Rich Rod, Casteel, and the Myth about Money
I realize that this board will never agree on what caused Rodriguez to fail here. However, in an effort to focus our pointless bickering on the right questions, it's time to put to bed a very persistent myth. May the following remove one source of contention from our angry but increasingly-united fanbase.
The myth:
"In 2008, Bill Martin gave Rich Rodriguez only 265,000 to hire a defensive coordinator. This amount was too low to bring Casteel or any other top defensive coordinator to Michigan, which is why the defense was so terrible. Rich Rod was set up to fail."
Ignoring the silly notion that Martin would agree to furnish a new million-dollar weightroom and pay 2.5 million of RR's buyout but simultaneously put a $265,000 cap on the DC salary, let's take a look at what other power conference teams around the country were paying their DCs in 2008.
Ohio State (Jim Heacock): 260,510
Oklahoma (Brent Venables): 210,000
USC (Nick Holt): 300,000
Oregon (Nick Aliotti): 225,000
Alabama (Kirby Smart): 360,000
LSU (Bradley Dale Peveto): 200,000
Florida (Charlie Strong): 300,000
Nebraska (Carl Pelini): 190,000
Auburn (Ted Roof): 370,000
Georgia (Willie Martinez): 220,000
Florida State (Mickey Andrews): 295,483
Washington (Ed Donatell): 334,000
Cal (Bob Gregory): 168,000
Tennessee (John Chavis): 340,000
Texas (Will Muschamp): 250,000
Va Tech (Bud Foster): 300,000
Clemson (Vic Koennig): 260,000
Average: $269,611
Even assuming Michigan refused a requested increase, which is not supported by any documented facts, the offer of 265,000 was competitive even among the nation's richest big-name programs. The fact that it produced the 109th-ranked defense in 2010 is ridiculous and a spectacular indictment of the hiring abilites of one man. His name isn't Bill Martin.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:36 PM ^
Okay, well if you're going to ignore the dictionary and define talent as "being good" at something, then yes, RR had awful talent his last year, Hoke had good talent his first year, and Hoke has awful talent this year.
October 30th, 2014 at 10:27 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 11:16 PM ^
Showed tremendous potential. Holy shit what were you watching? Constant double-digit blowouts were "tremedous potential"?
October 31st, 2014 at 11:24 AM ^
Talent: an aptitudes useful for some activity.
Aptitude: innate or acquired capacity for something.
Utah, as a team, is currently significantly more talented at the game of football than the University of Michigan.
October 31st, 2014 at 11:28 AM ^
Talent: an aptitudes useful for some activity.
Aptitude: innate or acquired capacity for something.
Utah, as a team, is currently significantly more talented at the game of football than the University of Michigan.
October 31st, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
Talent: an aptitudes useful for some activity.
Aptitude: innate or acquired capacity for something.
Utah, as a team, is currently significantly more talented at the game of football than the University of Michigan.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:14 PM ^
but if your coaching sucks(looks at Funk) it won't matter. Michigan has plenty of talent, but it needs to be coached well enough so that talent can manifest itself on the field of play.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:35 PM ^
When he had 4 NFL players on the line, we had two 1,000 yard rushers and won 11 games. Saying "Michigan has plenty of talent" based on nothing but Rivals rankings doesn't make it true.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:42 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 8:47 PM ^
I don't give coaches credit for players being good. I give coaches credit for building a program and bringing in talent. Rich Rod didn't make Denard good at running. Neither did Hoke. Same goes for Taylor Lewan and blocking.
The problem with Funk/Hoke is that the guys coming in aren't as good as the guys leaving. When we had talent, Funk/Hoke couldn't screw it up. They haven't changed, the players have.
October 30th, 2014 at 9:38 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 10:25 PM ^
Considering Casteel was his DC starting in 02 at WV and is his DC now, your point is that he was a bad coach at Michigan. That is a fucking horrible point.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:08 PM ^
Nick Saban is an amazing coach. Urban Meyer is an amazing coach. Rich Rod is not in their category.
Rich Rod had success at WVU, failed miserably at Michigan, and has done well at Arizona. He still has not won a national title and has not won a conference title since 2007. Is he a good coach? Yes. But I can't say he is better than a Dantonio or Kelly. In fact, I'd say both are ahead him now given what both have done in the past 4 years. But to be fair to RR he is only in this third season at Arizona.
I
October 30th, 2014 at 11:04 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 8:00 PM ^
The 2010 defense sucked because the roster stunk. No coordinator changes that. People arguing on either side of this issue are being dumb.
You weren't interested in finding out what RR was building, but no coach has "failed" if he gets fired when his first recruiting class are RS freshmen.
