will have spring ball and fall camp to install his scheme. That's plenty of time.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:57 PM ^
will be back, unless he gives up 80 to Wisconsin, or 50 to tOSU.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:07 PM ^
November 14th, 2010 at 1:35 PM ^
Here's the thing. Most coaches do not expect to fail. They don't worry about what might happen if they field a bad team. If you offer a guy the Michigan defensive coordinator position, at a competitive salary (that latter point is criticial - Bill Martin loved to nickel and dime our assistants), he'll consider it a plum job.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:59 PM ^
The team is 7-3 and is losing Rogers (replaced by a returning TWoolf) and Mouton off of the D and Schilling and Dorrestein off of the O. In other words, almost everyone will be back and it's not like we're losing a BG caliber player. How do you still call it a hot seat?
November 14th, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^
Unfortunately the hot seat on RR is not gone from broader alumni/fan base. Not beating MSU and losing to a terrible PSU team (granted walk-on QB was a surprise) are being placed onto RR. Depending on what happens w/ Wisky and tOSU, the seat could get hotter. Plus next year, expectations will be high for RR (and its a tough schedule). It alot for a new DC to take on.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^
I would say that most of the fanbase has more or less resigned themselves to RR returning, but that's not to say that they're enthusiastic about this. Personally, I like the guy and want him to succeed, but going into the season, I considered seven wins to be the bare minimum for RR to return, not some great level of accomplishment. Win one of the last two and you can call it a solid season. Win two and you can call it a good year. Lose both, and it becomes very important to win the bowl and come away from this year with a good feeling.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:03 PM ^
I don't know, I took the 'decimated defense' to heart, and basically expected the sort of play we've seen over the past 10 games. Add to that the loss of Floyd and Woolfolk, and the periodic loss of Martin, and I would have to say that this defense is performing better than should reasonably be expected. I get the sense that people are just in the mood for a bloodletting.
One side note, if we ditch Greg Robinson this year, and only end up with 7 or 8 wins next year, the next neck on the chopping block is RichRods.