Look at Stanford's Renaissance, and Keep The Faith
Please remember:
Stanford went 4-8 in Jim Harbaugh's first season in 2007 and 5-7 last season.
Look where they are now. They've replenished the talent base and have won some shocking games the past month.
There is no reason 2010 cannot be a similar year for Michigan. I think most here would take 8-4 or 9-3, and it is definitely possible.
Patience.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:30 PM ^
You are using that. Please stop.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:35 PM ^
I would have patience when I have access to the board and can start threads about how UNACCEPTABLE things are and how we ARE NOT THE SAME MICHIGAN TEAM I KNOW and be awesome for using CAPS LOCK LIKE WHOA and stuff.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:41 PM ^
It sounds like an endorsement to hire Harbaugh (yes, I realize that was not the intent).
November 17th, 2009 at 12:42 PM ^
Look at the record of the coach the season before Harbaugh and notice the trend (1-11 the year before he was hired). I fully understand the talent issues Rod has faced since he got here (no qb to run his system the first yr and now the holes on D) but it isn't a completely fair comparison.
That being said, I still believe in Coach Rod and think/hope/pray he's capable of getting to 7 or 8 wins next yr.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:50 PM ^
While it's all well and good to point to Harbaugh's success in year 3, he also took over the worst BCS conference program in the country...Michigan had just finished beating the defending national champions on their home turf. It's apples and oranges here...we certainly lost a lot from that team, but not to the levels that Stanford was at before Harbaugh got there (1-11 in 2006 with 118th (out of 119) best total and scoring offense in the country).
I still have the hope and optimism we'll be big ten and national contenders in the coming years, but I've grown more skeptical than I was at the beginning of the year.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:57 PM ^
The big question to me is how likely they are. At this point, I'd say that 7-5 is the ceiling for the team next year, esp. given the departure of BG and perhaps of DW. People talk optimistically about all the young talent that will be coming off redshirts next year, but that's the problem: they're all young. 2011 is the soonest I see us going 9-3. I've seen zero evidence that RR/Gerg are going to turn things around any quicker than that.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^
7-5 ceiling? Really? That may end up being the final record, but looking at the schedule, only the OSU and Penn State games seem like losses to me. I think we'll blow another game or two due to our defense, but I would say the ceiling is 10-2.
I predicted 6-6 last year, 5-7 this year and despite what is going on with our D, I am predicting 9-3 for next year.
November 17th, 2009 at 4:46 PM ^
RR has historically engineered big turnarounds in year two. That didn't happen this season, but OTOH, with a true freshman at QB and with a new defense (new DC, six new starters), this was almost like year one again. Next year will be the first time he'll have had a team that has almost entirely put in time in his system. I think we may see the lightbulb click on for some guys.
November 17th, 2009 at 12:58 PM ^
(I believe in RR, although the past 2 years have been frustrating.)
Jim Harbaugh has done a great job and is showing himself to be a great coach (just as his record at U of San Diego suggests), but I kind of wouldn't want him as a coach at UM, although he is an awesome coach. (I know this is not a "bring JH to Michigan!" thread. I'm just doing some kinda OT rambling.)
First of all, I imagine UM would never consider him after he threw his alma mater under the bus for the sake of recruiting. I don't have access to Bill Martin's Rolodex, but it doesn't seem like Harbaugh was being heavily considered to be Lloyd's successor (I could be wrong). That flap aside, I'm bothered by other things he's done. A few years ago he irresponsibly said that Pete Carroll was going to retire at the end of the year (Carroll didn't). And then on Sat he went for 2 when Stanford already had the game well in hand.
The going for 2 doesn't irk me as much because it's kind of a throwback to old jostling between coaches, e.g. Woody Hayes and Steve Spurrier, which sometimes is fun. (That is not what Dantonio does; he just acts like a dick.)
Also, Harbaugh has recruited pretty well, just to preempt any "doing more with less" arguments.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:00 PM ^
some of you really need to stop drinking the RR juice. you can blame the lack of talent on michigan not beating psu, osu, iowa. you can not blame it on losing to illinois, purdue, and barely getting by indiana. do you really think we have the worst talent in the big ten? if indiana wins on saturday, and we lose, we finish 11th out of 11.
i would like to know why some of you are so sure that RR is going to turn this around. i dont think he was even that great at WVU. his record against ranked teams was 13-15. its descent, but its not great. and the last few years he coached in a big east conference without vtech, bc, miami. he surprised georgia and oklahoma in the bowls games. i'll give him that. those were great wins. i just dont see him being a national title caliber coach. maybe if we scheduled del st and mac teams for 12 games.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:10 PM ^
Both Illinois and Purdue had a better performance in the NFL draft last year than Michigan, and both will likely have a better performance the next two seasons as well (two players drafted each year is pretty much the ceiling for Michigan when you look at the depth chart). Those teams also are probably using more than 69 scholarships and have, you know, an actual depth chart at positions like linebacker and safety.