You got what you wanted. It's worked out fucking great, hasn't it?
October 30th, 2014 at 8:11 PM ^
You also forget to mention that his offenses faultered vs MSU and OSU. His vaunted offense was sputtering when it mattered most. PSU, Wisconsin, MSU, OSU...his offense jsut wasn't good enough in these games.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:17 PM ^
No shit. A 7-6 team wasn't that great. We weren't good in 2008 either, because Rich Rodriguez inherited a broken program.
The question wasn't "Are we good yet?" but "Will we be good soon?" I thought we'd win 10 games (no matter who the coach was) in 2011 because we lost very little (Mouton and Schilling) and a bunch of young players could be expected to improve.
You got the answer wrong. If you and others had waited one offseason we would have been fine. Instead we're in the toilet. Thanks for the contribution.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:23 PM ^
His vaunted offense was sputtering when it mattered most. PSU, Wisconsin, MSU, OSU...his offense jsut wasn't good enough in these games.
Wait he wasn't able to completely revamp the offense to your liking after having TWO full recruiting classes, one of which was undermined by the cloud of totally bullshit allegations of NCAA violations? That's totally unacceptable.
October 30th, 2014 at 9:40 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 9:52 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 11:48 PM ^
RR did fluke out a stunning win over Wisconsin. And RR's team never watched the Brown Jug head to Minneapolis.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:14 PM ^
Who did we add to the defense in 2011 that made them great? I thought it was largely the same team?
October 30th, 2014 at 8:19 PM ^
Heininger (back from injury), Countess, Ryan, and Morgan were new additions to the roster. We also got Woolfolk back from injury. Also everybody gained a year of experience/strength/etc. This was offset by pretty much just losing Jonas Mouton.
There's a reason we've been at about the same level defensively every year since then. Once it was fixed it was fixed.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:33 PM ^
Ryan, Countess, and Morgan were all freshmen. Really, that's all it takes, a handful of freshmen to turn around a squad?
October 30th, 2014 at 8:38 PM ^
Countess as a freshman was better than James Rogers the year before. Morgan was a better player than Obi Ezeh. Ryan pretty much negated the loss of Mouton.
Freshmen can turn a squad around if they are better than the guys they replace. If you are better at every single position your defense is going to be better. That is what happened at Michigan in 2011.
October 31st, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
You change your rules of what can change a program every time you post. An influx of young talent was gauranteed to make the defense better in 2011 but the offense was bad in 2010 because it was young. I thought putting in better players automatically makes you better regardless of coaching so why didn't our offense do better against teams with a pulse in 2010 over 2009?
October 30th, 2014 at 8:38 PM ^
Puzzling isn't it? He argues that RR's defensive failure was due largely to youth in 2010, but that new youth in 2011 would have turned it around.
October 30th, 2014 at 9:11 PM ^
you are ignoring his point about the other 7-8 returning starters improving. we lost one good player off that 2010 D.
that said, i guarantee that RR's 2011 offense would have outperformed the borges offense.
but the final 3 games of 2010 was RR's death nell. had they been competitive in the bowl, he may have saved his job. but they got drilled. the program was toxic and a change needed to be made. brandon f-d it up though. he made a change for change sake only and didn't make a competent hire.
at least i had confidence in most of RR's asst coaches (DC and DB coach excepted). Hoke's staff pretty much all stink, except maybe mattison who is merely adequate. nuss gets an incomplete.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:42 PM ^
Don't forget Mike Martin recovering from the injury against MSU. He played after it but he wasn't the same.
October 30th, 2014 at 10:58 PM ^
He missed the last 5 games of the season with an ankle injury.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:54 PM ^
Whatever defensive roster issues we had at the time were greatly exacerbated by a DC with a spotty resume who thought it was a good idea to bring a stuffed animal to the Michigan sidelines and rub it in a linebacker's face during a game.
RR would have been far better off retaining Scott Shafer than bringing in the guy who had just gotten done with cratering the Syracuse football program.
October 30th, 2014 at 9:49 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 10:25 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 10:27 PM ^
For posterity.
October 30th, 2014 at 11:13 PM ^
There must have been some great free agent signings in the offseason. There's no way Hoke and Mattisson could take such a sucky roster and turn it into a top 10 group the next year.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:06 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 8:11 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 30th, 2014 at 8:20 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 8:20 PM ^
Dude, we all recognize that Dave Brandon's firing of Rich Rod was a collasal mistake--made exponentially worse by replacing him with a complete incompetent--from which the program is still suffering. But we all need to get over it. Rich Rod isn't coming back, as much as we'd all like him to.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:21 PM ^
Unfortunate that OP won't listen to people who actually know what happened with Casteel and Michigan (e.g. John U bacon). It's irrelevant what other DC's were being paid, Casteel would've had to take a pay cut to come to M and Bill Stewart put the full court press on to keep him.
