generational gap and RR
So, I begin by saying I like RR. I like his attitude, I like his honesty. I even think the game plan will work given time. So here is the question...
My father-in-law is a classic Michigan man. Graduated here 30 years ago, successful, upper middle class engineer. Football season tickets every year. Also, name the UM sport and he supports it (maybe not women's stuff, but you know). He and his wife DO NOT like RR. They don't like his style, don't like the attitude he is trying to bring to UM. They hate the loud music in the stands, etc. They even think RR is a somewhat underhanded with the way he treated some players (no evidence - just hunches). I asked him if winning will do it, he said absolutely not.
I think he is representative of the older generation and many of them feel this way...
What will RR have to do? Or will all be pissed until he is canned. Even if we win BIG.
What do you think?
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:17 AM ^
Not by just winning but by winning the "Michigan Way". If he wins the Saban, Meyer, or Carrol way then the older crowd will continue to dislike him.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:21 AM ^
One of the top junior prospects in the region (most likely Lawrence Thomas) recently said he's taken phone calls recently from about 20 different schools. One school that didn't call him: Michigan.
Why? Because it's against NCAA rules to call juniors right now.
If RR was going to do things the "Saban, Meyer or Carroll" way, he would've started by now.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:29 AM ^
I don't think RR will start or has ever acted like that. Just commenting on how the older crowd views RR as this new age coach that doesn't know about the "Michigan Way" and is as slimey as the media as made him out to be. I do believe that RR will right the ship and do it the right way.
January 23rd, 2010 at 3:12 AM ^
Agreed, but that's if he's given time.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:57 AM ^
That's refreshing to hear. I wonder if Thomas knows this, or even cares. I would if I were a recruit.
January 23rd, 2010 at 8:44 AM ^
about another recruit. I can't remember the player put said he hadn't heard from Michigan in a while but other teams have been calling him everyday. Then TomVH informed him that there was a dead period and the player knew nothing about it.
It is refreshing to see the pressure to win is not getting to RR and he is not starting to cut corners and take risks to try and save his job. He is doing it the right way or not at all.
January 23rd, 2010 at 6:30 AM ^
Being a Michigan man does mean having a large degree of integrity I agree. But honestly when it comes to recruiting I really do not see any other option to be competitive for the top prospects. Financial compensation in any way is completely wrong. But we aren't UF, we dont have the warm weather attractiveness. Under RR we now also have lost our ability to tell recruits that Michigan is a school which can develop you for not only the NFL, but a good draft pick. Recruiting is a shady game these days and we all know it.
Being a Michigan Man means understanding and feeling a certain way for the school. Making the school yours in a sense. Not integrity when it comes to recruiting.
January 23rd, 2010 at 10:38 AM ^
You either have it or you don't.
Your point reminds me of the reason I give this advice to the teens I work with: If the person you're on a date with is nice to you and rude to the waiter, he/she is not a nice person.
January 23rd, 2010 at 11:54 AM ^
What in the hell is a Michigan Man exactly. I'm so sick of hearing that f'n term. Do Michigan grads really feel like they are better then everyone else? Get off your pedestal. I wouldn't give a shit if a former msu player was the head coach, as long as he won. Going to Michigan doesn't give you qualities that no other institution does. When you get your degree it doesn't come with a badge of integrity and honor.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^
"Do Michigan grads really feel like they are better then everyone else?"
Yes and...
"Going to Michigan doesn't give you qualities that no other institution does."
Disagreed. My race and ethnicity requirement did that, thanks.
January 23rd, 2010 at 5:02 PM ^
OK, you just spent a long time pontificating about "integrity," and how RR allegedly doesn't possess it, and then as soon as someone presented evidence that he does, in fact, you pooh-pooh the whole issue and complain about results.
So basically, you don't give a shit about anything other than wins and losses. That's fine - but you shouldn't be dishonest and pretend to care about other issues.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:28 AM ^
i didnt known there were different ways of winning.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:20 AM ^
I feel that RR biggest problem has been acclimating to what Michigan is. The odds of "fitting in" were stacked against him, i.e. he is not a "Michigan Man," It appears he was not briefed about several of Michigan's traditions, including the #1 jersey.
It is well known Michigan has some of the strongest traditions of any school in the nation and in the two years RR has been given to understand this he has had to; 1. install a new system 2.recruit new players 3. move his family and get acquainted to Michigan. AND 4. rebuild one of the nations most prestigious football programs. Cut the guy some slack! He will get it. He is very passionate about his job here, he wants to be part of the Michigan Difference. lets give him the opportunity to do this before we crucify him. Ok?
