EVERYONE'S FAVORITE TOPIC!!!!!
Rich Rodriguez’s Recruiting = Michigan Win vs. Bama?
RR brought us some very good players who are now upperclassmen. Hoke and Co. now coach them to make them better players. Not a whole lot else to say about it.
Rich Rodriguez + Anything = 100+ MGoPosts.
And usually 200+. Everytime. No matter what I say or do. And without fail, the flame that lights the fuse is not a Rodriguez defender, but rather a Rodriguez-hating fanboy who is so chapped that Michigan never beat Ohio State while they were students or some such thing. (Tell it to the kids who were undergrads from 2004-2007 when the team was coached by Carr and lost to the Ohio State University Buckeyes four years in a row.)
The massive irony is that when Rich Rodrigez was coaching Michigan and was under attack in the media, and people like Brian Cook were defending Rodriguez, the very first argument made against people like Brian (and I suppose, me) is that we were just fanboys, trying to protect and cover for our beloved football team. We couldn't see the truth because we were blinded by Michigan fandom.
So how's that workin' out now? Is my Michigan fandom blinding me?
Is my Michigan fandom blinding me?
No, your stupidity blinding you.
So far, so good . . .
Otherwise, do you care to explain these as anything besides trolling? I'd be interested to hear an explanation, since I can't think of a single non-troll use of "Walverines" (twice in the same post) or quotes regarding gay marriage and the political climate of a city in a posters name.
Which all goes to the point that for at least some Walverines, their memories are just as short, their collective understand just as badly warped, and their fanatacism [sic] just as bad, as any other team.
"Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel said Chick-fil-A has no place in his city. (And Emanuel has no place at the family-friendly Chick-fil-A—not with his potty mouth.) Emanuel intoned that “Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago values.” This was a breaking-news twofer, as most people weren’t aware that the graft-laden youth-homicide capital of the United States had any values." ~ Matt Labash in the Weekly Standard; August, 201
You got lucky a mod didn't see it at first, or I assume you would have lost your points like all the rest of the people saying "Walverines" or posting some crap that's supposed to be "not-quite-political-enough-for-a-banhammer, but still pretty damn political". You're no better than the idiots saying "Dick Rod went 0-6 against our main two rivals" or anything like that.
And I have nothing but respect for something like 99% of the people here and their opinions. As far as labeling things "trolling", I definitely do say what I see. The only other instance I can think of akin to this one was with a poster who's history was pretty bad; the mods docked points and eventually banned them. I also gave a hard time to a guy talking straight politics (who is on his third banned name) and once made a post or two that I regret regarding a longtime poster and some difference in views. The last poster and I have had some good natured interaction since and I feel like it's behind us.
If you think I'm overly negative on some posters, fine. That's absolutely your right and I respectfully disagree that it's indicative of my general attitude here. I do think Section 1 has crossed a few lines into trolling recently, and I'dlike to hear his reply, especially given his attitude towards users in the past doing the same things he is now. More than anything, I love coming here and talking sports and all manner of OT with the best internet community out there. Cheers.
And making up shit to flame like "game that cost Lloyd his job", maybe you ought to clean up your own house before you go all Internet cop.
Baiting a troll is nearly as bad as trolling.
was not WVU's coach when they beat OU.
Are you kidding me
this Rich Rodriguez you speak of? I choose not to recall who that is, or what affect he had on our program... like no OL or DL depth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
if speed was the only thing required to win, the Jamaican track team should form a new NFL squad.
It worked in Cool Runnings!
1. Michigan hasn't beaten Alabama.
2. You would have to see the game to make any argument one way or another.
Why would you have to see the game first to suggest that RR's recruiting of speed would be beneficial against Alabama? These boards are built on theorizing and conjecture.
In fact, you would have to have NOT seen the game first to suggest this.
This. The SEC's dominance over the last few years, and unfortunately that is an accurate statement, has been feuled not by ESSSSS-EEEEEE-CEEEE SPEEEEEEEEED, but rather a bunch of big, bad ass dudes on both lines. You'd think fan bases as "knowledgeable" as those in the South would understand this...
I think it's a mixture of size and speed. When you're a 5'11" 220 lbs. linebacker who runs a 4.5, it's not a big deal. When you're a 6'4" 250 lbs. linebacker who runs a 4.6, it's scary.
beat SEC teams at WVU with his DC.
Then he came to Michigan and had DCs he'd never worked with before.
You wanna talk defense? There's the RR/Defense conversation.
you aren't much of a head coach if the loss of one assistant causes a meltdown of Chernobyl like proportions on one side of the ball. Head coaches are in charge of entire teams, not just offenses. This includes special teams. Thats the part where they kick the ball through the uprights.
many people have the co-workers they deserve.
