This is literally the same thread over and over again. Shit's getting redundant
Michigan welcomes back football 'family'
Well I thought people would want to see an article about Michigan on the frontpage of ESPN, this being a sports blog and all
God I hate Mondays.
42 titles is ALWAYS acceptable to shout about.
Do the players he is "welcoming back" like what is happening? Are they excited to yell out the number of championships? Do they feel a part of the current family and a part of the historical family of Michigan Football? Are they more vocal and supportive of the team?
I don't know why this is the case exactly. I liked RR. But I think it is pretty foolish for us to argue with the overwhelming support we hear from the players. We didn't walk into the meetings or the building and interact with the coaches or players. We weren't communicated with by either of these coaching staffs. Instead of assuming the majority of football alum are just wrong and foolish, I think I'll trust what I hear: they feel like family and are excited about Michigan football. I won't read too much into it and won't place blame anywhere - I'll accept these positive feelings for what they are - and be *very glad* the players feel this way.
Hoke is just copying how he starts meetings with the players - some have criticized this as well, and my point in support of that arguement is exactly the same as my point here. If the players like it and it makes them feel more a part of the current and historical family of Michigan Football, then for God's sake, continue.
I find the OP comments slightly annoying and foolish, but hey, they are his opinions. I certainly don't trust his opinions more than the opinions of people who are in that room and putting on that winged helmet. The OP's negativity is no more sensical than early detractors of RR. Both are ignorant and unproductive. Furthermore, it flies in the face of what we hear from former and current players.
in regard to there being a problem with "bandwagoney" fans. We should all stick by our school through thick and thin... but I'm not sure about your problem with yelling out team records. It's just his way of putting an emphasis on our teams history and what that means to this University. So, I'm not sure why you have a problem with that.
My problem with this is that Hoke gets way too much credit for emphaziing Michigan tradition. RR brought in Bo's first team to teach them about transition, put OSU logos on the tackling dumbies, etc... What I would love to know is exactly why a significant amount of the Michigan Football Program wanted their head coach to fail.
That's a terrible answer to a valid question. I don't think there's anyone who can legitimately deny that Hoke has received FAR more positive press than RR ever did. Saying you "just knew he would" doesn't make any sense unless you're some sort of oracle. Granted, people were justifiably concerned that he would be changing the scheme of the program, but no one (at least at first) had any reason to expect anything less than success after watching what he did at WVU. So if you're saying you somehow "just knew" RR would fail from the outset, you didn't exactly WANT him to win, either.
Rye, don't waste your time. Everything Sean Ornery says is stupid as F***.
This coming from the asshat that only showed up and joined the site after RR was fired to gloat about it and be a general fuckhead about Michigan football. Go to bed, would you please.
You might remember him from such usernames as The Barking Sphincter or The King of Belch. It may take awhile, but once you realize it's all an act he's easy to identify.
Fair point friend, but didn't KoB have a tendancy to also be funny, however idiotic and asinine his comments were?
Why are you such a dick? Why dont you do us all a favor and take your comments to the RCMB. You will find a lot of like-minded friends over there.
into the blog archives in early 2008 and find me a bunch of instance of people who "knew" of what was going to happen. I will eagerly await your findings....
1. he was a hick from West Virginny
2. zero family values
3. dissed all the former players
4. lost games at a lethal rate
5. would rather beat Delaware State than OSU
6. Rita's chilly sucked
7. recruited thugs
8. treated Tate like shit
9. too many hybrids not enough thoroughbreds
10. didn't like MANBALL
your avatar looks like some kind of dog/human hybrid in a crouched position. I'm sure I just need to see a blown up version, but its rather disturbing from afar.
I was not expecting that...
For months, I've thought your avatar was some really wrinkly fat dude taking boudoir photos with his face blacked out (like maybe it was you).
Thank you so much for posting that.
Ha. glad I could clear it up, what a horrible image to contemplate for months on end
Thanks for clearing that up, simply delightful.
Dogs kick so much ass.
I'm pretty sure his comment/list was tongue-in-cheek.
Come on, you have to know that the lack of alumni support, fans that didn't like where RR was from and Lloyd Carr are to blame for the record. The worst defense in history of the school had nothing to do with it. And if you like Hoke, or appreciate anything he does, you're a hypocrite b/c RR did the exact same things and never, ever got credit from it (except on here of course).
I don't care who the coach is.
I don't care what offense he runs.
I don't care what defense he runs.
I do care about NCAA violations and losing games.
He has publicly denigrated the Illinois win. That's not "Michigan football" to him. Can't wait to go back to the Oregon games -- MANBALL versus 21st century will be a blast (again)!
