A point of view on some of the Rich talk
So I left the Big House disappointed again today. But one thing popped into my head again and basically got confirmed by the play on the field more than it has been all year. This isn't Rich Rodriguez's fault.
This teams perception in relation to RR is distorted. BIG TIME. A million intelligent opinion pieces, Chart & graphs can't explain to those who don't want to hear the truth exactly what the truth is, so its almost impossible and completely exhausting after all these months trying to do so. The most frustrating part after today is how so many cannot see the big picture just by common sense!!?
Michigan Wolverine Football just put 36 points on the board today. AAAAAAND they did it against Purdue. Not a power house. When you put up 36 on a team like Purdue you should win. In college football 36 points, especially in the Big 10 is a win a large majority of the time. But it wasn't. And it wasn't in the Iowa game at Iowa when we put up 30 (that could've been almost 50), And it barely was against Indiana when we put up another 36. Hell we were about to roll on sorry ass Illinois until the goal line stop and subsequent easy Illini TD that changed the game immediately after. . . What I am getting at is that this defense is as bad as everyone with a football brain has been telling you that it is, but most of you won't listen.
I don't give a motherphuck if you dreamers who are making little wishes either out loud or to yourself on the side of your beds at night could get Kelly or even Meyer to leave Florida for christ sakes, NOBODY, absolutely NOBODY is going to win with a D as bad as this. And if you would open your eyes, you would see this isn't anywhere near the team of last year on offense. RR is getting this program headed to where he said he would offensively. Yeah they shit the bed in a couple games this year bad, but they are VERY VERY young AND run by a teenage kid who is one of only 5 true freshman starting at this level in 2009. As far as I am concerned we need to really just use common sense and realize that the problem isn't Rich, its what he has on the field on D. Has he made a few mistakes? Yes, all great coaches do. Has he done a good job? I don't see how you can argue truthfully. Because if you put a semi-decent secondary in we are seriously 3-4 wins better right now. We beat MSU. We beat probably beat Iowa. We definitely beat Purdue & Illinois last week.
A friend of mine sent me a text after the game today & it said- "2 words Bryan Kelly" - SERIOUSLY????!!!! Ok then lets say we get Kelly. Unless hes a 5 star safety or can be in 3 places at the same time then whats he going to do?? How is he going to coach walk ons and depleted talent levels to wins? Hes not. He won't. He can't.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:58 PM ^
What's another tear-jerking excuse-laden post and opinion? Wow--at least Rich Rodriguez is good at one thing: Convincing Michigan fans that being the worst team in the Big Ten is never the fault of the coach.
Man, to be paid 3 mill, have a negotiated 4 mill buyout, and to stink things up this bad and still have a sorry-ass fan base plead my case.
Where the HELL do these jobs come from? I WANT ONE!
November 7th, 2009 at 9:05 PM ^
How did you lose 200 MgoPoints in a few hours?
.
.
.
Oh... now I see!
November 7th, 2009 at 9:36 PM ^
Points don't matter as long as you have over 20.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:09 PM ^
Then whats your sorry ass on this blog for? FAIL
November 7th, 2009 at 9:10 PM ^
Thanks for breaking out your BS detector! Otherwise I'd fall for such reasonable thinking as having talented players and depth on defense is important to winning college football games! : D
November 7th, 2009 at 9:13 PM ^
I agree. So what he can put up 33 points per game, if you are giving up 36 that is a problem. The last time I checked he was the head coach and is responsible for all phases of the game.. not just the offense. Where else beside General Motors could you perform that poorly for two years and keep your job.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:00 PM ^
We put 42 points on Purdue last year. Northern Illinois managed to put 28 on them a few weeks ago (oh and they held them to 21 points, but I guess NIU must have 5-star safety recruits). The fact that we put some points on Purdue does not make a lot of us feel any better about the state of program, nor does the fact the we basically have an offensive coordinator as a coach, nor does the fact that our coaches regularly yell at each other on the sidelines like a bunch of knuckleheads.
November 8th, 2009 at 12:06 AM ^
notre dame
November 7th, 2009 at 11:14 PM ^
Last straw. Your posts on MGoBlog aren't douchey; you are an actual, absolute douchebag. I honest-to-god shudder to think what your life is like, KOB. If I worked with you, and you spoke out loud like you do on these boards (as in the delivery of what you say), I'd get fired for punching my secretary (you) or the IT guy, or whatever the fuck you do.
For the people on the "prayer to the banhammer" thread who defended this guy: do you really enjoy this? Is this fucking discourse? Not only that, but please, let me remind you that HOW you say something is often times far more important than what you say.
