Literally no athletes?? Vince Lombardi couldn't win under those circumstances!
A Full Eleven Warriors Blog on Rodriguez
Ugh. Please don't mention Casteel. It hurts too much.
Yes Hoke has somehow managed to muddle his way thru with the meh players like Denard, Kovacs, Martin, Roh, Lewan, Gardner, Ryan, Schofield, Demens, Countess, Morgan, Toussiant. RR had troubles with attrition and recruiting but it's impossible to judge since after the Freep disaster he had 1 armed tied around his back recruiting. To compare the talent he left to what he was given is mismatch considering the importance of a QB and LT to a program. RR inherited a solid defense and a disaster on offense. Hoke inherited an offense on the verge of going nuclear and a defense that consisted of Mike Martin, RVB, Roh and 20 or so freshmen or sophmores that had no idea how to play defense. Don't try and play that card.
I don't root for Arizona because I am a Michigan fan. I didn't root for Florida when assistants went there, I didn't root for Iowa when Soup went there, I didn't start rooting for Harvard because Tommy wen there.
I root for Michigan, because I am a Michigan fan.
I will reserve judgement on how well RR will do at Zona. Looks to me that his teams still refuse to play defense, so until the day comes when they are winning with D rather than O, I will think his teams relivant.
Daughter Class of 2011 LSA, son class of 2014 University of Arizona. We root for Arizona (unless they play Michigan), went to the New Mexico Bowl, were not surprised by Nevada gaining 659 yards, but cheered for the exciting finish. We will see if the UA defense improves over time, or gets progressively worse.
By my count, this post has been up for 21 minutes now and Section 1 hasn't commented. That's gotta be some sort of record.
in the mirror and say "Section 1" three times......
Also, I find it a tad ironic that the intent at snarkiness implies disdain, yet calling him out is sort of like an invitation for him to respond. If I was a shrink I'd suggest that, subconsciously, you actually yearn for his interaction.
If he loses from here on out it doesn't affect the Michigan football program, and if he wins from here on out it doesn't affect the Michigan football program. That's about all there is to say on the matter.
Unless we play them in the Rose Bowl next year.
I would love that game.
Wow, I disagree with that MgoBlog comment you blockquoted. This place had always been a bastion of Rodriguez loyalty. One would get neg-banged and howled at for daring to pipe up and question, oh I don't know, why our defensive staff didn't even use the same terminology under RR.
True, there's a contingent that is now just as fanatically loyal to Hoke, and equally unable to withstand any criticism, but it doesn't seem quite as fervent as the Rodriguez-fever this site had back in the day. Granted, that's likely because of stuff like the Freep and a part of the fanbase that never gave RR a chance.
Basically, what I'm saying is that if you really think that even MGOBLOG is somehow "anti-Rodriguez," you might be a little paranoid. This place has just moved on (well, except for His Dudeness).
All eleven warriors can kiss my ass. I couldn't care less if RR wins or loses at Arizona because Arizona football means nothing to me. The only time I will care about what Arizona does is if we play them. I do, however, find it interesting that Arizona's defense is a wretched tire fire.
I find it interesting that numerous people keep saying they don't give 2 shits how Arizona football does because it has nothing to do with Michigan....and we also have some of the same people following SDSU basketball and Eastern Michigan football closer than they would random basketball team A or random football team B. Not saying you do that specifically, I just find it interesting the negative reaction his team gets
I'm not aware of anyone making posts about SDSU basketball (why would they even do that?) or Eastern Michigan Football (Ron English?) on this site. Can you provide any examples?
when Brian Cook was about the first person anywhere to doubt the wisdom of Greg Robinson
I don't recall this being the case. In 2010, this site was really pushing the "Decimated Defense" idea (i.e., that the level of talent/experience on defense was too hopelessly low for any coach to make much of a difference). There were a few posters here who hated the Gerg hire right off the bat and were chastised away. (I know the poster who is a Syracuse grad was beside himself when we hired him.) It didn't become "acceptable" on this site to recognize that the man's defense was awful until the final weeks of RR's tenure, when it became clear that someone needed to be the fall guy.