I could see how it might work out in your favour, however, while your first team might very well be as fast as any SEC team, its the next group and the next group on the 2-3 deep. Doesn't seem to matter who is playing for Bama, they are all almost first team fast.
be because of RR's recruiting. That's for sure. It will because of the motivation level of the current players and the coaching job of the current staff. If you doubt this, ask yourself what you think the outcome of the game would be if RR and his staff were still coaching here. ANS: Blowout City.
I'm still waiting for the reasoning why RichRod recruiting those guys to Michigan is not the reason that they came to Michigan so coach Hoke could coach them up.
I was with you until "go slit your wrists." Let's keep it civil.
We got beat up by a perennial bottom-feeder in the SEC in Miss St under RR. This coaching staff is without a doubt the biggest difference. There shouldn't even be a debate about that.
...has no chance of ending well.
Depends on your definition of 'well'.
This meme will never end. This thread will be replaced by another very similar to it, and the beating of the dead horse will continue.
Pretty sure Michigan had beated SEC teams before RR was hired. And I'm pretty sure RR was the coach when Michigan got stomped by a mediocre SEC team a couple years ago.
We also had a very, very young team then. And no defense (the one major area I do assign blame on RR). Not so much anymore...
our favorite DC of all time, Greggggggg Robinson when he was at WVU.
RR didn't have our favorite DC of all time,Greg
gggggg Robinson Mattison when he was at WVU
RR's recruiting was excellent for the first 12 months. If a miracle strikes and we win the game Saturday, then yes, he deserves some credit for recruiting Denard, Roundtree, Omameh, Lewan, Schofield, Fitz, Big Wil, Roh, Gordon, and so on.
HIs problem with recruiting was that, after that first 12 months, it all completely tanked. 2013 and maybe 2014 are when you will fully see the effects of this.
...the Free Press witch hunt and NCAA allegations might have been brought up by opposing coaches during recruiting? Nah, coaches would never do that. They have (had?) a gentlemen's agreement.
...Nothing to see here.
Big brother is watching . . .
What better way to make your return to the Mod job than to watch a Rich Rodriguez thread? Sounds like super-duper fun!
No better way to say "welcome back" than a thread like this! I just hope I'm not too rusty.
I think we are inhaling the ashes of that dead horse...
They beat ONE sec team...Georgia...in a game where they had to score 38 points to win.
Yeah, here at Michigan we've never had to win a shootout. Coach Carr's last 10 bowl games were all dominating defensive performances when we gave up 35 to Florida (W), 32 to USC (L), 32 to Nebraska (L), 38 to Texas (L), 28 to USC (L), 30 to Florida (W), 45 to Tennessee (L), 28 to Auburn (W), 34 to Alabama (W), and 31 to Arkansas (W).
Looks like we had to score a few points to win those games. Luckily our new coach would never tolerate such a thing and has declined to accept our wins against Notre Dame and OSU from last year, since, you know, it is so embarassing to concede points against a mediocre team even if you end up outscoring them.
when they don't want to left too far out of the conversation. If Alabama wins it's going to be with an utterly PONDEROUS ground attack and a buncha huge and very well-drilled linemen who move like brontosauri but get the damned job done. You could argue that Nick Saban brought the best of the B1G to the SEC but then the normal SEC fanbrain would seize up forever and you'd just have to finish off their Cheetos and go home.
Many fans do it just because it pisses us off. I respect that.
Can I be snarky in this thread? Yay or nay?
That's all he recruited in the 2010 class. Still the most shortsighted class ever assembled.
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.
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.
While Mallett probably would've stayed, I don't know if he had the maturity to lead that team. Remember that he was handing off to Mike Hart as a backup. Plus that was an average at best defense regardless of the head coach. That was not a very good team inherited by any coach in 2008.
Players only get older if they are on the team and have eligibility remaining and are in uniform. Brandon Graham didn't get older in 2010. Neither did Stevie Brown. Neither did Donovan Warren. Those guys were gone, and they were easily the best players at each position group from the season before (a season in which Rodriguez's first full recruiting class were just true freshmen, yet we had roughly 25 scholarship players on defense). Then Troy Woolfolk (had been a starter), Mike Williams (had been a starter), Will Heininger (was going to start), and Mike Jones (was going to start) missed the season due to injury, so they didn't get older either. To fill the void was a senior class Rodriguez inherited that was populated by Jonas Mouton and...yup, pretty much just Jonas Mouton.
Acting like this is identical to what happened last year when virtually everyone returned, many of the most productive players from the year before had been underclassmen, guys returned from injury, AND we added guys like Ryan, Beyer, Countess, and Clark to the mix is either intellectually dishonest or just really dumb.