So, outside of Jackson, exactly who on the current staff was coaching during the Oregon game?
Giving up 45 points in regulation to that Illinois team is unacceptable. So I understand any criticism about that win.
I miss the days when if Michigan scored 28 points you knew it was a victory. Having a balanced team is important. I feel last season there was too much pressure on the offense to perform. If denard knows that he has a defense (and special teams for that matter) to back him up he can play much more relaxed and not be put in a position where he is trying to force things.
Above all else what this program needs is stability. Four defensive coordinators in six years is why kids are leaving, not some "Michigan secondary hating God". The coaches that they commit to are leaving. This problem dates back to the last few years of the Carr era so that isn't all RR's fault but he certainly didn't help fix it. Hopefully Mattison will stay here for a decade and we can have some top 10 defenses.
I listen to what Hoke says, and compare it to what Rodriguez said - not much different outwardly. Plain speak, not well articulated, occasionally drawn into a guffaw, no Lloyd Carr poetry recitations for the elitist, etc.
Hoke was asked at his first press conference about the importance of the OSU and MSU games. He gave Rodriguez-like answers ("I understand" and "three rivalries"). The difference: he was asked three times. The press kept serving up big juicy slow pitches and by the third time, he got it, and started pounding the pulpit. The press only reported on his third answer, and therefore everybody only remembers the third time.
It is clear to me that Rich got a raw deal from the press, many football alumni, and other "insiders". This same group (or their Freep / M-Live / Mid-Western-valued lackeys) are now all bandwagon-y, and are trumpeting warm maize and blue fuzzy pap all over the internets (including the low points posters here).
This has / will go on ad nauseam. Rich Rod got a bad deal / Brady Hoke is so dreamy ...
So - I too am sickened by the family coming back (when they should have been here before even if they weren't wanted), and the dreamy pap on the web.
But rather than sounding like a broken record (I am dating myself into the 5% category), I'm posting less. It's like I have to hold my breath until there is real football to talk about, because the point is moot.
Rich was let go. Hoke is here. Just ignore the pap. It will die down unless Hoke is wildly successful, in which case we'll all be wildly happy.
its a long time until fall practice starts and if we spend all that time parsing every single sentence about UM football, we will go insane.
these worthless posts should just be called something like "internet meme parade" or "funny picture and quote-a-thons" or ".gif fests"
Oh come on, I can't be the only one that's happy to have Lloyd Carr coaching again.
Brady continues to impress with quotes:
"We want to touch players," Hoke said
Jesus. We've fired RR so many time on this board, you'd think that at some point that sonofabitch would just stay fired.
mostly, im just really disappointed to see the extent of the xenophobia and lack of support that the previous regime had to endure. it makes me feel a lot of shame to think i am united in a cause with people who can behave that way.
but honestly, all we can do is wait. i think my signature really puts it best...
you summed it up perfectly
I would hardly describe the way the treatment of the previous regime as xenophobic. Yes, there were some who didn't like RR from the start for a litany of reasons, some deserved some undeserved; but let's not he didnt do himself too many favors either. If he had won more games, the alumni and fan base would have accepted him as if he was a native son. Bottom line. End of story.
Just be happy that everyone is on the same page now regardless of why they may not have been in the past.
when i say xenophobia, it's not just the fact that he was from wv. that was certainly a factor with some alums, but that's not facet im aiming to point out.
the xenophobia against richrod was due to unfamiliarity with his system and with him not being tied to the previous michigan coaching tree. he was foreign, and his methods, especially compared to the status quo ante, were stange. this is indeed xenophobia (look it up).
the absolute aversion to change, despite a proven record of success, to the point where players in the locker room were "rebelling" and there was open conflict within the alumni base, was not only sad, but extremely harmful and hurtful to the program.
it brought a lot of old heroes down to earth. players and alums who were once idols are now flawed and petty men. personally, while i'll never be able stop supporting the program 100%, it was disheartening to see that the players who made the program could behave in such a way. its kinda like, as a kid, realizing that santa no longer exists. you have to accept it, but that doesn't make it any easier to stomach.
I couldn't agree more.
I'm not sure I feel the same way about it bringing the heroes down to earth.... but that's mostly because I'm jaded and expect them to be flawable humans in the first place.
It's not the fairness or moral issues regarding the treatment of change and outsiders that bothers me. It's more the fear that we are now tied to the Michigan Man coaching tree for the very distant future or until there is epic failure, whichever comes first. I certainly hope for the best for Hoke and I never want the program to fail, but being tied to the Michigan Man coaching tree makes us succeptable to many of the same risks that a fortune 500 company would face by only promoting from within.