We have less experienced talent than Illinois, Purdue, and a host of other teams. This is the reality of the situation. Just because "we are Michigan" does not mean we have better players.
As for believing Rich Rodriguez can turn it around, his teams won as many major bowl games in 7 seasons at West Fucking Virginia as Lloyd Carr did in 13 years at Michigan.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:29 PM ^
I *cannot believe* people are still trying to compare Carr unfavorably to Rodriguez.
So I guess you're saying we should take heart: as soon as 2011 or 2012 we'll be able to play with the likes of Illinois and Purdue. Yikes!
November 17th, 2009 at 1:37 PM ^
We have less talent than Illinois and Purdue. That is a fact. To expect a team with less talent than their opponents to win consistently is pretty stupid in my opinion. Have Northwestern and Indiana fans been doing the same whining about their coaches that some in our fanbase are doing now when they've had far less talent than the rest of the league for decades?
All I did is point out the resume of the last two coaches we've had at Michigan. If you think the comparison is unfavorable, that isn't my fault.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:34 PM ^
you might want to look at the star ranking for some of these kids coming out of HS. granted, not all recruits pan out. but if purdue and illinois can turn their 2 and 3 star guys into players, and we cant do that with our 3,4,5 star recruits, than a large part of it has to be coaching. i dont have time to go over illinois' and purdue's recruits. but i glanced at their classes on rivals, and while illinois has a lot of 2 and 3 stars and some 4 stars in the mix, purdue's are all 2 and 3 stars. they get one 4 star per class. here are ours. and i am not including true freshmen.
Van Bergen - 4
Brandon Graham - 5
Adam Patterson - 4
Mike Martin - 4
Stevie Brown - 4
Obi Ezeh - 4
Fitzerald - 4
Mouton - 4
Brandon Smith - 4
Warren - 5
Floyd - 3
Woolfolk - 3
Michael Williams - 4
Greg Banks 3
Brandon Herron - 3
and while we dont have great depth at every position, there enough 3 star guys out there (who would be starters for purdue and illinois). if only we had someone to coach them.
i know that RR doesnt coach defense. and maybe that his problem. it doesnt seem like he cares about it one bit.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:46 PM ^
Other teams aren't turning 2-3 stars into awesome players on a regular basis. They just have multiple, experienced 2-3 star players at each position so the chances increase that one of those guys will develop into a competent player (just one out of 3 or 4 guys has to pan out for the defense not to have a gaping hole). Only eight guys on that list you mentioned are upperclassmen, and a number of them have developed fantastically (RVB, Graham, Woolfolk, Warren, Martin, etc.). This defense simply has no depth at linebacker or safety. If middling 3-star recruit Obi Ezeh doesn't turn out to be good (a strong possibility given his recruiting ranking) there is no one to replace him with except a sophomore or a walk-on. If Ezeh and Mouton both don't pan out (which seems to be the case so far) you are playing a sophomore AND a walk-on (as we've already seen happen this year). If Stevie Brown's move to OLB hadn't worked out or if he'd gotten hurt, we'd be in a similar boat at that position where a freshman would be the first guy thrust into the lineup.
Having a handful of highly ranked guys on a defense without enough non-freshmen on scholarship to field a defense, still makes you a shitty defense in terms of talent-level and on field performance.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:56 PM ^
i am not saying that we should have OSU's defense. but it should not be as bad as it is. college is only 4 years. so every team will have underclassmen playing. you might not be able to contribute as a true freshman. but by the time you are sophomore, with right coaching, you should be able to play. even if its in a reserve roll.
and going by what you said, a lot of these underclassman will be upperclassman next year. freshmen, sophomores. sophomores, juniors. but i dont think anyone here expects our defense to be any better next year. yes we are losing brandon graham, but a defense consists of 11 players.
November 17th, 2009 at 2:02 PM ^
I fully expect the defense to be better next year. Those who don't overvalue the contribution of one player in comparison to an increase in experience and depth across an entire roster.