At the end of 2009 these 31 players were in line to return on defense in 2010 and "become a year older" with the same Head Coach, but the defense became historically bad:
Ryan Van Bergen
Jared Van Slyke
At the end of 2010 these 34 players were in line to return on defense in 2011 and "become a year older", with a new Head Coach and the defense improved tremendously:
|Nathan Brink||DT||RS FR|
|Isaiah Bell||LB||RS FR|
|Cameron Gordon||S||RS FR|
|Thomas Gordon||S||RS FR|
|Ryan Van Bergen||DE||RS JR|
|Steve Watson||DE||RS JR|
|Will Heininger||DT||RS JR|
|Kevin Leach||LB||RS JR|
|Brandon Herron||LB||RS JR|
|Jared Van Slyke||S||RS JR|
|Mike Williams||S||RS JR|
|J.T. Floyd||CB||RS SO|
|Kenny Demens||LB||RS SO|
|Jordan Kovacs||S||RS SO|
Yeah, you know how the defense that was basically 6 freshmen, 1 senior converted wideout and 2 sophomores in 2010 were older and more experienced. Great call.
I think RR's performance against Mississippi State in the Gator Bowl pretty much ends that argument
Your co-workers are ignorant noobs.
Chunkums - Can you create some sort of gif utilizing Shatner's "KHAAAAAAAAAAN" gif with a text block that reads: "RICHROD THREAAAAAAAAAAAAD"? We need to stop with the bipartisan divide and endorse one MGoBlog meme we can all agree on for these types of posts.
Pro-tip: If you plan to premise a thread involving other peoples' analysis around the background of those doing the analyzing, and that background is "my buddy" or "my co-workers" or "this guy at the bar", as opposed to "program insider" or "Coach Mattison" or "the_knowledge", then do not start the thread.
This is pretty darn good advice. 60% of the time, its true every time.
By this logic, every win we had last year was thanks to RR. It is a simple truism that a new coach wins with the other guy's recruits. It simply HAS to be that way and there is NO example of a new coach who wins right away with his own recruits.
When the OP suggests that credit for a win over Bama has to go to RR, he has grossly oversimplified things. I believe that credit would go to the players, but also to the job of coaching done by Hoke and his staff, especially Mattison.
However, I also think that too little credit is given to the recruits that came in under Rich Rodriguez. Let's look at this in a bit of detail.
- Denard Robinson. The face of Michigan. Would definitely not have come, nor been recruited, if not for RR.
- Ricky Barnum. A late steal for RR, and a great lineman.
- Taylor Lewan. The next Jake Long. Again, RR's recruiting.
- Fitz Toussaint. A feature back, pulled out of Ohio. Where would we be without him.
- Jordan Kovacs. Even if he wasn't recruited, RR had the sense to add him to the team and start him and give him a scholarship.
- Craig Roh. A solid player, who has been jerked around all over the place. Mattison has developed Roh, but he was recruited by RR.
- Will Campbell. Recruited by RR . . . here's hoping he pans out.
- Patrick Omameh. Recruited by RR, good lineman.
- Blake Countess. He committed to Michigan while RR was here, and is potentially the first elite CB we've had in a long time.
- Thomas Gordon. Another RR Recruit.
- Michael Schofield. Another starter, RR Recruit.
- Jake Ryan. Sleeper recruit, stud LB, from RR.
- Roy Roundtree. Our best WR, recruited by RR.
- Kenny Demens. Anchoring the LB Corps, a solid RR Recruit.
- Devin Gardner. Backup QB, possibly a huge WR this year, RR Recruit.
- J.T. Floyd. Turning into a lockdown corner, a RR Recruit.
- Jibreel Black, starting DT. RR recruit.
- Jeremy Gallon, best WR in camp, RR recruit.
- Desmond Morgan, starting WLB, RR recruit.
- Brennan Beyer, WDE, RR recruit.
- Brendan Gibbons, "Brunette Girls," Field Goals, RR recruit.
- Will Hagerup, punter, RR recruit.
- Elliot Mealer, starting OG, RR recruit.
My point? I believe with the possible exception of Thomas Rawls, every projected starter this year was a recruit under the previous administration. I can say unequivocally that the OL recruiting under RR was atrocious, and that the entire defensive coaching staff sucked.
However, RR WAS responsible for recruiting our entire starting OL. The starters are very stout, and if they stay healthy, we will have an incredible line.
RR did recruit solid defensive players, and once Mattison, Montgomery, and Hoke got ahold of them, they have done a tremendous job.
And to reiterate, RR was responsible for recruiting Denard Robinson as our QB. That in itself is a legacy worth having. I don't care what Denard projects to in the NFL. RR had the vision to see that he could be an excellent college QB, which is exactly what has happened.
