That's all he recruited in the 2010 class. Still the most shortsighted class ever assembled.
Rich Rodriguez’s Recruiting = Michigan Win vs. Bama?
I dunno, I think Hoke has done a horrible job when it comes to the 2017 class. He still hasn't gotten any commits yet, disgraceful
Don't you think Rich Rod's son is still committed?
RR did great against Mississippi State!
But that was with LLLLLLLoyd's recruits! DUR DUR DUR.
Nope. Definitely had Denard, Roundtree, Odoms, etc.
Wasn't that our biggest bowl loss in history?
Eh, if you're going to stick regular season games in there, there are some games from RichRod's tenure (OSU 2008 and 2010, Penn State 2009, Wisconsin 2010) that were far worse beat downs than the Iowa game and arguably the Oregon game.
But thanks for making me remember those games.
except that the 2006 team was more talented than the 2007 team, in particular on defense.
was trying to get out the door since before '06. Nothing cost him his job; he was done as soon as he could find a way out.
But you can count all the others. Convenient. (What because his teams were bad he doesn't get blamed for his team being bad? WTF?) By your logic, you can't count Tennessee, because you knew they were going to lose to a team that should have been playing for the national championship.
on O and D are mostly RR recruited guys, but that's simply because they are juniors and seniors.
While Denard is awesome, who knows who the next M QB would be had RR not been hired. It could have been another (although slightly worse) awesome QB.
I don't think Alabama gets beat by speedy smurf-ball. Not with the strength and power of their O and D lines. I'd say Hoke feels likewise, given the extent to which he's trying to beef up our lines this week. He doesn't wish he had more slot receivers. He wishes he had more tackles.
We have nothing but returning starters and 4+ star upperclassmen playing on both lines, including returning all-conference honorees at LT and DE. The idea that our former coach recruited nothing but "speedy smurfs" is a silly myth you choose to perpetuate because you don't like him and/or just are mad we didn't win more games when he was here.
This is funny given that we played Bama three times under the ancien régime (1987, 1996 and 1999) and went 2-1 (and we massively outgained them in the one loss).
We've been lucky enough to hire two excellent head football coaches in a row. As a result, we will have one of the best teams in the country this year.
Not sure why the idea that Rich Rodriguez did a good job here is still so repellant to some people, especially when they all thought we were in for a multi-year rebuilding period after the guy got fired.
Who is "they"? I recall the Rodriguez supporters being the ones who were arguing that firing him would set us back years. I do not recall critics of him making that argument.
You win with players. The ones Rodriguez brought in are really good. Plenty of people thought attrition and what they perceived to be poor recruiting was dooming the program to perpetual failure. "They" and everyone else should have listened to me when I said that whoever got brought in was going to win 10+ games and be instantly viewed as the program savior. Pretty much exactly how things happened.
That's selling Hoke short. Teams do not routinely improve from 109th (or whatever it was) to the top 20 in total defense in one year. That wasn't going to happen with just any coach.
Rodriguez recruited decently, but we needed this staff to get them to reach their potential.
In 2004, Notre Dame scored 24 ppg. and 350 ypg. They hired a new coach and "the same guys" scored 38 ppg. and put up 489 ypg. They went to a BCS bowl and even almost beat the #1 team in the country, and would have if not for a controversial call. Everybody was happy and they gave the new guy a 10 year contract extension. They averaged over 32 ppg the next season and went back to a BCS bowl.
Then in 2007 "the same guys" all graduated but the coach was still there. As a result, Notre Dame averaged 242 ypg (the lowest total in the entire country) and scored 16 ppg.
Coaching ain't what you and most fans think it is. Greg Mattison is a better defensive coordinator than Greg Robinson, but the turnaround doesn't happen without getting back Heininger and Woolfolk (and to some extent Martin and Floyd) from injury, adding Ryan, Countess, Clark, Beyer, etc., all while losing pretty much just Jonas Mouton. Luckily we go through a similar process this year and lose just two Sugar Bowl starters while a bunch of young guys continue to improve and a talented group of newcomers work into the fold.
As I said, it's not normal for teams to make that kind of a leap. You cited one example to apparently disprove me of this.
Incidentally, I think Weis is a pretty good offensive coach, and I think he got more out of Brady Quinn and the rest than Willingham would have. Like Rodriguez, his problems were on the defensive side of the ball.