Regardless of your assessment of RR's success or failure, the rest of the world is improving. We need to improve at the same or a faster rate to remain the leaders and best. Not just cling to our traditions and past victories.
RR wasnt exactly set up for success with the players he inherited but if he had done his job better as in WIN MORE GAMES, the alumni, fans, and players would have found a way to like him. People didnt fear him because he and his system were different, they didnt like the fact that he didnt have a grasp of the traditions and didnt win enough. I think if Ron English or Mike DeBord had gotten the job we would have had an even worse last 3 years and plenty of people would have been calling for their heads if either one of them had gone 15-22. People who turned on RR at the end or werent fans of him aren't xenophobic, they are losingphobic.
But, I'm not sure if they fit into the context of the post above:
"to the point where players in the locker room were "rebelling" and there was open conflict within the alumni base"
To put it in context, did that rebellion and open conflict start before or after the losses piled up? I seem to remember some of it starting from the moment a certain coach didn't get the job.
It was clear that some players on that 08 team quit and that is an indictment of their character, the new coaching staff for not getting them to buy in, and the previous staff for not making sure that the players did what was best for Michigan regardless of the coach. This is an area where I have the utmost respect for RR because the holdover players have been all in for Michigan as an institution and as a TEAM. The guys from 08 could learn a thing or 2 from the current team.
As for the alumni, I recall a very popular website that had been around since 05 called sackcarr.com and open discussion of why M needed a change. We got the change and some hated it. There will always be a portion of the fan base that isnt happy unless we are winning the B1G and beating tuos year in and out. The opposition RR faced was unfortunate and unwarranted in many instances, but winning cures all. He didnt win and now he's gone. It happened, it's over, time to support Hoke and THE TEAM.
I think RR was set to win 9 games this year which means he probably would have won 8 (before getting fired). 10 wins would certainly be overachieving in my opinion and I don't see it happening this year.
Okay, if you insist. I will book it. And for a guy who mischaracterized the yearly expectations for Rich Rodriguez by the proprietors of MGoBlog, your asking us to "book it" just might be a very rich source of humor.
I think Hoke and his staff have done a good job of selling the transition.
The sell is easier: transitioning to pro-style will help everyone get to the next level. The recievers, the tight ends, the running backs, and the entire defense all have something to gain. Denard and Devin may have been more likely Heisman contenders under Rodriguez, but even Florida brought Scot Loeffler in to help prepare Tebow for the NFL. (After Saturday, anybody think we may need a QB coach?) Getting to the next level has to be on Denard's mind.
That said, Spring Practice has just ended. We are not to September 3rd yet.
Ann Arbor in general took a huge hit, not just M fans....in my opinion. Not just the treatment of RR as a coach, which was reprehensible and inexcusable, from day one, but the treatment of his family, Rita being shunned because of her clothes/hair and his kids being tormented at school. I thought AA and M fans were above that sort of thing, but apparently not. Funny thing is, if it they were African-American instead of West Virginian, AA liberals would have been falling all over themselves to accept them. My opinion.
Former players 'coming back' should never have left. All the rhetoric about Hoke appreciating tradition more than RR is just BS and part of the 'Hoke is Great!' PR machine.
I don't care what anyone here says now, there was a HUGE segment of the fan base that wanted RR to fail from day one and openly acted in a manner detrimental to his success. The same fans now acting like anybody not supporting Hoke 100% and without reservation is somehow less than a fan. Shoe, meet other foot.
I like Hoke as a person, but he clearly is not the caliber of coach M needs and was about our 5th option. It is not impossible he will be successful, just not very probable.
I haven't been less excited about an M season as far back as I remember. I have seen enough of manball, 4 yard runs, old-style football to last 3 lifetimes and I am not at all excited to return there seeing where that got us previously. To be blunt, it just isn't going to work. the days of 'blowing people off the ball' ended a long time ago and it is too bad many M fans can't see that. Even if it works, it is boring, sooooooo boring to watch.
I used to be on here every day and craving every last bit of M football data, insight, recruiting news and analysis I could get my hands on, now I am lucky to check Brian's blog entries once a week and actually read some of them. Was skimming Google Reader for anything interesting in these forum posts, but same old, same old.
are you serious?
...what this particular story reminds me of is the recent story about a computer program that was fed some game-stats data and churned out a print story about that game. NPR did a nice job with it:
I presume that the 'bot that did this story was Larry Lage, the AP sports stringer for Detroit. Larry, there's no byline! Is that you? Why would the AP deprive you of a byline?
