Rich Rod stays through at least 2011; Here's why:
Everyone seriously needs to shut up about "Fire RR, no results" or "Give him more time, he'll be fine", for one simple reason that everyone is overlooking:
MONEY
Let me repeat that: Money. Rich Rod was penned to a multi-million dollar PER YEAR deal, for a five year contract. Mary Sue is going to be loathe to eat those last two years and the millions they entail. Secondly, the buyout. There's another couple million that the university will have effectively wasted on a two-year deal. Thirdly, the new contract: If RR was fired and Les Miles/Brian Kelly/Bill Belichick was brought in, the Athletic Department is going to have to set up a new, 5-year, multi-million dollar PER YEAR deal, that will probably have to be even greater than the one they gave RR, in order to help entice a coach into what is going to be nationally known as a coaches' nightmare here at UM if RR is fired.
Next Reason: Mary Sue Coleman
The president of the University is not an idiot, and wouldn't stake her reputation behind RR by saying "He'll get his 5 years" if she absolutely didn't mean it. Even Tommy Amaker, who we can all agree wasn't exactly an all-star coach, was given his 6 years, and then was gracefully canned for lack of performance.
For her to endorse Rich Rod, then fire him at the end of this year or next year, would reflect terribly on UM, something Mary Sue Coleman would attempt to avoid at all costs. Also, this would create a terrible hiring situation for any other great coaches we would try to lure away; no one wants to come to a program full of whiny fans and media who give their coaches two or three years and then boot them.
Regardless of what you want, or whether you're behind RR or against him, this WILL happen, and not because of any performance (or lack thereof) on the football field.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:19 AM ^
But I do think this is the single best argument I've heard for Rich Rod staying on beyond 2010. Good work.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
Please stop with the cold logic, thoughtful analysis, and reasonablness. I come here to read the ranting of extremists on both sides of the RR aisle. Posts like your's are too real-world for me. I prefer the hysterics of the sky-is-falling crowd and the RR is the greatest coach on earth crowd.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:33 AM ^
Dammit, plz plz plz don't negbang me, I swear I'll grab my pitchfork right this second.
/s
November 9th, 2009 at 10:27 AM ^
I agree with your sentiments but at this point in the season are there really any "RR is the greatest" folks posting? While it does seem that the sky is falling crowd is out in force, the "opposing" side is merely more like uniqenam labeled as "give him more time."
November 9th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
Thats what a couple post/borderline rants I have made have been about as well as most others. Your right that nobody on here is really on any RR is the greatest coach of all time. Mostly the "pro RR crowd" is just flat out tired of hearing all of the unreasonable drama.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:28 AM ^
that no violations (even minor ones may give the University grounds to dismiss RR, without a buyout).
Anyway, I agree with your logic.
Since I'm not a fan of any other college team, don't really hang out with people who are (before you ask, my friends are NFL fans or didn't go to football schools). Are Michigan fans different from other fanbases? Didn't Tennessee fans always want Fulmer fired? Didn't Alabama fans want Shula gone? Wasn't there a fire Les Miles, during the season, last year? Again, I may be incorrect about this, but I don't think M fans are overly whiney.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:35 AM ^
every fanbase is exactly the same.
There are a few differences (I can't say I've heard of any school other than OSU doin' their business in coolers...), but most fanbases regress toward the mean in this regard.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:11 PM ^
I want to believe there is a "Michigan Difference"; that its not just marketing.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:36 AM ^
I would think the expectations at UM are a little higher (not that it's a bad thing). The problem though is the fact that so many people clamored for change, saying "We want to play like the SEC, the Big 12, and all those great teams down south", and now people are saying "Speed can't beat big, hulking B10 teams", and they want back to the conservative days of LC.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:52 AM ^
and aggressiveness, but my fear is not that RR's philosophy (spread, read option, aggressive play calling, emphasis on leaner players...) is incorrect, just that RR is not the right coach for the job (culturally, isn't smart enough, knows nothing about coaching D...).
IMO, besides the success at WVU (which cannot be ignored), what has he done to show that he is the right coach for Michigan?
November 9th, 2009 at 12:44 PM ^
at Tulane, Clemson and Glenville state perhaps. My biggest concern is that maybe he had good defenses at WVU because he got lucky with a good coordinator but he isn't great at being a head coach. The sloppiness and special teams errors also is disturbing.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:46 PM ^
double post
November 9th, 2009 at 10:26 AM ^
Dismissing RR for only minor violations would probably still scare other coaches away. The new coach (almost certainly a second-tier type) would then have two years to win or else, with the shaky roster we have now, minus the usual flood of transfers who wanted to play for RR and/or would be poor fits for the new coach's system.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
look at Bo Pelini at Nebraska. He had solid credentials and was hired after Callahan was fired.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:16 AM ^
Many people seem to ignore the fact that if violations of any sort are found, then the coach not only broke the rules but lied about it as well. As Mike Stone has pointed out, it's often the cover-up that gets people in more trouble than the original crime.