You're missing the point. Nick Saban went 6-6 his first year at Alabama and lost to Louisiana-Monroe. Did he just forget how to coach that year and then became a much better coach later? Jim Harbaugh started out at Stanford 4-8 and 5-7. Did he forget how to coach those two years, or do you think maybe, just maybe, him having a better record in years 3 and 4 had more to do with Andrew Luck and Toby Gerhardt being upperclassmen?
Harbaugh took over a 1-11 team and went 4-8 with the other guy's players. That improvement was on a par with the improvement in any successive year, and it wasn't because he recruited and started a ton of true freshmen.
First off, the coach was fired for a reason. I'm guessing that 1-11 is the reason. You can't just say it is logical to jump 3 wins because it isn't. You don't get fired for playing at what the expectation is for the team, you get fired for not living up to expectations. Second, you just proved my point, so thanks. As the talent showed up, along with the best quarterback in the nation, his record magically became better.
I do to. And yet he managed to have the least productive offense in the entire country in the middle of his tenure. If a good coach can have the absolute worst unit in the nation, what does that say about the impact coaches have?
Monte Kiffin is a good defensive coach. His first year at USC (despite, OMG, 5-stars galore) they sucked balls at playing defense.
Teams don't normally make such big leaps because it is very rare for teams to lose next to nothing from their senior class and return a ton of young talent with even more guys added to the mix.
That home cooking was a recipe for success. Considering we were average at best in road/neutral site games last year, it's not hard to believe us being only an 8 or 9 win team last year.
Couple of swing games between 8-4 and 10-2 I think, but if things don't go great, and we do go 8-4 (or worse...it could happen) you are going to blame the players, right? We're not going to hear how Borges or Hoke or whoever is using them wrong, or that they're doing a bad job, correct?
The bigger problems may come next year when a new QB (who we might only have for one year as a starter) is potentially behind a bunch of new linemen who might not be any older than sophomores (or redshirt freshmen), with a potentially new running back taking the heat off him. And sophomore and freshmen receivers catching the passes. That's where the gap lies...depth this year, and replacements next.
But I basically agree. In a lot of ways this season is on Denard. If he's as good as he's been it'll be another pretty good to good season. If he's a senior QB who is going to be one of those guys we only mention with guys like Woodson, Howard, Harbaugh and other guys who almost single handedly lift their team and take a team of really good players and make them a great unit, we should be in Pasedena.
Baring injuries, which can screw up good plans, players, and seasons for anyone.
Barring an injury, of course (please do not happen!), I think its going to be lots of fun watching Denard run the offense this year, win or lose. I can't believe its his last year!
It's not just Denard. We can't really afford too many injuries in a lot of spots. At least not ones for extended periods of time. Starting QB is true for anyone- lose him and your season is taking a hit. Most teams can lose a lineman without having to put in a true freshman though.
Rich Rod's recruiting of skill players was pretty good, but his recruiting of the guys in the trenches was absolutely pathetic in terms of numbers. There is no excuse to recruiting one offensive lineman in 2010 and whiffing on so many good Dlineman durng his tenure. Hoke comes in and has to recruit 11 offensive lineman in two classes to make up for this. Brady Hoke is 10x the coach Rich Rod is and the way the recruits and players speak about him is proof of this. I wish I could find the quote by Dave Molk about Hoke after the Sugar Bowl.
Gotta give this guy credit for STILL slurping the Rodriguez kool-aid though.
Lol. Athletes. We are going through the biggest drought of talent at the defensive and offensive lines that has been seen in over 4 decades. Hoke is changing that in a hurry though....
The same can probably be said about the RB and WR positions...
Oregon hardly got steamrolled. They gave up either a pick 6 or a fumble return to Mathieu in the first half and then gave LSU two short fields on fumbles in the second half to turn a 16-13 game into a 30-13 game.
Their offense certainly struggled vis a vis what they normally do, but they still outgained LSU substantially. They lost that game because they couldn't hold onto the ball, not because they got physically manhandled.
LSU's d-line had very little to do with the turnovers. One fumble was on a kickoff return. Another was on a punt return. Another was stripped by a safety ten yards downfield. Oregon did struggle with LSU's line, much as they did with Auburn's. They certainly couldn't get their running game going (which wasn't helped by the fact that they lost their top 2 running backs during the game), but the reason they lost that game the way they did was that they turned the ball over deep in their own territory three times.
Who is saying we would beat Alabama with RichRod as coach? Who said if we ran the spread-option we would beat alabama? Have you seen a single person saying that or did you just make that up?
Remember that time Auburn and Oregon met up in the 2011 Spread 'Em! Finale?