Anyway, I guess there's no stopping these stories. Even though they are boring tripe that hardly scratches the surface. Easy, uncomplicated narratives are apparently what a lot of sportswriting is about these days. Let's at least give Larry Lage a little credit for giving Rick Leach a paragraph. As always, a dedicated college sports fan could learn 10,000% more about Michigan football from this blog, than from all of ESPN and the Associated Press put together.
You didn't "learn" any of that here. Reading Brian Cook, you'd have seen FAR more criticism of the Threet/Sheridan fiasco here, than just about anywhere else.
Here at MGoBlog, you'd have learned FAR more about the real Boren story, than anywhere in the mainstream media.
At MGoBlog, you would have read detailed, performance-based anguish over the performance of the defense under Scott Schafer, and the quandry over whether to fire him or not. ALL sides were expressed. And to his eternal credit, there are few Michigan-centric writers anywhere who expressed greater doubt and caution about the hiring of Greg Robinson, than Brian Cook and his MGoColleagues. Robinson was a classic cautionary tale from BEFORE the time he was announced. It was all here, for people with some semblance of reading comprehension, which apparently excludes you.
Of course my personal favorite moment in MGoHistory (and I mention this only in the hope that it will piss you off), was when, at the conclusion of the Monday Press Conference on August 31, 2009, when Rich Rodriguez was responding to the previous day's Sunday Free Press story, Brian Cook was in attendance, and was asking Mark Snyder, as the presser broke up, how exactly Snyder and Rosenberg had come to the conclusion that practice time had been exceeded by vast numbers of hours; Snyder turned his back on Brian and walked away, wordlessly.
... that Brian's pre-season reviews of our defense were alarmingly pessimistic, and everyone forgot that by week 4 of the past two seasons only to have it come crashing down around them in the Big Ten schedule.
There is a lot of homerism, but Section 1 is right - the level of analysis around every game (openly critical of coaching many times), all aspects of how we got to the level of depth we have on the team, various views on our odds of winning, etc. make this blog one of the deepest places to get information on Michigan Football. (I'll bet our opponents' GA coaching staff use MGoBlog as an information source in preparing for games.)
Here we go again....
You would think people would learn after the first 50 articles like this. Also, what's with the people angry about Hoke getting positive press? Who cares if it's not fair, positive press is something that has been lacking of late.
I don't think anyone's angry about the positive press (at least, I'm not... I'm all for Michigan being built up instead of torn down), but at the same time, contrasting it with all the negative reporting that RR received is just mind-boggling. I don't understand how two men can receive such different initial treatment. So basically, I'm not mad that people are (probably) over-inflating Hoke, but I'm still kind of mad that people worked so hard to tear down RR. Sure, the guy dug his own grave, but he was treated like crap from the beginning. I think I'm within my rights to still be pissed that the "Michigan family" could be so closed-minded (considering I'm a part of it).
Good points, and it was an unfortunate situation, but I'm just past the point of caring. I just feel like many mgobloggers are unable to move on, and that is why posts like these come about. I don't think I can take another 5 months of talk about RichRod. It just doesn't matter anymore.
The problem is -- what can we talk about for the next five months? That spring game did nothing to calm the fears some of us have about Borges and Hoke. (Even RR fans wanted the D situation to be addressed; Michigan finally opened the checkbook and it looks like it's addressed.) Hoke's resume (and the resume of guys like Hecklinski and Ferrigno) isn't going to change over the next five months. And we have Brandon in our face about how now we're going to play Michigan football, and the media telling us that Hoke will recruit tough players (anyone here think Vincent Smith isn't tough? Taylor Lewan not tough?) -- it makes me want to vomit.
To building a football program is getting the players to buy into it. That's what he's trying to do, why do you have a problem with that?
They shout Hoo-ah all the time. In basic, when they are running they have their running songs. This is no different.
I really want to talk about this more.
Soon after Rodriguez replaced retiring coach Lloyd Carr, some former players returned to campus but a slew seemed to stay away.
"I can't tell you why, but I think it's because he didn't value the tradition like coach Hoke does," said Hart, an Indianapolis Colts running back. "Rich Rod let you come back, but he never really valued the tradition of Michigan. Coach Hoke is all about tradition."
Huh; that's an interesting theory, Mike. That Coach Rodriguez "didn't value the tradition..." Or even, "he never really valued the tradition..." "Never"?