I'm almost positive that Mealer and Demens originially committed when Lloyd was still coach (as did Brandon Moore). The general point stands and RR obviously had to hold and honor their commitments.
And probably some others. But it doesn't matter. Though I kinda lost interest when Barnum was labeled "a great lineman" after being injured most of last season. I hope so, but I'm not sure where some of the evidence presented comes from.
I laugh everytime I see someone say "Floyd is a lockdown corner." Watch game film from last year. He was far from a "lockdown" corner. Improved, yes. Lockdown corner? Not even close.
Well of course they're mostly RR recruits. It's mathematically impossible for the result to be otherwise. The question is why we have so little depth. That's entirely RR's fault.
They all should be RR recruits. If they weren't it would mean that Michigan was trotting out a bunch of freshmen and a few sophomores that Hoke snagged late in his first few months. I don't really think this is that valid of a point.
There's a big game coming up, it's almost the beginning of football season, and some people still feel that it's necessary to "stir the pot." Will Lou Czirr please pick up the courtesy phone?
(and I can't believe nobody caught this yet) is that your grammar sucks, mr. ivy league guy.
It should be "my co-workers (a couple of WHOM are fans of SEC schools)..."
Geez, people. You are off your games today. Glad y'all aren't playing Saturday, or we'd get steam-rolled!
It's the coach's fault. His new-fangled ideas might have worked well in West Virgina, but this is Michigan fergodsake! After some manly grammar drills and killer spelling bees from the new coach, the team will be ready to take on anybody.
So you're basically tossing up a what if consisting of a hypothetical win on Saturday and whether or not Rich Rod deserves credit and how much for such win? Damn. Are you going to say that about every game we win this year or is it just for Alabama? Rich Rod coaches at Arizona, end of story.
If RR did a good job recruiting we wouldn't have 12 Freshman on the depth chart. RR recruited all the seniors and junior plus most sophomores. Who else is going to start. Your co-workers are idiots. Are you managing a Wall-Mart and your co-workers are the stock boys (HaHa couldn't resist that one).
Also RR also couldn't coach the few recruits he did get. "Hand Denard the ball" isnt good coaching or strategy.
If we win its because Hoke and company has to out coach a Bama team with recruits at a level that RR couldn't come close to getting.
Not a good post. Read the info presented above before you make such cut and dry generalizations.
And FTR it's Wal-Mart.
I have always believed that a man is not measured by how he treats those who he knows and loves but how he treats those he does not know and fear. R^2 because he was different was shunned by much of the Michigan football alumni base. Who knows how much better a job R^2 could have done in recruiting if he had the complete support of the Michigan network and the assistant AD who despite being in the Athletic Department insisted he would have nothing more to do with football. How many recruits did we lose out on because of a word from a HS coach or a former alum at a camp? How many were turned away at every contrived uproar?
What makes football great is that as long as you have a scheme and fill players to fit that scheme you can win. Yes, if you recruit 30 5 star recruits at Bama or USC you have more room for error. Then it makes sense to pro set and out athelete your opponents. But Oregon with their tiny defense did as good a job as anyone else staying in the game against Auburn. Wisc and Iowa seem to just fine without top15 classes. If one is so blind that there is only one way to play football, you will get destroyed like UM constantly was against good spread teams.
I think it is reasonable to assume R^2 made some mistakes. His problem was every set back was compounded because he had no room to work with. I always wonder what would have happened if Fitz had not been hurt and discovered in 2010 instead of 2011. Then DR would not have been beaten up which means his shoulder is not hurt going into the state game. I wished we had the opportunity to see what R^2 could have done without interference. If I had twice the support R^2 had as football coach I know I would not have succeeded at my job either.
...is an empty statistic if I've ever heard one.
Freshman and true sophomore starters being relatively rare, the only way a substantial majority of starters on the 2012 team wouldn't have been recruited by the coach who was here from 2008 to 2010 would be if we'd somehow gotten the death penalty along the way.
It demonstrates absolutely nothing, good or bad, about any current or prior coach.
How about you go count all the freshman and sophomore starters on our teams from 2008-10.
I think it is more telling that Hoke, in his 2nd year, will still be starting someone who committed 2 coaches ago.
Here we go again....
Sadly, I immediately thought of Section 1 the moment I saw the thread title...
Lloyd Carr's recruiting = Michigan IS Bama
That's really just ignorant sports talk. Not to beat a dead horse but if we win Saturday it won't be because of our smaller, faster players. It will be because we are a team. I couldn't ever say that when RR was here.
Awful lotta negging for stuff that's just true and not very controversial in the first place.
...let's remember that this is relevant because we got beat by Toledo with Carr's recruits.
I think most of the players on Yost's first national championship team were Teddy Roosevelt's recruits.