Exactly, and then it became all about GERG, and not the inept defensive staff RR brought along with him.
More than a few. I saw the thread for the hire like last week. A lot of people hated the hire based on what he did at Cuse and with the Chiefs defense. Oh, and supporters touted Super Bowls from a decade ago, and a National Championship where he was co-DC (with none other than Gene Chizik) and that defense wasn't even that good.
But to be fair on this point I remember Brian being pretty skeptical from the very start about the hire. I don't know if he was the first, or being completely doom and gloom about it, but he rightly had some serious questions about it:
I don't want to get into how blame was divided or how it protected anyone. Just saying I have to give credit to Brian on this one.
Why in the hell do they even care about RR at this point?
I'd like to see the guy succeed. I think he's a hell of a football mind.
On the other hand, Scott Shafer's success at Syracuse irked me a good bit. I wasn't rooting against him, I just resented what that said about Michigan's program at the time.
"M Man" is the 11 Warriors version of RDT.
Every article I read over there seems to have a comment from him. I have a hard time believing that a Michigan fan spends that much time on a rival's message board.
Isn't aggravating at all. I'm actually pretty happy for him. He came into a MUCH more favorable situation in Arizona, got both of his coordinators, and most other assistants. Never mind the fact that he has spread players already at Arizona when he got there.
So yeah. Bucknut fans can think whatever they want, but I'm quite happy for Rich.
Musings of the Day: Are there always 11 warriors on both Ohio's offense and defense? For example, would Terrell Pryor be considered a "warrior" in hindsight? If not, is that blog improperly titled? Also, shouldn't it be called the "12th Warrior" since its really a fan site and not a site used by the actual athletes themselves? Talk amongst yourselves . . .
Yeah, really it should be 22 Warriors, maybe more if you include the kicker and longsnapper (the only warrior punter I can think of is Zoltan the Great). Or maybe Urban's Circle of Trust is capped at 11.
See, now we can undertake some serious analysis. Technically, if you include the defense, placekicker, punter, longsnapper, and all the "extras" that play special teams only, it could be more like 30 special warriors. And if there are 30, are they really that "special?" I mean, if 1 or 2 or 3 rise above the many, the would probably deserve the "special" title. But if you include half of the team, are each of them really "special" technically speaking?
On the other hand, I assume the Ohio blog is calling the Ohio players "special" because they believe these players to be better than the players of other teams. If that's the line of thinking, isn't that inherently flawed? I mean, a lot of the kids that play for Ohio were recruited by other top-ranked programs but many were not. Some were recruited by lesser teams or not at all (walkons). So is the owner of the blog being dishonest or simply living in dream world?
(This is obviously "off-topic" to all those that want to rate it as such - I'm trying to get away from the F--- RICHROD or RODRIGUEZ RULES discussion.)
If any other school could win a national title other than M, I wish nothing more than for it to be a RR coached team.
One thing I do wish Hoke could have done was hire a spread OC to keep the Rich Rod offense intact. I realize that might not have been possible--but I'm not so sure. And if Hoke could have pulled it off, the thought of a 2010 type of offense paired with a Mattison defense still seems to me the best of both worlds. So as Rich Rod starts to rebuild his spread & shred juggernaut in Arizona, I do think there is some merit to the idea that UM fans will become envious--especially if we continue to struggleunder Borges.
'the thought of a 2010 type of offense paired with a Mattison defense still seems to me the best of both worlds."
Urban Meyer at Florida... 2 NCs.
I only talk about coaches who coach for Michigan.
...so he is just as a legitimate topic of conversation as Schembechler, Moelller, Carr, etc.
I think you missed the joke.
The cupboard was bare for RR because LC encouraged everyone to transfer. The cupboard was 80% full for Hoke because RR encouraged players to stay. Sorry if the truth "irks you," but it is parochial at best and petty/vindictive/ignorant at worst to compare the two situations as if they were equal.