What I'd expect, is for some decent, ordinary reporter to simply ask: Mike, we've heard that sort of comment from a small number of guys who played under Coach Carr. It would be helpful to everybody, if we could understand what you are talking about. Which "traditions" did Coach Rodriguez not "value"? How should he have "valued" them more? Do you agree, Mike, that there were some inexplicably damaging and self-defeating things said, along the lines of Braylon Edwards' "Lloyd Carr's University of Michigan" line? What do you say about those things? Did those statements "value the tradition"?
Well, half of what you propose is leading, and the writer (you) inserting themself into the question, putting words into his mouth, then asking him to accept or reject them.
Further, asking him to confirm your negative words for a team-mate of his and possible friend will never happen.
Third, you seem to think that Hart had any interest other than advancing boiler-plate, AD-approved talking-point that you'll hear almost anyone with a Michigan polo spout with a dead look behind their eyes.
You're angry because the media reported a point of view that you happen to disagree with, and you wish that you had a similar microphone.
"Mike Hart, when you claim that Coach Rodriguez didn't 'value the tradition,' what are you talking about? Can you please be specific?"
what's not fine is the portion where you propose a denunciation of Braylon Edwards be ventriloquized for him to accept or reject.
"Lloyd Carr's University of Michigan"?
And if Mike Hart doesn't like the question, he can always decline to answer. But the reason it becomes relevant, and the reason to at least ask the question, is to compare the understanding of "tradition," between a Coach who allegedly didn't get it, and a player who is now central to the supposed new-old family feeling.
I'm merely saying that no trained journalist would ask a question that ventriloquizes the answer they want to hear.
You're really big on being a watchdog for the media, so I'm amused that you're advocating it.
Since you seem to be confused about what part I'm referring to, it's this:
Do you agree, Mike, that there were some inexplicably damaging and self-defeating things said, along the lines of Braylon Edwards' "Lloyd Carr's University of Michigan" line? What do you say about those things? Did those statements "value the tradition"?
Journalists ask more leading questions than lawyers do! And they should!
Now I suppose, that if I were a simple wire service beat-writer, the questions might be:
- Mike, what do you mean by Coach Rodriguez having not understood "tradition" at Michigan? Can you give us some specifics?
- Mike, many of the supporters of Coach Rodriguez have been very angry at Braylon Edwards, for numerous comments he's made; do you have anything to say about those comments, in relation to "tradition" or loyalty?
If I had a bylined article or a column to write, I'd personally want to see if I could isolate Braylon Edwards and see to what extent I could get other players to condemn those comments. Journalists do that all the time; asking people to stake out a position, or to condemn an outlier position, by inquiring for a statement on the record, about what somebody else said. Not a single day in the media goes by without that occurring.
To what purpose, other than to perpetuate this asinine fight? Do you wish people would be rough on Hoke?
I do wish people would be rough on all of the individuals who made life much more difficult for Coach Rodriguez. Be rough on Rosenberg, and Snyder, and Drew Sharp. I wish people would be rough on Braylon, and on Stan Edwards. I wish people would not give a pass to statements like those from Morgan Trent, or these statements from Mike Hart. How "rough" to be on those guys just depends. Just ask good, hard questions. I cannot think of a more vague, question-begging assertion than, 'Coach Rodriguez just didn't get the tradition.' That's lame.
I will always like the stand-up guys. The guys who stood up to be counted for Coach Rodriguez. The Rick Leaches. The Larry Footes. Brandstatter and Beckmann. I'd love to have a complete, exhaustive, honor-roll of those guys. The other guys would probably be too chickenshit to allow themselves to be on an opposing list.
who simply thinks that in the best interest of the University, we treated Coach Rodriguez badly, and that the University made a mistake in terminating his contract early. I enjoy Michigan football, and it's just my opinion (everybody gets to have an opinion) that Michigan football did the wrong thing by firing him.* I appreciate the fact that David Brandon has publicly recognized that Michigan had made mistakes in the past, in failing to offer enough money to attract top assistant coaches; Brandon is right about that.
In 2010, all that I did was to choose to support our current head football coach (Rodriguez), over the disloyal and disruptive comments of some ex-players. Some immature and not particularly bright ex-players at that.
The rightful verdict on Braylon as a football player is that he's brilliant. The rightful verdict on Braylon's off-field judgment is that he's a prick.