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:03 AM ^
Unfortunately, I know exactly the type you mean. I know an older alum and booster who hates Rich Rod. He insists that Rich Rod is not a "Michigan Man" and never will be. I've asked him why and he mentions the attrition and says that Rich Rod hasn't made any effort to win the alumni over. He contrasts Rich Rod with Beilein in the way they've dealt with the alums.
As a younger alum, I don't get it. I don't need my football coach to suck up to me or the base. All I want is an exciting team to watch on Saturdays and a victory over Ohio State. I've tried to point out that all coaching changes including Beilein's have attrition and Bo "the ultimate Michigan Man" was an outsider too, but his mind is made up and I doubt even winning will ever change his mind.
Michigan football is like religion in every way. Some people despite all science and logic will just never believe in evolution. That said - I agree with The Other Brian. A winning season and a victory over Ohio State and the dinosaur alums will be outnumbered.
January 23rd, 2010 at 10:00 AM ^
As a younger alum, I don't get it. I don't need my football coach to suck up to me or the base.Seconded. I sat at a bar during the OSU game with older alumni talking down to me like, "kid, I don't know if we can give him another year," and "I'm just so damn tired of seeing BAD football" (clearly not familiar with the Detroit Lions) as if they owned the damn team and everything hinged on their miserable, entitled opinions. Just win, that's all the sucking up I need.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:52 PM ^
Your post might be the worst I've ever read.
You compare MICHIGAN to the fucking Lions??? Did you really graduate from UofM? Really? And you're not bright enough to understand that there should NEVER be any similarity between Michigan football and the worst franchise in professional sports?
We should never see Lion-esque football in Ann Arbor. If we've sunk that low, and alums accept it, then perhaps RR has done more damage then I could have ever imagined.
January 23rd, 2010 at 5:45 PM ^
And you're proposing what exactly? Sweep house and introduce all the current kids to an entirely new system? I'm sure that will go realll well.
January 23rd, 2010 at 6:13 PM ^
I know it's been mentioned elsewhere, but the Mgoblog groupthink is really fucking annoying. Isn't the point here to welcome different viewpoints? We're all fans. WTF?
I much prefer to be a critical thinker. Praise the good; try to turn the bad around. Enough of the "super fan" assholes ripping into those who dare to claim that RR is doing a bad job. I just noted how sad it was that a previous poster, defending RR, pointed to similarities with the Lions. That's a positive? That we're now like the Lions?????
In response, a flurry of negative points. Sweet. I was around -400 for daring to say that RR is doing a bad job. I was almost back up to zero, but then I had to go and be bothered about the product on the field. I'm a Michigan fan. I don't give a fuck if he's from Ann Arbor or Angola. I do care that he is losing games and the program is suffering. I was in his corner until the final few games of this year. I'm fine to give him one more year, but yes, without 8 wins, he needs to be fired.
It is simpleton thinking to assume the choice is keep RR or "sweep house" and install an "entirely new system". A new coach might run a form of spread. WOW! A middle ground!!!! Unreal!
I hope RR turns it around asap. I'd love to be wrong about his potential at UofM. At the same time, have enough smarts to understand that a coach who brought us our worst two seasons in nearly 50 years has EARNED the criticism more than any possible praise.
January 24th, 2010 at 9:45 PM ^
I much prefer groupthink over simplistic stupidity. In this above post, you don't make particularly outlandish claims, but you come across as a real prick throughout most of this thread. By the end of the season, many of the posters here were wary of how things would go next year.
"It is simpleton thinking to assume the choice is keep RR or "sweep house" and install an "entirely new system". A new coach might run a form of spread. WOW! A middle ground!!!! Unreal!"
And I'm sure he'll want the same defensive coordinator, right? And the same offensive coordinator. And the same playbook Because it sure isn't simplistic to think that Mike Leach's spread is almost identical to Rich Rodriguez's. A middle ground? Yeah, totally what we'd be getting with coaches from Duke turning down Tennessee.
January 24th, 2010 at 2:56 PM ^
The point was, the guy couldn't take two rebuilding years of mediocre football, it's as if he'd never seen anything like it.
I could point out examples where national powerhouses like Michigan had to rebuild and the result was unfortunately "bad" football, but you'd probably find some reason to take that the wrong way too.
You've been excellent thus far at missing the fucking point. Really.
January 25th, 2010 at 12:00 PM ^
He was contrasting UM football with Lions football. I guess there's no difference if you don't realize that comparing and contrasting are opposites. That's just something you learn in grade school, anyway.
January 24th, 2010 at 5:31 PM ^
So what were all of these sage, wise, noteworthy "older alumni" doing in a bar? Why weren't they at the game? Did you ask them?
I gather that they are "older alumni" who, uh, don't actually, like, go to the games, and see the team for themselves...