RR left Denard and Devin at QB for Hoke. Carr "left" Steven Threet and Nick Sheridan. RR had to play a majority of underclassmen his three years, while Hoke inherited a majority of upperclassmen.
Are you really trying to say that the two situations were equal?
I didn't know that Carr encouraged everyone to leave. I thought there was debate as regards Mallett, because of his (lack of) fit for RR's system/scheme. But I didn't realize that Carr told the whole team to transfer out. I'm surprised, because I never got the sense that happened.
I didn't communicate well what I wanted to say as regards the players left for the new coach. I don't take issue with the thought that Carr left the cupboard bare, and was slacking on recruiting at the end of his career. More than saying that, I wanted to express that given both the paltry OL recruiting, and how many still remain from the class of 2010 (iirc,) RR also didn't do the best job of recruiting. In other words, the situation for BOTH incoming coaches was less than ideal. Comparisons are never "apples to apples." The difference in the QB situation left RR & Hoke, in particular, is stark. But I think some of the coaching, especially in the change from Gerg to Mattison, made a vast difference. Moreover, I do have the sense that RR, more than Hoke, threw some of his players under the bus. I think, with virtually the same guys on the kicking team, for instance, Hoke has done vastly better.
Just thinking in terms of QBs, would Hoke's first season been nearly as good if Denard had split town? Likewise, had Mallett been encouraged by Carr to stick around would that have been worth a few more wins in Hoke's first year?
Hoke is only two years into his tenure whereas Rodriguez had three seasons under his belt, but at this point I don't see a huge difference between the two except one having some good luck and the other having some bad luck.
It'll be interesting to see how things play out on a longer scale, say in 10 years. It's just as that possible Rodriguez gets his defense tighten up and has success as it is that Hoke's offenses continue struggle and he is forced into a downward spiral of OC hires. Guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Strangely enough, Hoke and Borges might have actually preferred to have Threet over Denard at QB.
the cupboard being bare was the fact that he was under assault by Carr loyalists from the minute he took the job, whereas Hoke and Mattison were almost universally hailed as saviors. Also the restults on the field were completely opposite. Its not hard to see why RR would feel the need to be defensive about his work while Hoke did not have a similar need. Lastly, Brandon made it clear when he hired Hoke that he did not want anymore fighting between the factions so I would not have expected to Hoke to make any potentially disparaging comments and risk violating Brandon's call for unity.
All the Rodriguez years demonstrated was that no matter how strong or prestigious the athletic program, if you don't have the support of everyone behind you, it's very difficult to succeed. The fact that MIchigan is doing so much better under Hoke when everybody within the footbal program is pulling in the same direction as contrasted by the Rodriguez years, when people weren't, is not a coincidence.
Fuck Ohio State.
That is all.
And this even more, lol
Why would RR's success irritate me? The whole premise of this article is dumb.
a year or two ago 11W piece would have irritated me from both a content perspective and because it told a truth about me/us. Now? RR's effect on me is completely dissipated. I don't really care how he does in AZ.
One of the options in the "moderate" box is "redundant". I'm pretty sure that there are no thoughts on RR that shouldn't automatically register as such.
Sometimes I think everyone who writes for that blog is about 12 years old, because none of them seem to realize that there was football before 2001.
describe RichRod's time in AA. I'm glad he's gone and don't care what he does at AZ.
one way or another about RR, but because there is a strong possibility it will cause Section 1's heart to palpitate.
describe RichRod's time in AA. I'm glad he's gone and don't care what he does at AZ.
I honestly couldn't care less about Rodriguez as long as he isn't coaching here. His 3 years were probably the worst I've ever seen and ever hope to see here in terms of on field performance and off the field problems. He's gone and Thank God for Hoke.
Is correcting a stranger's word choice on the Internet a better use of time than arguing over RR again? You make the call!
If you are going to correct grammar on the internet, at least be correct.
I am glad mgoblog is still a place where dumbass mistakes are quickly corrected, even if they are my own. (However, I failed in correcting usage, not grammar.)