*It is amazing to me, the extent to which people are swayed by events. Just a few short months ago, in December, there was wild enthusiasm for Jim Harbaugh and an overwhelming sense of expectation that he'd be hired as the next Michigan Head Coach. Michael Rosenberg in the Free Press and Lynn Henning in the Detroit News were practically guaranteeing it. People on this Board were speculating about everything from how much we'd be paying Harbaugh, to how many Stanford recruits he'd bring with him. And in all of that, the subtext -- at least here -- was that clearly, if Michigan didn't hire Harbaugh, the next best thing would be to retain Rich Rodriguez, with (finally) a new quality DC who was not a third- or fourth-best choice. It was basically:
- Get Harbaugh.
- Keep Rodriguez
That wasn't my choice; I was always in favor of retaining Coach Rod. I had nothing against Harbaugh, as I have nothing against Hoke. But that was the "popular" state of affairs, then.
And just reflect now, on how much things have changed, with nothing more than a few press conferences, and a million dollars for a new Defensive Coordinator. And, most of all, an adoring press.
And no reporter, by the way, would insert the adjectives you used to describe Edwards' statement. They would quote it, and ask for a response.
Biased reporting and leading questions are OK, just so long as the reporter shares your views.
fact remains people didn't like the fact RR treated the OSU game to be 'as important' as any other. he knew we cared but he didn't jump up and down about it. simple as that. people want a cheerleader of core elements of the school. RR acknowledged them but didn't cater to them. simple as that. consider it dumb, i dont gaf. the fact your incessant drivel is forcing me to defend a comment i don't even fully agree with shows just how far you've gone with this incessant crap.
oh and btw - Hart wasn't even one of "those guys." he even poked at them a bit with his comment by noting he never distanced himself in those 3 years unlike others. yet he owes you an explanation. wtf?
Thanks for calling it OSU. Getting sick of the "scUM"-esque "Ohio."
scUM is just troll-y and immature. "Ohio" or tsio isn't much different than Woody Hayes calling Michigan "that school up north." You may be sick of it, understandably, but it's nowhere near the trolljerk status of scUM, Spartina, or O$U.
If the point of it is to needle or irritate our rival by using an incorrect name for them, well, I'd rather just let our play on the field do the talking. That's what I was getting at.
Wow! You play for Michigan. Cool!
like how their own band spells it?
Yes, I consider all of that dumb. Thanks anyway.
I agree. I'm sure he's relieved to not have to deal with the full of shit AD and former players who abandoned Michigan in its time of need.
So can Braylon. They should just be clear, and be specific. Braylon has said, and done, such a variety and volume of dumb shit, one might think he'd just want to shut the fuck up for his own sake.
These are highly visible guys, who should be used to answering questions and appearing in front of the press. They're not particularly good at it; hell, they are just football players. But they aren't immune, and they really ought to know by now, that they will be scrutinized very carefully when they comment on controversial matters.
They don't need to ask my permission to say any damned thing they want to. But why wouldn't Mike Hart expect a follow up question, to ask what he means by Coach Rodriguez "not valuing the tradition"?
Who's embarassment was it? Yours? The dudes in the NFL? Fuck no.
I guarantee you that their level of embarassment was nothing compared to the people that fucking lived it - which is precisely why it's shitty that they had people turn their backs on them.
This is what RVB was talking about - where was "the Micigan family" then?
None of that was as embarrassing as that fiasco of a two weeks that was the start of the 2007 season. I get way more shit about losing to App State than about 3-9, Miss. State or anything that happened under RR.
So now we're bashing Lloyd Carr? Really? Give me a fucking break. There's a reason you have negative points.
Everyone has a scapegoat.
Nobody can accept the fact that everyone tried their best, and it didn't quite fucking work out.
We need conspiracies and asinine witch-hunts, and assignations of blame to non-sporting-entities like the FREEP.
Lloyd lost some games. I'm sure he didn't want to. I'm sure he wanted Michigan to continue to win after he left. I'm sure RR wanted to win, and did everything he could to do so - it didn't work, he's gone.
Nope, just saying that losing to App. State and then getting crushed by Oregon was more embarrassing. Didn't even mention Lloyd Carr. You see, games are won and lost mostly by players and only somewhat by coaches. If the former players were so embarrassed about losing 9 times, etc. under RR, well, they still owed RR their support. Because some of those former players were mostly responsible for the worst loss in program history. I didn't abandon Michigan then and they shouldn't have abandoned Michigan during the RR era.