Get out of here with your "facts." That poster said it was men vs boys and the defensive line caused all the fumbles, who are you to question him?!? He had a feeling, so that is plenty enough!
Well, it wouldn't be his defensive schemes that let us beat 'Bama, that is for sure.
As for recruiting, I don't feel as if RR recruited exceptionally well. Yes Denard and some star players come to mind. Carr however was bringing in people like Branch, Woodley, Robohenne, Hart, Edwards, Avant, Manningham and the like even at the end of his career. Moeller brought in lots of talent. Bo brought it in.
Basically it is the exception for the headcoaching posistion that you bring in high talent players to Michigan. I don't feel RR did that job better than anyone else. So he doesn't get any special kudos. If we win it is because the current staff did a good job of shaping the talent that Michigan has (and always should have), not due to prior recruiting. If lack of O-Line depth costs us the game, then we talk about RR's role in all this. If it is lack of upperclass DT's we can all take a moment to curse Hopson's name.
Actually given the state of Alabama's secondary, I'd actually say we'd have better odds in this specific game if we had RoboHenne 2.0 throwing to Edwards 2.0, Avant 2.0 and Breaston 2.0 right now.
I think this is what was the most disappointing thing of the tenure. He recruited well enough, but not substantially better, which you'd expect a full of energy young coach with a hot reputation to do. All coaches slide a little towards the end as they get older, because it's hard to collect social security and kiss a 17 year old's ass. Bo had the same problem; that's why it seemed like Mo made such a splash. So you expect an upturn when he comes in. And the whole idea was "getting Michigan talent while running innovative new systems", not get West Virginia talent while running it. Which isn't bad. But the thought of a Denard with a Braylon Edwards to get up and get those jump balls, and a relatively Michigan defense sounded great. We were supposed to be giving up size for speed, but other than at QB, I don't think we are faster on either side of the ball than we were before. Maybe not slower, either. But the dream was Michigan big and fast players running the system. Because if it ran that effectively with a really good QB and a really good RB at WV, what would it have been like stacked all the way around?
In 2005 Lloyd Carr signed one linebacker, Brandon Logan, a 3-star from Kentucky who never saw the field in 4 years here. He signed 5 defensive linemen. Eugene Germany and James McKinney transferred prior to the 2007 season, Chris McLaurin moved to TE, got hurt and gave up football, Marques Slocum flunked out of school in the summer of 2008, and Terrance Taylor became a solid three year starter. He signed three defensive backs. Chris Richards transferred to Stony Brook after the 2006 season and Johnny Sears was kicked off the team early in the 2007 season. Brandon Harrison stuck around and was a starter at safety.
So that makes 3 defensive players even on the roster, just 2 who ended up starting.
In 2006, counting Stevie Brown and Jonas Mouton as linebackers since they ended up playing there and earning all-conference honors, we did not sign a single defensive back (that makes for one DB on the roster out of two recruiting classes). Linebacker Cobrani Mixon transferred to Kent State after the 2006 season and became a two-time all MAC player there. We got to keep Obi Ezeh.
In 2007 we signed just two defensive linemen, RVB and Renaldo Sagesse. Our linebacker class consisted of Marell Evans, Austin Panter, and Brandon Herron (and not Greg Jones).
This is why the Horror happened, this is why Oregon players were strolling unimpeded into the end zone, and this is the bulk of the reason that our defense sucked from 2007-2010.
You can tell by the negs that you're making way too much sense.
True enough RR sucked while he was here.
2008 defense was bad, 2009 (players one year older), defense sucked, 2010 (players one year older) defense sucked worse, but we are to believe that 2011 (players one year older), defense good. No thanks I ain't buyin' it. Totally buy it if Hoke is coach.
Can there be any doubt in anyone's mind that M bowl streak would be intact had Hoke been hired in 2008. How that team won only 3 games has to go down as one of the worst coaching jobs in history.
Hoke would have struggled, too. And rumor has it that Carr was going to dismiss him from the program even if he had wanted to stay.
That said, there's no doubt that the talent on hand was better set up to run a Borges-type offense than the spread 'n' shred. Man, that was brutal.
One score losses: L: 23-25 Utah, L 10-13 Toledo, L 42-48 Purdue, L: 14-21 Northwestern
MSU as a two score loss. So really there were four games in reach and MSU has not entirely out of reach. So even without Mallet I think 6-6 was on the table had Threet been used as Navarre 2.0. Even in the blowouts we tended not to bleed too badly until the defense had been run out of gas by the offense constantly punting.