January 24th, 2010 at 9:58 PM ^
I was in NY at an Alumni Association get together, so it makes sense that they weren't at the game, but I get the feeling that they don't really follow that closely either. No one really knew who anyone was and they were a bit preoccupied with the pre-game tailgate that incidentally ran into the second quarter...
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:47 PM ^
If all you want is "an exciting team to watch on Saturdays"...then RR has failed you. Wait, maybe I'm wrong...sometimes he loses in very exciting ways.
Bottom line, blind loyalists, is that you should love Michigan...not just the coach. I can understand wanting to give him time (although not a second longer than the end of this season without 8+ wins), but it's sad to see you all ripping other alums who have the common sense to see that RR is not delivering on the field.
January 23rd, 2010 at 3:01 PM ^
MGoBlog gives you a helluva lot of good ammunition in an argument with a guy like that.
Screw "generational" issues.
Ask him what the hell he means. I don't understand him, the way you describe it.
Attrition? Ask him to explain. Mallett, Boren, Clemons. Each one has a story. Johnny Sears. Wermers. Is he mad that some of Lloyd Carr's recruits went early to the NFL? Ask your old alum friend to explain himself in detail.
Does your friend know something about how Rich Rodriguez has somehow failed to "win alumni over"? Ask him to explain, and be specific.
Somebody mentioned the #1 jersey kerfuffle. What a joke. That silly issue was in the press for one reason; Braylon Edwards put it there. Now I like Braylon's pass-catching as much as or more than anybody you can find. I don't want to dump on Braylon. But as much as Braylon has proven what an exceptional football player he is, Braylon has also proven that he can be an immature, foolish, loudmouth. Repeatedly.
January 24th, 2010 at 9:47 PM ^
If I could I'd give you plus 1 just for using "kerfuffle" in your post.
MGoObscure-word-reference!
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:11 AM ^
...win over a vast majority of his "doubters," but *even if it didn't*, what is the school going to do? Fire a guy who perennially wins 9-10+ games with some Big 10 championships? If RR starts winning like that, all he has to do is not hit kids (and maybe not lock kids in closets or whatever), and he will be fine.
That kind of staunch, blind traditionalism drives me crazy in all sorts of of contexts. Things have always changed, yet some people seem to think everything hit the perfect balance in their formative years, and that nothing should ever change again. [The pro-style offense was once crazy and new too!] I love traditions worth keeping (and there are many at Michigan), but I hope I never get to the point in my life where I have a knee-jerk reaction against all things new and different (not that your Father in Law is like this, but some are).
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:17 AM ^
People just think RR is shady because he's not the best public speaker. He's a little bit awkward and that's why people get a bad impression of him. I'm sure he's actually a really nice guy and for the players, he's a great football coach and mentor, too.
I can't imagine a D1A football coach with so much success is someone who can act so nice in public, then scheme darkly about how he's going to skirt the system in private. He probably does cut some minor corners just like everyone else, but I'd put my money on him being a pretty honest dude overall.
Sometimes it seems like people forget that he's not some iconic legendary object coaching a football team, he's an actual human being. It's pretty tough for a Joe to make it as far as RR has if he's not a legit good guy.
January 23rd, 2010 at 5:32 AM ^
I agree. He seems friendly, intelligent, awkward, and obviously prone to using some West Virginia regionalisms that might bristle the ears of the snooty "upper middle class" Michigan crowd. I think that he's learned the hard way that the media coverage he gets up here is much more intense and pretentious than it was at WVU, and he's adjusting the way he acts when he's being recorded, which might make him seem fake. If anything, I always thought he seemed kind of nervous—especially in sit-down interviews—as he avoids eye contact with his interviewers.
As a fan who is not a Michigan Man myself, I think some of us non-alums kind of like that there's a coach who also didn't attend. It makes Michigan football seem much less clubby.
January 23rd, 2010 at 7:17 AM ^
You would probably have a good point if there were any Michigan coaches in the last 40 years who went to Michigan.
January 23rd, 2010 at 8:41 AM ^
I guess I just meant that because so many see him as an outsider I can identify with him more. My only real Michigan connection is some wallpaper when I was 10 and a year spent at the Flint campus. Otherwise I'm just like Rich Rod before he was hired, a fan of Michigan football.
January 23rd, 2010 at 10:53 AM ^
Did not have such a great record.
Bump Elliot coached for 10 years. While he won the 1965 Rose Bowl, he also had 5 losing seasons (1959, 1962, 1963, 1965 and 1967).
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:33 AM ^
...I would like to bring up a few points. I'm 57 and Bump Eliott was the coach when I started following UM football. I attended my first game in 1960. I'm not in "blue-hair" catagory yet, but not young, either. Anyway, those points:
1. "We" don't all think the same way. Some like him, some don't. Also, I agree wholeheartedly that a lot more people will like RR when he starts winning.