But regardless of that, if Rodriguez deserves to be fired over this practice issue, he should be fired--without any regard to any of the potential consequences.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:33 AM ^
You have waited extremely to long and are making to much sense. We need more final seconds of the game, knee jerk reactions as opposed to thought out reasonable arguments posted after anger has worn off.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:38 AM ^
Assuming that we lose the next two games (which I don't because I'm a friggin' optimist), that will make two losing seasons in a row, which I'm sure we're all aware.
If in the 2010 season there isn't a significant turn around and improvement and we somehow see ANOTHER losing season for the third year in a row the as of yet unnamed AD will be forced to act.
That's not saying that that's gonna happen, personally I've always thought that 2010 will be "the" year where we finally see all of our patience and heartache pay off.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:43 AM ^
I like the logic here. Well done. Like others have said I am sure there are conditions that could change this but to me that could only be with Major Violations and not Minor Violations. I also agree with iknight that if Michigan were to have another losing season next year then I could understand the complaints more but we need to give him a little more time.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:09 AM ^
I don't think that the contract will get in the way of RichRod being fired. If the university wants to get rid of him after 2010, the money will be there. One or more wealthy boosters will step up to the plate. They always do.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:10 AM ^
I love UM basketball as much as the next person and watch as many games as I possibly can but we aren't really saying X happened in basketball so it'll happen in football are we? We all know this is a football school with an on again/off again basketball team. We're doing a pretty good job right now of making it on again but we don't really have any continued decade upon decade heritage to propel the basketball team into comparisons with the elite - never mind the elite in our own conference (let's face it, IU owns that one). Basketball certainly has a history of having much more turnover and parity but, seriously, we're a football school. I don't think saying Tommy got 6 really means as much to how long RR will stay because the University can stay as "Michigan" with the basketball team playing poorly but without the football team being in the top 20/10 year in and year out it's just not the same.
If he doesn't go to a bowl game next year I'd bet he's out. I'm not saying 9-3 or 10-2 but if we're not going to a bowl game (7-5 at least I'd hope) then it's quite possible he'd get the ax if a better option was available.
As far as the money goes - how much do you think it cost UM to pay all of Lloyd's assistants a full year of salary to do nothing? The cost of ditching him would be far less than the cost of allowing the face of the university's athletic department to fall into a state of embarrassment.
All that being said, RR, please just beat either UW or OSU (preferably OSU if it's an either/or scenario) so we can at least get rid of the "just make a bowl game" talk.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:10 AM ^
Totally agree that the comparison with Amaker is off-base. Amaker took over a scandal-plagued program and was essentially given "extra" time at the helm because of that and because the program was placed on probation after he came onboard.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:17 AM ^
Exactly. Amaker didn't even have a full slate of scholarships until, what, year 4?
Even at that, though, it was obvious after year 3 that his handle on fundamental basketball was nonexistent. Players actually regressed over the course of their careers. He wouldn't do anything to actively promote his program (radio shows, reluctant to give interviews, generally insular and distant, icy relationships with high school coaches), while Tom Izzo barnstormed around Michigan winning over hearts and minds everywhere there was a camera to capture it.
The writing was on the wall that this wasn't working out, on the court and off, and they let him linger and linger and linger.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
Amaker also had a very thin resume of success, unlike RRod - yet he got 6 years - if you boot RRod now expect an Amaker like replacement - a second tier hire. Give RRod 4+ years and if you want to replace him then your chance of replacing him with a top tier hire would be better.
I think we are different fans, we have more class than to call for someones head within two years - unlike the Bucknuts
November 9th, 2009 at 12:40 PM ^
I don't get this "give RRod 4+ years" stuff. Give it to him regardless of what happens, on or off the field? He just automatically gets 4 or more years because he's RichRod?
November 9th, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^
You give ANY coach 4-5 years because that's how long it takes to get a team full of his recruits and have juniors and seniors who have been running his system for 3-4 years. Only then can you say whether or not he is doing a good job. Weiss looked a lot better when he was winning with someone else' guys, for instance.
Off the field stuff is cause for dismissal at any time. I don't think the off field stuff with our program will end up being that bad though.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:01 PM ^
So, in theory, a football coach could go 0-24 in his first two years and not be fired, and then go 0-36 in his first three years and still not be fired.