KOB, you, my friend, are a douche. I cannot in any way imagine you, in real life, are a Michigan fan. I hate that we have supertrolls even here, on MGoBlog.
EDIT: I realize this severe language and personal call out of a poster is against MGoDecorum. I'm sorry- neg away. If you disagree, then god, I can't imagine what it takes for someone to say to be a douchebag to you guys (and gals). You're responsible for what you say. And more importantly, how you say it. Accountability.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:57 PM ^
richrods offense has been alright, i think we're all in agreement there, especially with a freshman qb.
but he also hired scott schaffer. he also hired greg robinson. did you hear troy woolfolk today!? he said it like 'no one knows whats going on (on defense).' thats bad coaching any way you look at it. he needs to get his crap together there.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:58 PM ^
Right now it's a defensive issue. However, when is that going to get turned around? I don't see it next year, in fact I think we may be worse on defense next year before turning it around in 2011. Our offense may be better equipped next year to score 40+ points a game or at least I hope they are because they are going to need to.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:07 PM ^
It can only get better when you have actual scholarship players competing with each other for playing time. This team has four scholarship linebackers that aren't freshmen. Of the three starters, one is a last-minute converted safety and the other two have been benched. The secondary has three non-freshman guys on scholarship (not enough to field a team) and one of them is Mike Williams.
People who ignore the role talent and experience (two things we have very little of in the back seven) play on a defense don't know shit about football.
In 2011 the defense will be pretty good. Until then, you only have to look at the roster to know why they suck.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:16 PM ^
That's why i'm so scared that next year's defense is going turn in a similar performance. Are experienced walk ons better than inexperience scholarship players? I have no idea.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:21 PM ^
It's not just an defensive issue. The offense does not sustain long time consuming drives that keeps the defense off the field. One of the best drives they have had this years was with Denard in the fourth quarter against Iowa. This type of offense runs better when you have a quarterback that is more suited to run than throw and as much as I love Tate he is not the man best suited for the job. I hope they start Denard next week and let him take his lumps for an entire game, at this point what is another loss.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:32 PM ^
You're using the Denard drive against Iowa as your example of sustaining long, time-consuming drives? Yeah, it was a time-consuming drive, but that was the one place where we needed a quick score. Instead, it took over 6 minutes (with only 9 min left in the game) for Denard to take us down the field while we were down 2 scores.
We scored 36 points today. Our offense isn't the problem right now.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:49 PM ^
When your average TOP on offense is around 2:30 it causes major problems for your defense. Last years defense had a lot of Senior leadership and they still got torched because of the same issue. As much as we did not like Lloyd at times he understood that ball control is key. A concept that RR does not believe in
November 7th, 2009 at 10:04 PM ^
Can you imagine the time of possession with Denard starting at QB? It's gonna be even less because we're going 3 and out most of the time when opposing defenses stack everyone in the box and defense the rush. Denard has shown that he's not ready to start at QB. Yeah, he can run a little, but he's fumble prone and can't throw. He's got a 50% completion rate with 4 interceptions with only 22 passes thrown. He's not the answer.
We're averaging over 30 points per game this season. Again, offense isn't the problem. The problem is our defense is ranked #80 in the nation in yards given up per game. We give up almost 400 yards per game. The problem is our defense can't get off the field because they can't stop any opposing offense.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:40 PM ^
You act like this team is playing for a national title..... The season is over; get the guy some experience, what is it going to hurt. To blame all of this on the defense is not the answer. The play just keeps getting sloppier every week. The special teams, the offense, the defense, let us stop blaming the kids who are working their tails off and put the blame where it belongs on the coaches. RR in all of his pressers keeps saying" were not executing" well, who's fault is that. This team has enough talent to win at least seven games. I think there are a lot of schools who would love to have a starting defense with BG,MM, and DW . The offense is loaded with running backs, a decent offensive line, good receivers and tight ends... the kids are not executing because the coaching staff is not putting the kids in the right situations.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:51 PM ^
The season is over; get the guy some experience, what is it going to hurt.
Any remaining chance we have of making it into a bowl game?
November 7th, 2009 at 9:04 PM ^
You can justify the ocuppation of Afghanistan and Iraq too, put all the charts and garbage you want together. Doesn't matter, the the results tell the story. Just like how our performace on the field does too. How much do we have to lose before we get back to the normal before (In both cases)? ALL that matters is wins and losses. The only time it didn't was when Marshall lost its ENTIRE team. Don't give me diaries and charts and all this as a response, because I've seen what ive needed to see. 1 Conference win.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:10 PM ^
I feel bad that Rich Rodriguez has disappointed you. I'm also sorry that you don't know anything about college football. If you don't want to know the facts and just want to complain, that is fine, but know that you are just being intentionally ignorant of reality. That is not an admirable quality.