1)they were national champs in FCS and
2)who is giving you shit? Notre Dame or MSU fans? Pretty sure they lost to that very same Michigan team. OSU fans? Why would they need to gloat about Appy State when they can just bring up their own head-to-head success
1. And Michigan was returning most starters from a team that spent most of 2006 ranked #2 and was ranked #3 to 5 depending on what polled you looked at going into the App. State game. There was no excuse for what happened in that game. None. It wasn't the loss that was embarrassing so much as the arrogance, laziness and sense of entitlement that led to it coupled with the failure to get up to play Oregon after getting knocked the f out the week before. I don't know about you, but the Oregon players taking their sledgehammer to the block M at the end of 5 touchdown drubbing was about the most embarrassing moment I've ever experienced at Michigan stadium. Well, it would have been were it not for App. State.
2. Who gives a f*** what ND fans or MSU fans think? It was every fan of every team in the country for the whole f'n season and people still bring it up. But now that you mention OSU, it was pretty embarrassing to have lost to them 6 out of the last 7 [EDIT: actually I think it was 5 of 6 by that point, sorry] games by the time that water-logged mess of a game was played in which we put up about 70 yards of total offense.
Look, my only point is that losing is always bad, but there are degrees of bad and the losses in 2007 stick out in my mind. The wins were all the sweeter b/c of them, just like they were in 2008, 2009 and 2010. All I know was I supported the team and the coach every single year I was a fan, student and alum, even when we punted from the opposing 35 and even when we decided without the use of any common sense to install the 3-3-5 midseason. Supporting the team, no matter who is the coach, is the least that should be expected from any fan, former players included.
We'll have to agree to disagree about what was more embarrassing. But here are some facts for you. Michigan was a top 5 team when it suffered that loss to open 2007. VT was ranked 13 coming off of a loss to Boise, before which game it was ranked 10.
And we won by 6 points in an exciting game that was pretty close. I don't think we throttled Florida.
We way overlooked App State, and it was the definition of why people wanted Lloyd Carr to move on. The Horror, the Oregon game, and the Rose Bowl against USC: we didn't open up and score enough points to win. The Cap One Bowl is exactly how we should have played against USC, App State, and Oregon ....
Anyway, outside the State of Michigan, the last three years are looked at as the direct result of the loss to App State. The most embarassing loss ever causes huge upheaval where the winningest program lurches around for three plus years. Any kid on a ski lift in Boone will tell you that they staggered the giant (and they do often).
Sure there have been highights (beating MSU in '07, ND in '07, '09 and '10, Wisconsin in '08, and Illinois in '10), but by and large Michigan football has been in the mud since The Horror, or maybe the Rose Bowl before that. To state otherwise would be revisionist history.
Let's be clear here. The reason App State seems more embarrassing is because we were a good team had high expectations. Even though we lost, we still finished with what a 8-5 season. The reason you don't get shit about the Miss. State game or 3-9 is because our rivals feel pity for us because of how far we have fallen. It's funny how a lot of people here think we were one or 2 seasons away from being great, but the perception from fans of other teams we played were that we were a long ways off. So basically I will take embarrassing over irrelevant anyday.
My thoughts exactly. A strong opinion is hardly ban worthy....
As such I propose a "New Rule": When someone calls it (The Ban Hammer) out by name I think we should damn well give it to them. Just out of common courtesy!
In the immortal words of Sergeant Hartman - "If God would have wanted you [banned] from here he would have [banned] your ass by now, wouldn't he?"
To you. I support the team no matter what. I supported RR. But the last three years were embarrassing. Fact.
I...what? There are like eight posts rolled up into one giant, disjointed post.
These bandwagon "tradition" fans are the same ones who seem to know the least about the team and seem to remember little of what actually happened in the past. You may remember these fans from such former fans as "the cupboard wasn't bare this is the University of Michigan goddammit!" fans.
I generally try not to speak or think for anyone
But, you want a peanut butter sandwich right now.
for you to understand.
Your insinuation that the current players didn't want RR back, has about the same validity behind it as my assumption that I know what you are currently craving.
This is the dumbest shit I have read in a while. I am sure that the entire team, 90% of which has been recruited by RichRod, is relieved he was fired. Sometimes I really hate reading the dumb shit on this board.
Honestly, it doesn't matter why it happened, how it happened, or who was at fault. All that matters right now is that it seems to be getting better. Absolutely, some people fell into the crack as the rift grew, and that sucks, but it's over.
Seriously, can we please stop trying to explain it, blame people, and defend people? We can all agree that it existed, right? And we can all agree that it was NOT GOOD for the program, right? Let's take a step back and decide whether or not it's getting better. From my vantage point, it certainly does seem to be.
Are we supposed to hate Mike Hart now too?
I just farted and it stinks horribly
some gas-ex should be able to solve that problem for you.
or you can go with the old school remedy and just take a shit.
I believe this sub-thread is more appropriate for the "silent but deadly" thread from yesterday.
