Michael Rosenberg Blasts RichRod in Freep

Submitted by skegemogpoint on
RR blasted by Rosenberg, though it's hard to argue with what he says.

The Other Brian

July 9th, 2008 at 10:03 PM ^

I find it hard to AGREE. I hope if (when?) Brian addresses this, he isn't so diplomatic and calls out Rosenberg for the bullshit in this column. http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080709/SPORTS06/80709105 People wonder WHY Detroit fans hate their media so much. THIS is why. This is scumbag journalism at its finest. 1. Not ONCE does Rosenberg mention that Rich Rod truly felt like West Virginia had not lived up to the promises that they made. Instead RR is just a money grubbing skunk. 2. I guarantee Mike Rosenberg never played competitive sports in his life. What, Rodriguez swears at the players? Oh, never mind the fact that MULTIPLE players have said that Boren carried a sense of entitlement. Never mind that multiple players who played for Bo said that RR's practices remind them of Bo's early days. Never mind the fact that countless players, both current and incoming for 2009, have said they stuck around or committed because Rodriguez brings a sense of family. 3. I'd wager a bet at least 70% of Michigan fans feel that Jim Tressel and Ohio State are as corrupt as they come. THIS is why nothing ever comes of it. Columbus doesn't have wanna be Bernsteins and Woodwards sniffing around like weasels. Drew Sharp and Jim Carty love digging around Michigan and using lies to fuel their agendas. Seems like Rosenberg is in their camp now. Rosenberg is an SOB for this. He comes off as some self righteous dolt who feels like he has to expose RichRod for what he thinks he really is so Michigan will be better off for it. Guess what, Mike? Spreading this slander is nuclear fodder for Jim Tressel, Mark Dantonio and Charlie Weis. This is just plain garbage, and I'm sick of it.

skegemogpoint

July 9th, 2008 at 10:11 PM ^

my only response is that Rosenberg's account seems factually correct.  doesn't change my opinion of that fat SOB Boren.

as for cursing, big deal.  i've sat in on countless rick pitino practices and the language is as harsh as it gets.

jdberkley

July 9th, 2008 at 10:51 PM ^

is that Rosenberg was one of the most enthusiastic supporters of this hire when it was made. He didn't seem to have any of these objections back in December, even though any number of people familiar with the West Virginia program could tell you the Rodriguez hire did not promise merely sunshine and roses. Apparently, Rodriguez's fighting of a buyout clause has caused Rosenberg to at least partially repudiate the sentiment he expressed when Rodriguez was hired. This strikes me as an overreaction. I'm not convinced, and have never been convinced, that Rodriguez is the right guy, necessarily, but I'm hoping I'm wrong about that. I don't see this as a major or even a minor embarrassment for Michigan, and I don't see this as evidence that Rodriguez won't prove to be a good hire eventually.

hat

July 10th, 2008 at 1:49 AM ^

Rosenberg's normally a respectable columnist, but there are times when he channels his inner "old man who complains about how times are changing" and writes unreadable crap. This is one of them.

Literally no one (outside of a few accountants doing the paperwork) will care about the buyout a few months from now.

Chrisgocomment

July 10th, 2008 at 10:35 AM ^

A dollar received today is worth more than a dollar received tomorrow. Rosey says that Rich Rod didn't reduce the buyout by a dime, yet he doesn't have to make a payment until 2010...uh.....Rosey, dude, Time Value of Money...BRAH. He's probably getting a significant reduction in what he's got to pay based on the present value of that payment stream.

Yinka Double Dare

July 10th, 2008 at 11:12 AM ^

But Rosenberg's "anyone who has driven past a law school" thing is just plain wrong. Anyone who has driven past a law school might "know" that RR had no case, but anyone who has actually attended law school and knows anything about contract law knows that he most definitely had a case, certainly in regards to challenging the amount of the liquidated damages. The fact that it was a liquidated damages clause matters.

Jay

July 10th, 2008 at 12:06 PM ^

If Rich Rod wins, then I don't really care about any of this. I'm not entirely convinced that this was all RR's idea to fight the buyout, anyway. Its a reasonable assumption that he had the full support of MSC and Bill Martin to take this to court and try to get the $4 million figure reduced. MSC and Martin deserve some of the blame for allowing things to get this ugly.

Blue Balls

July 11th, 2008 at 9:56 PM ^

This article is a Bucnut "toliet article" (styrofoam cup not included), good for a dump and then you wipe your ass with it. If you can't see through the ignorence of it's writer and the 1+1=6 assumptions, then take another xanex, it will be OK! and yes, Mary Sue Coleman is the President not Obama!