Feel free to go watch some other team every Saturday if supporting Michigan is so difficult for you.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:28 PM ^
1 conference win isn't a fact? They've lost to Purdue and Illinois. Hurry up man, the lemminings are seperating, hurry back to the pack.
November 7th, 2009 at 11:06 PM ^
Lemmings, dumbass. Learn not only how to spell, but how many syllables are in a fucking word. Jesus. And the Afghanistan and Iraq shit has no place here.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:13 PM ^
You've "seen enough"? Good. Go away. Forever. Find a new team to become a fan of and go infect their message boards with your inane rantings.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:29 PM ^
If Rich Rodriguez walked off a cliff, would that become the next accepted norm, and would you procede to follow?
November 7th, 2009 at 11:08 PM ^
What are "Lemminings"? Also, what are your thoughts on geopolitics, U.S. foreign policy, and string theory?
Don't answer. Please. Just learn how to identify what you're talking about and/or spell it. Please. Can we get a minimum age for posting on here, please?
November 7th, 2009 at 9:14 PM ^
You know, that totally makes sense. My wife can't dunk a basketball. Ignore the fact that she is 5' 2". Muggsy Bogues was only 5' 3" and he could totally dunk, so my wife must be a complete failure at basketball. I mean, just look at the numbers, the genders, the experiences, etc. She can't dunk, so she sucks at dunking.
Maybe a dumb example, but you can't just look at A->B and ignore the "->". You clearly have your opinion about UM, and that is fine. But don't come on a board where people put real effort into analyzing why this team is struggling and spout off with "I've seen what ive needed to see" crap. Go to mlive or freep for that. We get it - you hate this team losing, and you'll like them when they win. Glad to meet you, don't forget to shut the door when you leave.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:30 PM ^
"She can't dunk, so she sucks at dunking."
Wow man.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:23 PM ^
Please, never, ever compare football with war(s) regardless of context. Football is a game and every M player and fan went home disappointed, but they went home. Your opinion on something you likely know very little about should not be brought into a comparison with M football.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:24 PM ^
I hear ya. It's frustrating. While I am not a fan of comparing a game to war, I get your point.
But the charts and garbage you dismiss so lightly help explain the story as well. There's a confluence of choices and events that add up to deficiencies on our team. I don't think they excuse the poor performance on the field but they do at least help us make some sense out of it. They also point to the possible solutions to get us back to winning.
1 Conference win? Yeah... wow... that's heavy. I don't like that stat, but it is what it is. I want us to get better and that's gonna take time. I'm all in... even if right now it's disappointing.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:07 PM ^
How many points are we going to score when the defense is even average, and we have a veteran offense? I pray we give this guy five years. If Amaker got six, Rich deserves at least ten, even though I think five is enough to know. Remember how pissed Bo was at Illinois for only giving Moeller 2 or 3 years.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:29 PM ^
Thank you Steve! After reading many posts today that are so short-sighted and impatient, thank you for common sense and vision. I'm with ya on the hope that he gets at least 5 years.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:13 PM ^
Amaker got "extra" time because he took over a program recovering from a huge scandal. In fact, wasn't his contract extended by the same number of years that the program was put on probation?
Whether the majority of the posters on this site like it or not, any Michigan football coach is going to be on a shorter leash than any Michigan basketball coach.
It also isn't going to help Rodriguez's cause that the person who hired him is now a lame duck.
And to preempt the inevitable post citing President Coleman's statement of support--contrary to popular belief that statement was not some sort of response to the Illinois debacle. It in fact was made before the IL game.
And if you've read the above and instantly concluded that I'm calling for Rodriguez's immediate firing, you're not only wrong but also displaying an amazing level of defensiveness.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:12 PM ^
of idiotic posts, these and the ones stating that he needs to go now. How can someone win when they lose? That is what you are saying. I'd say that these posts are more annoying than the fire RR ones. If he wins then he's great. If he loses it's not his fault? Jebus
November 7th, 2009 at 9:14 PM ^
If Rodriguez is losing in year 4 and 5 (like the portly fellow in South Bend), then the complaining is justified. Losing with a true freshman quarterback and a defense with no depth and multiple walk-ons in the starting lineup (when the head coach has only been here a year and a half to recruit) is not his fault. It is what happens to every single coach in America faced with that situation.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:31 PM ^
You're saying that if the team does this next year it's not going to be his fault then? If it's not his fault when we lose then he doesn't deserve the praise when we win.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:38 PM ^
I think most people give coaches way too much praise and blame. I judge coaches by the program they build over time and Rich Rod hasn't had a chance to do that yet.