2. People of all ages are resistant to change. I would imagine that most of us here can remember a time when somebody changed something at work, and we hated it. As we got used to it or had successful results, though, many of us decided the changes were OK. The longer someone is used to doing things one way, the more resistant they are to doing it another way. That is probably why older fans are having more trouble adjusting than younger fans are.
3. Evolution happens regardless of whether or not people adjust to it. Keeping UM football in some 1970's fantasy is just that: a fantasy. Time was passing UM football by and something had to be done about it. There are some who are dragged kicking and screaming into any change, and they are in denial. They can fight it all they want, but it will happen. As I have told a few "acid casualties" who still seem to think it is 1969, "the sixties are over." And so are the 70's, 80's, 90's, and even the 00's.
4. As for the "atmosphere," I wonder how many older people have considered the possibility that recruits probably like the present one a lot more than when the "Big House" was more like the "Funeral Home." The recruits are kids. Kids like excitement. If the recruits, students, and student-athletes like the current environment more than the "down in front" crowd does, it should stay, regardless of the ravings of a few people who seem dedicated to making those around them miserable.
5. So-called "fans" can bitch all they want, but wins and losses, not whining, will determine RR's tenure at UM.
6. If anyone doesn't like going to the games anymore, they should stop going and free their tickets up for someone who would actually enjoy them. As far as I know, nobody is kidnapping anyone and making them go to the games.
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:40 AM ^
that is all.
January 23rd, 2010 at 9:34 AM ^
Support the TEAM!!!
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:44 AM ^
I'm c/o '95.
For me and my friends of that era, the losing is terrible.
Worse than the losing is the piped in music. RR, with the tacky tunes, has placed us in the same shitty basket as MSU, AA baseball and other things that suck.
I'm all about improving atmosphere, but Neil Diamond, Slim Shady and bad techno aren't the way to do it. If we win, I'll learn to love the spread; but I'll forever be ashamed of the garbage music. It doesn't mean we can't pipe in music, but we can create our own hype music that can't be found on Jock Jams 23. RR doesn't get that Michigan is the leader and the best. We can create new traditions, but let's just make sure they are good ones that aren't already in place at lesser institutions.
January 23rd, 2010 at 2:05 AM ^
The coach has nothing to do with anything you're talking about. The only way that RR might be "responsible" for that is the fact that he is new and therefore would not have the veto power that Carr did.
You and I may not like the music piped in over the crappy sound systenm, but at least be reasonable about it.
January 23rd, 2010 at 3:00 AM ^
You think the coach didn't bring in the music? Really? I guess we'll just have to chalk that up to coincidence. Nothing else is RR's fault...so the Neil Diamond couldn't be him either.
January 23rd, 2010 at 3:07 AM ^
Obviously you're not a golfer.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
I don't get the golfer thing, but re-reading your statement that RR doesn't have "veto" power over the football program is ridiculous. He runs the program...into the ground, unfortunately.
January 23rd, 2010 at 2:19 PM ^
Well you're just a ball of wit and logic.
January 25th, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
Bill Martin had more to do with it. Perhaps you noticed the new speaker system installed? The stadium definitely needed an upgrade (old speakers sounded like a dying cassette tape) and these speakers were thrown in as part of the renovation. And so you might as well use them...
Do you honestly think that the head coach of the football team had more to do with this than the athletic department?
January 23rd, 2010 at 2:49 AM ^
"Worse than the losing is the piped in music."
Interesting priorities...
January 23rd, 2010 at 3:04 AM ^
As the posts on Mgoblog prove, you can always find an excuse for losing. There's no excuse for poor taste.
January 23rd, 2010 at 7:22 AM ^
Yeah, why no mention of the lack of fountain drinks at Yost?
January 23rd, 2010 at 10:04 AM ^
RR doesn't get that Michigan is the leader and the best.You. Are. Wrong.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^
Nice statement. It'd be sweet if you could provide a single fact to back that up. Michigan innovates (winged helmets, landing on the moon, etc.). We don't (until RR) replicate...especially the shitty elements of a minor league baseball experience.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:51 PM ^
He will give you the facts that he is using as soon as you give him the facts you are using that RichRod doesn't get that Michigan is leaders and best. Oh the irony
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^
then read.
January 23rd, 2010 at 1:56 PM ^
Where's the proof, and what's the evidence, that Rich Rodriguez selects loudspeaker music?
You mention "veto power." I'll tell you who has veto power, and it is Bill Martin. Soon to be David Brandon. And at Michigan Stadium, the secondary veto power is Joe Parker's.
I am with you on the aesthetic. I HATE the freaking loudspeaker music.
But I await one shred of proof that it was Rich Rodriguez's idea to play "Journey."