I never got the RR didn't want us here meme, and I think its a big line of bullshit. Did RR understand all the traditions when he came in, no. But he tried to embrace them and brought in things that had left. I seen an article the other day that former players sure did enjoy the third annual alumni game that RR started.
The current players have every right to be pissed at the past players who didn't come back. The current players needed way more support then past teams, and having them around more often during RR's tenure couldn't have hurt. The reality of it is the former players should have been there regardless. It wasn't like they were unwelcome and RR told them to get the fuck out.
"But he tried to embrace them and brought in things that had left."
Honestly, I loved the potential excitement of what could have been under RR. However, how do you know that he tried to embrace them? He could have totally driven the players away in person or in private meetings. Do you know with 100% certainty that he didn't drive the initial wedge. Do you know how he acted behind closed doors? Do you even know what traditions Mike Hart is talking about?
You can't accept the the line Mike Hart says about 'it being a welcoming place' as fact and not accept the 'he didn't embrace the tradition' part.
Why do the current players have any more right to be pissed off than former players who might not have liked the noise coming out of Barwis' group about the weight room and training, Rodriguez calling the Michigan Man tradition hyperbole, the dismissal of all but one of the coaches they had worked with or known, the national press Rodriguez got when, among other things, he sent his grad assistant to deliver his letter of resignation, etc. etc. etc.
So many here had no problem measuring every damn thing Rodriguez did against Carr. From the end of the country club atmosphere, to the press accessibility, to the end of his offensive scheme, to all of the championships we would compete for. Few stood up to defend Carr and yet when the shit hit the fan, it was Carr's fault for not coming to the rescue, for not helping Rodriguez? And so many here continue to dismiss the Michigan Man tradition as irrelevant bullshit when that's the very thing that knits together all these players whose loyalty you are testing.
As far as I'm concerned Rodriguez had a tough go. He was Martin's third choice and there was no more Bo to protect the head coach as there was for Carr who also had to deal with an element that didn't want him. Martin was a weak ass AD when it came to PR and understanding what made the football program tick so Rodriguez got no help from him. Lastly, I don't think Rodriguez asked for help, either out of arrogance or ignorance, he didn't understand how to work the politics of a program Michigan's size. Hoke's experience in the program helps him immensely, so does Brandon who is all about marketing. .
It's seems to me like alot of the players who had issues with Rodriguez were Carr guys. Maybe they were turned off by comments that Rodriguez made talking about "the situation I inherited" and "I didn't know how bad things were before I got here" and other things to that effect. To alot of these guys for who Lloyd Carr is probably a father figure, that was probably insulting to them. Maybe they felt like RichRod was denigrating Carr to make himself look better.
It's kind of an insult to them too. The fact that the program that they bled for and sweat for, just wasn't good enough in RichRod's eyes. In effect by cleaning house in the way that he did, Rodriguez may have given the perception that he didn't value the tradition that Michigan had prior to his arrival. Not saying that this was the case, just that they may have had that perception. And who knows to what extent RichRod made an effort to reach out behind close doors.
Then you also have stories like the one with Morgan Trent saying that RichRod was talking bad about him to NFL scouts. Alot of recent players may have been tight with him and may not have taken offense by something like that.
Really though, Rich Rodriguez wasn't popular with former players for one major reason, the results on the field. If he had won he would have been hailed as the second coming and the rejuvination that Michigan needed. It's not like he wasn't complict in alot of this. We have no idea what kind of reaching he did behind closed doors.
With that said I'm not going to hate on former players for having an opinion. They bled and they sweat for the program, they have more of stake in the program than any of us. They do deserve a say on the programs future, though ideally behind closed doors.
If I could rewrite history it would go as follows:
1. Michigan beats OSU in the #1 vs. #2 game from '06
2. Michigan beats Florida in the MNC that same year
3. Lloyd retires after the '06 season on top of the world
4. Long and Henne leave for the NFL foregoing their 5th and 4th years respectively
5. Hart stays and mentors Ryan Mallett through his Freshman year
6. Lloyd tells Bill Martin to hire Brady Hoke.
7. We avoid the App State loss
Your #6 is the only thing that would have made less sense than hiring DeBord to replace Carr after 2007.
is no more apparent than in this thread. All I know is, it's going to take a TON of winning to suture this gaping gash*.
*shameless anatomical reference
Unless and until Mike Hart gives us examples showing in detail just exactly how Rich Rodriguez "never really valued the tradition of Michigan," this is what he really means:
"he never really valued the tradition of Michigan" = "he never really won enough games."