When virtually all of the team's struggles can be directly attributed to the unbelievable lack of talent the coach inherited, then yes, I don't think being a .500 team is his fault.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:57 PM ^
is a problem, yes, but losing close games like this are a coaching problem because there is always a bonehead call from coach that results in us losing. Although we may have deficiencies on defense we are in the games late. That would lead to the conclusion that what we have is good enough on that given day.
There have been quite a few calls that cost us games this year. Fake punt, Denard going in when we need to pass and not kicking a field goal w/ 4 somethin left. You could also say the same for the Illinois game. Take the points (field goal) and live to fight another day.
This team has not shown much progression after the first 4 games. They come out strong and then fade into the sunset when the 2nd half begins. I would love to know why that happens.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:09 AM ^
The fake punt was not called it was Zoltan's decision. If they score the TD at Illinois Juice's day is done and we get the backup. Not to mention Illinois probably quits by the way did you see their score yesterday? I'll have to assume the Denard reference is concerning the Iowa game and he had just led the team to a TD. Yes, he should have thrown the ball to Odoms but it's not like Tate was having the best of games.
As for the progession after the first four games, losing Molk was huge and the Oline hasn't been the same since. Who did we beat in the first four games that was any good? ND just lost to Navy and could easily end up with 5 losses. This is still the youngest team in Michigan history and they seem to have lost their confidence and when adversity hits they aren't handling it very well. The last two games this has really been evident with the goal line stand followed by the 99 yards drive against Illinois. Yesterday it was the option pick off followed by a score and then the onside.
Believe me I'm not happy about what's going on but they're my team and I'll go down cheering for them.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:06 PM ^
If Rodriguez goes 7-6 in year 4 (2011) and is 8-3 with one game to go in 2012--that's it?
November 7th, 2009 at 10:09 PM ^
If we go 7-6 in 2011, Rodriguez deserves to get axed. If that happens I will also eat my hat (I'll even let the mgoblog community vote on what hat I eat).
November 7th, 2009 at 10:14 PM ^
one of those jester hats from an amusement park with the bells on them. You'll have fun passin those later in the day.
November 7th, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^
I'll take any other suggestions and create a formal list as we approach opening kickoff in 2011.
I trust my powerful ass to blow out those bells, but I don't like the fact that everyone could hear me coming.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:40 PM ^
There are more than two kinds of idiotic posts. : P
I think everyone knows that the L's go by RR's name in the books. The point is people are looking to see if there is any hope for improvement or not. I doubt any M fans are happy with the results on the field in terms of wins and losses.
There are indicators to suggest that there is reason for hope. I don't think that it is being an apologist or saying he is winning when his team is losing. Despite the misery of another big 10 loss, I do see a better future.... with RR at the helm.
I simply suggest that given time, things will get better. There are few guarantees, but our young team has talent and will improve. Depth will be added and we will compete.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:13 PM ^
Thats just the way it is. I agree the defense is terrible. But RR shouldnt be exempt from criticism. He is the Chief Executive so to say of this football team. His recruiting, defensive philosophy, and the guys he has hired havent worked out yet. We all know he doesnt have much to work with on the defensive side, but you cant get rid of all the players, so the coach always takes the fall. Thats just how it goes.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:21 PM ^
How can you say his recruiting hasn't worked out when he's only been here a year and a half? Other than a few true sophomores, this is Lloyd Carr's team in terms of recruiting. To expect freshmen and sophomores to contribute to a winning/championship football team (especially on defense, quarterback, or in the o-line) is a lot more like wishing than expecting.
I don't think the coach should be immune from criticism, but when people's lone criticism is essentially "the team isn't playing well", they aren't criticizing, they are just belly-aching.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:37 PM ^
They say the same thing about Charlie Weise and Ty Willingham... Nice loss to Navy Today
November 7th, 2009 at 9:46 PM ^
you would start getting charlies & tys. Just sayin
November 7th, 2009 at 9:37 PM ^
I said the recruiting hasnt worked out YET. And i'm not saying I expect championship football. Is it too much to EXPECT the defense to hold their own?
November 7th, 2009 at 9:44 PM ^
Just pointing out that expecting recruiting to have worked out in year two is way too premature (and there are a lot of positives when guys like Roh, Martin, Tate, and a bunch of receivers recruited by Rodriguez are already big contributors).
And no, expecting this defense to hold its own would be misguided. If you can find an example of a defense with 7 scholarship guys for 7 spots in the back seven (including only 3 DB's) who aren't freshmen, with walk-ons starting and littered throughout the two-deep, that has even been able to hold its own, then we can expect this unit to do it.