Yeah, that makes sense to me.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
The financial considerations essentially boil down to the following: If we aren't successful on the football field, which would of the following would hurt more--buying out the contract and moving in a new direction, or continuing to pay it while interest in the program fades, luxury seating doesn't sell, and donations drop because the product on the field doesn't excite the big-money donors?
If Michigan can't sell the remaining boxes and club seats, and if people who have currently put down deposits decide to cut bait and keep their cheaper tickets in the bowl (which IS happening), that's a lot of $$$ and face to lose. In this economy, you're not going to find an overabundance of people willing to fork out, essentially, over $600 per person per game for a suite if they're forking over that cash to watch a 5-6 win team.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:20 AM ^
While I think your argument has some weight, money won't be a big deal for this team. If the boosters want RR gone, he'll be gone. At this point, though, I think the administration realizes that another switch at HC would only set the program back even more and would leave them with relatively few real options (because guys like Les Miles and Brian Kelly are not going to come to UM if a coach with at least as much pedigree was given such a short leash). So then you are left trying to win with Mike Debord, Brady Hoke, or an unporven DC or OC from another team, which is not a position UM wants to be in. RR might not work out at UM, but it is going to take a couple more years before the administration will feel comfortable coming to that conclusion.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:23 AM ^
Let's face it, M fans are like any other fans would be after 40 years of winning. We're spoiled. We thought nothing like this could happen to us. Clearly, it can. It happened to Notre Dame, after all. If there is any fan base that thinks it is more entitled to wins than Michigan, it has to be Notre Dame.
The more I watch this team and the more I learn from reading the in-depth analysis on this blog, the more I respect the need for talent. I can't think of any reason we won the NC under Lloyd except the presence of a ton of defensive talent + the amazing Mr. Woodson + a bit of luck. It's not like Lloyd and his staff were close every year and the offense that year was nothing special. Our current talent and experience deficit is real and brutal.
RR needs time to build the talent and experience level all across the team. I am confident that Mary Sue Coleman is going to give him that time. If being 'Michigan Man' means anything at all, it should mean some fucking perseverance in the face of a challenge. You don't go wildly firing coaches with a spectacular resume after a couple tough years with a depleted talent base, barring major violations or misconduct. You just don't.
RR is going to get more time and I believe that he is going to succeed. All other paths out of here are MUCH more painful.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:34 AM ^
Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Alabama ... all went through something like this "All other paths out of here are MUCH more painful." is spot on
November 9th, 2009 at 12:53 PM ^
And NONE of the coaches who brought them out of the desert were the ones who led them into it.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:40 AM ^
What if RR leaves of his own accord?
With all the ranting over "Fire RR" vs. "Give him time" I don't see too many folks on here making room for the possibility that RR would happily jump ship if given the right opportunity.
Those SEC teams don't bat an eye at dropping millions of bucks to get the guy they want. If an attractive opening becomes available, and the school will shell out the $4M for his buyout, why wouldn't he go? It's not like RR took the UM job because he had some great desire to coach here or some great lifelong love for Michigan.
If the right offer comes along, RR will be gone.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:50 PM ^
Man, people really believe in the Michigan Way, don't they? Mention firing a guy who is flailing away and losing his grip on the program, and people forget that for the last umpteen years they've been waking around believin We, and this, ARE and IS Michigan! Which is it?
Listen, you get rid of Rod, and candidates pop up. Like I said in another thread, the program is on sound footing with regard to facilities, money, and what's left of it's reputation and history. As we've ALL said over the last two years: This is STILL Michigan. That means something. Now, people turn into checkens (chickii?) at the thought of cutting our losses with the guy who has made UM a laughingstock.
OK--you show patience if you are Iowa State with Dan McCarney; you show patience if you are Colorado with Bill McCartney (holy hell: I see a trend! Too bad his name isn't Rich Zablarney or something! LOLZ--too soon?)
Nebraska showed patience with Bill Callahan and look where it got them (according to most here who like to point to Nebraska as some sort of bad example)--but at least he got to a bowl game in his second year.
But Michigan doesn't have to stand idly by while Rodriguez continues to burn this thing to the ground--expecially those who believe it didn't need to happen.
2011 won't happen if he flops next year. The problem is the standards are now so low that people will have Extreme Boners if UM goes 6-6 and makes any bowl game in 2011.
And if Rich Rodriguez is so FTW great, why do people "fear" Brian Kelly or Urban Meyer as coach of Notre Dame?