If you have a Pitchfork I want to talk

I would wajer that we'd be 8-0 (since we've only played 8 games thus far).  But point made.  Just need a couple more stops (literally 4 or 5) per game and we're winning a LOT.

False. Post bye-week records:

The Big Ten is the most extreme, but overall teams are <.500 coming off a bye.

The atrocious D is mostly RR's fault

I just don't see it that way. Yes, he is the head coach and it unltimately is his responsibility to field a better D than what we have, but the main problem we have with the D is age and experience.  The RS Soph / Jr,  RS JR / Sr, and Sr classes were all here or on their way before RR arrived.  Were are all those guys now? And how did RR run them off? There looked to be plenty of talent in the DB ranks, we have gone over the attrition records a thousand times, it just does not add up to being mostly RR's fault, or anyone's for that matter. And if we return every member of our starting D save Mouton and Banks, I am not sure how they couldn't be conciderably better.  ANd how much better would it take?  2 more stops a game? That would do it with this offense, but with next years O? maybe 1 more stop would do it?  Hard to say, but like the OP i want to see us try.  I have endured the last three years, I can take my chance with one more to see what one more year does to our O and our D.

 

Big picture, yes a head coach takes responsibility for the whole performance at the end of the day.  Slightly smaller picture, we we could insert another D coordinator and get a brighter defensive future at the end of the day, there is some reason to see what RRod can do with another one in the fold.  For gods sake, we don't need a world-beater D, or even a best in the big ten, if we can get our current talent playing like the 50th best defense nationally, I think we have a chance at beating anybody.  Despite the horrid attrition and mass of youth, I still find it hard to believe another coordinator couldn't at least cobble together a mediocre to bad defense that could consistently stall the likes of UMas and a crippled Penn State.  Perhaps I'm wrong, and perhaps most of our rated recruits have all really been shockingly overrated, but I would like to see what this team could do with another DC.

They'll have to learn new schemes again.

Is this a bad think or a good think, because the way I see it this defensive scheme doesn't work? We need something else that works. Now, aren't our defensive players mostly FR and SO which means they were only coach by G. Robinson so this "learning of new schemes AGAIN" does not apply to them?

OP, I agree with most of your post, but I'm simply asking why there would be mass transfers on O, with an NFL style O implemented?

Obviously, the next HC wouldn't go back to Lloydball, but why would players leave with a Patriots, Saints, Colts style offense? The WRs (Roundtree, Stonum, Hemmingway) could all flourish in any offense. The RBs are varied inough in style from Hopkins, to Cox, to Shaw and Smith.

The only real question is Denard, but if he improves his passing more, he could be a shotgun spread QB (not a read option guy) and if not, Tate/ Gardner could play in a pro style spread offense.

The main difference between RR and other spreads is RR's significant use of the read option, but otherwise isn't all that different from NFL style spreads.

Don't fret...The facts of our recent recruits prove your concerns completely unfounded.  While we might lose a couple of players, we'd likely gain others.  More importantly, Stanford has offered roughly half of our current commits.  Harbaugh even offered Tate.  Do you really think that our kids would hate a coach who brought dismal Stanford to prominence (and top-10 recruiting) especially when he already offered them a scholarship?  The only player who might not fit into a pro-style offense is Denard...and that's only if he doesn't want to switch to the position he'll need to learn for the NFL.

Beyond that, please drop the "fire GERG" stuff unless you want to ad "fire RR".  RR is the captain of the ship.  He recruited the players and hired the coaches (his first DC now having turned around GERG's shitty Syracuse defense).  The young, inexperienced players can't be RR's excuse but not GERG's.  

Ever. They will be sucky forever amen

denard was sucky last year.  now look at him.

the development of the frosh D will be more than marginal next year with bowl practices (hopefully), spring practice, summer practice and fall practice.  but i would like them to focus more on tackling and covering than scheme.

next year the O will avg at least 35 pts a game.  if the D improves just a few points a game, you're looking at a very good team overall.

The players who return on D won't all be underclassmen next year. That alone will be an improvement.

Outstanding levity on this gloomy Monday morning.  Thank you sir.

His defense is not working, and I don't know that it will work any time soon. We ought to play 4 down linemen, since our strength is on the line, get some more pressure on the QB, and lessen the load on our inexperienced db's...

Well, Ron English fields a worse D than UM. We could have their D!

i just want to catch duke at this point dammit...

So you're saying we're only 10.5 yds/game away from being in the top 100.  I think that is pretty encouraging. /s

You know, I think that's an excellent point.  Overlooked, and so far negbanged, but a good point and I (for one) think you're onto something.

When people say "I don't care about yards, I care about winning" I get where they are coming from.  We all want to win.  But I've watched losing games where it's all pain, and I've watched losing games where I say "Holy sh*t look at that kid run" and the latter is way better.  I can have a lot more patience when I have hope (which our offense gives me) and moments of absolute glee (which the offense also gives me, usually thanks to Mr. Robinson).  Even when the outcome is bad, there is a lot of entertainment to be had when our offense clicks.  And that definitely helps during these lousy weeks.

I agree completely. We are on the right track, our team is getting better, and they are damn fun to watch.

Than be boring and win? Are you Wesley Snipes in White Men Can't Jump?

I'd love for the defense to not be so pi$$-poor, and it would be nice to win more often, but not if it means going back to immobile QBs...

I could understand this if you were a neutral fan.  I can't understand it if you're a diehard.  I agree that Carr's offense was pretty dull, but I liked winning - a lot.   It's one thing to say this now, but if it's bowl season and we're sitting home again, would you honestly say it was worth it?

Now saying we'll be the best team in the nation,  but look we got ND and 3 teams that will have 70pts hung on them.  Survive that and MSU on the road is the only game we won't be favored by 10 or more.  Iowa loses everyone and the rest of the Big Ten blows save PSU and Wisc which are off the schedule.  So we come to Nebraska and OSU 10-0 with both games at home.    Not a guarantee and maybe we stumble at Illinois or Northwestern or something but a 10-3 season for me is an absolute bare minimum.   

We do that and I think the recruits come pouring in,

Than the program falling into the abyss?



Interesting.

Not at all.

The program falling into abyss means that something is wrong with the coaching. All I'm saying is it would be disheartening to know that we supported a coach who we thought could take us to higher levels, only to see him fail.

Yeah it sucks being wrong, and I hear enough of it on a daily basis from my Spartan roommates and even from my other friends who are Michigan fans. I want RichRod to succeed because it means that Michigan will be succeeding.

I stopped believing in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and God a long time ago.

This will end well. 

That were just god awful!! /sarcasm



The solution is simple hire casteel however much it takes.



Or implode the d side staff (except tall) and let the new DC pick his staff and scheme.