One thing I think I do have in agreement with OP is that RR was far too involved with the defense. He hired one very competent DC (Scott Shafer), one not so much (Gerg), but utlimately tried to force both of them to run a system they weren't comfortable with, with some assistants who were not familiar with the system either (the 3-3-5). Ultimately, that's on him of course, and he got what he deserved: fired. That being said, if Bill Martin ponies up an extra $50k a year RR likely gets Casteel to come and we aren't having this discussion.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:24 PM ^
That being said, if Bill Martin ponies up an extra $50k a year RR likely gets Casteel to come and we aren't having this discussion.
Citation please
October 30th, 2014 at 8:32 PM ^
John U. Bacon: 3 & Out. He's also discussed it many times in interviews since.
Of course, you already know this because I've told it to you numerous times in other threads, but you continue to feign ignorance and hold onto your own version of reality where RR is a terrible coach despite his raging success at WV and Zona, and Casteel didn't come to Michigan because he... didn't feel like it I guess?
October 30th, 2014 at 8:38 PM ^
Why do you suppose RR didn't offer to personally pick up the difference? At the salary RR was about to pull down, $50k would have been walking around money.
That's okay, I don't expect you to answer. JUB didn't ask RR, which is just another point about his book I found wanting. He either did ask and didn't think the answer would be seen in a postive light, or he didn't ask. Either way, it's yet another gap in the story that should have been filled.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:39 PM ^
Are you seriously suggesting that Rich Rod should have paid for his coordinators out of pocket?
Ah, the Michigan Difference.
October 30th, 2014 at 9:29 PM ^
Not only am I not the only one that thought that, it isn't a novel idea. Many people in positions to do so routinely make such decisions to increase their ability and chances to succeed.
October 30th, 2014 at 10:22 PM ^
October 30th, 2014 at 8:45 PM ^
Bacon never said that in Three & Out. You may want it to be true, but it's not.
In your mind, Bill Martin paid 3.5 million dollars for a weight room and buyout but refused another 50k for Casteel, which caused him to stay at WVU. 5 years later, Casteel takes a paycut to go to Arizona. Nothing about that sounds implausible?
October 30th, 2014 at 8:56 PM ^
Actually, he does. Thankfully MGoJen has quoted the pertinent bit below so I don't have to. Three factors played into the decision:
1) less pay
2) no guaranteed contract at M
3) pressure from Bill Stewart to stay at WV.
Some have speculated that his family also wanted to stay in WV, but that's never been confirmed.
Not sure why I keep repeating this since it's clear you have no desire to let facts sway your thinking. Regardless, a lack of pay at M did factor into Casteel not coming here, whether it fits your narrative or not.
October 30th, 2014 at 8:59 PM ^
The quoted part is where Bacon implies that because Michigan's initial offer was 10,000 less than WVU's, Casteel didn't come here. No quote from Casteel. No discussion of the negotiations. No discussion from Rich Rod. Just pure guesswork. It's lazy journalism that's really just an opinion, and it certainly doesn't support your assertion that Casteel would have come here for another $50,000.
October 31st, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
How the fuck does John U Bacon know this? Seriously? Was he in negoitating calls? Did he call Casteel and say hey buddy if Michigan offered you an extra 50k would you have gone?
Here is an idea, its damn educated guess but he really doesn't know because it is impossible to know. All this if Michigan weren't cheap Casteel would be here is predicated on an assumption that Casteel had any desire to be here which we can neither prove nor disprove. The point the OP is trying to make which everyone seems to have missed is that Michigan provided Rich Rod with enough money to make a competitive DC hire, even if that person was not jeff casteel. So either your argument is that Rich Rod can only succeed with Jeff Casteel as his DC, which would imply he is a shitty head coach and should be an oc and would have been a bad hire for michigan regardless, or you admit that Rich Rod made a bad hire or made Shafer do coach something he was uncomfortable with both of which means rich rod fucked up.
Hiring a bad coordinator can doom a coach, look at beilein, fired his assitants got lavall and bacari in and the program took off. Rich Rod had the opportunity to prove he could win withouout Casteel and didn't. That doesn't mean he is a bad coach but the point is that he had the money necessary to hire someone good and he didn't do it. Anyone bringing up Casteel is missing the point or saying Rich Rod can't win without Casteel it is one of these two things.