When we have a full depth chart of talented/experienced players, we will have a good defense. When we don't have enough non-freshmen on scholarship in the back seven to field a team, we will have a bad defense (like we do right now). The defense should improve next year and be pretty solid in 2011.
November 17th, 2009 at 3:13 PM ^
I agree with both of you a bit here. (By the way, Martin is only a sophomore. So scratch him off your upperclassmen list) The D is definitely inexperienced and on their 3rd system in 3 years, so even a junior right now can be considered inexperienced due to having to constantly learn new systems. But you would hope the mental aspect of college football has been developed at that point and they are able to learn much more quickly than a freshman or sophomore. Some (Van Bergen, Warren, Woolfolk) do and some (Ezeh, Mouton, Williams) don't. The problems with the defense have been due to mental aspects of the game in my opionion. Colossal bust after colossal bust leads to lots of yards and points against. It's not like the defense isn't forcing 3rd and longs. They do that frequently, but they somehow leave a guy wide open (and I mean WIIIIDE open) on 3rd and long or overpursues on a running play that would be stopped for naught, but ends up being 15 yards and it kills us. It's certainly not due to athletic ability so it's harder to argue the whole 4 star recruits vs. 3 star recruits (which is based very strongly on athletic ability). I would have hoped the upperclassmen on the defense would all have that mental ability at this point in the season, but it doesn't seem to be there, which is what concerns me the most.
November 17th, 2009 at 3:20 PM ^
PS I also believe the decline of this defense began with BooBoo's problems. When he played at the beginning of the season, the D was middle of the pack (or close to it). Then his injury and subsequent booting has caused Woolfolk to move down CB, Kovacs to move to Woolfolk's deep spot (which he is entirely ill-suited for...he should be close to the line as much as possible) and Williams into the lineup. This has led to Scott freakin' Tolzien lighting us up like he's playing video game football.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:50 PM ^
"As for believing Rich Rodriguez can turn it around, his teams won as many major bowl games in 7 seasons at West Fucking Virginia as Lloyd Carr did in 13 years at Michigan."
i would think that its a bit easier to make it out of the big east, when you are fighting for the conference crown with the likes of rutgers, cinci, and lousville. dont forget that during lloyd carr's tenure, the big ten was one of the strongest conferences in the country. and lloyd did make it to 4 rose bowls. yes he lost 3 of them. but so did bo. its tough to fly out to the west coast to have to play usc in what is technically a home game for them. and one year we lost to Texas (who would go on to win the national title the next year ) by 1 point
November 17th, 2009 at 1:57 PM ^
It is hard to beat the Big 12 Champion and the SEC Champion (just ask OSU) in bowl games as well. The fact that Rodriguez did it at a Big East school makes it even more impressive to me.
November 17th, 2009 at 1:14 PM ^
Yes, I do think we have worse talent than the rest of the Big 10.
I've been studying these programs for years and they have been passing up for years, pretty much on the D side of the ball.
I would trade our current D roster with anyone else in the league. Look at IU, between Kirlew, Middleton, the Repogle Bros, Fisher, all those guys are better than anyone other than BG on our defense right now.
November 17th, 2009 at 2:26 PM ^
for Warren's draft status.
November 17th, 2009 at 3:36 PM ^
I kinda slighted D-War there, didnt I
I guess, to be more specific, I'd rather have those guys than who UM has at their positions--S, LB and DE, opposite BG, of course.
November 17th, 2009 at 3:34 PM ^
You can't compare coaching situations. We need to get out of that habit. What about Rodriguez's renaissance in his second year? Happened always before, but not this year, hmm. These coaches are very different in most variable aspects of their job. The situations were different, the expectations are different, the competition is different. The only real barometer of what the 2010 team will be like is how hard they work in the off season, the coming spring practice, and then fall practice after that. That being said, its unfortunate that were in a position of having to convince ourselves that tomorrow will be better to feel good about the team.
November 17th, 2009 at 4:09 PM ^
Since this is a support Rich Rod thread, I though i would post what Cowherd just said. He said that if you were to judge coaches based on 2 years, Charlie Weis would be a huge success.
November 17th, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^
I'm just trying to be positive, because there is nothing else, as fans, that we can do. That is all. Believe that Rich Rod will turn it around, because if he doesn't, then Michigan has to start over again and it means more losing seasons.
Let's all choose positivity over glass half-empty.