I would hire Hoke. Then Rich Rod. Satisfied?
spoiler alert: i linked this
I would hire Hoke. Then Rich Rod. Satisfied?
RR was never in a situation where he would come out on top. Too many people against him because he's not a Michigan Man. It's a shame, really, because RR is an innovator and a good coach. He'll succeed elsewhere. But he never stood a chance at Michigan. Not with the alumni and fan base here and how he had to change just about everything about the program.
Sorry, but you are way off. Ultimately, RR didn't succeed because his teams lost a shit ton of games, went 0-6 against MSU/OSU, missed a bowl for two years and got destroyed in the bowl.
Did the alumni make it easy? No. But, can you explain to me (and I mean this seriously) how the alumni support caused our defense to suck so badly, how it caused RR to make the worst DC hires / fires ever, how it caused us to run the 3-3-5, how it caused RR to oversee the program during our only ever NCAA violations, or how it caused us to try to run the spread with Nick Sheridan at QB? Sorry, RR's lack of success here had less to do with the whole "Michigan Man" thing than many on this board believe.
Note: this is not an anti-RR post. It is a response to your post and nothing more. I think that RR is, in fact, an innovatorm and a good coach in the right situation
Another post where I agree entirely with michgoblue. This is happening too often, when do we get back to talking about Denard's running yards?
There is nothing that anyone else could do on the field. Were there distractions off of it? Yes. I'd like to see one elite program without distractions.
Ultimately, if RR had gone 39-0, he would be as much of a Michigan Man as Yost. There are a lot of things at fault for the last three years, and the football alumni (the ones we're talking about) were very annoying but I don't think they lost even one extra game.
well, i would say both are involved. one thing led to another.
he didn't win, and that's the main reason why things didn't work out. but he would've had a better chance to win in the first place, and survive after that, had he had proper support from the fanbase, from end to end.
Coming even from someone who would most likely be happier if the CC hadn't happened (or at least hadn't played out like it did, nobody can miss the excellent job Hoke is doing) I just don't see it. It's nice to have support, but what exactly does it do? It's not like they were playing to an empty stadium and no cheers, there were just a lot of distractions from Sunday to Friday.
I'd be willing to argue that a large portion of why Scott Schafer was fired was because an incensed alumni base. Obviously, RR should be faulted for hiring GERG, but I personally believe if Schafer were around, RR would still be around.
Schafer wasn't fired because he was a bad coach; Schafer was fired because we went 3-9 and heads needed to roll, and you couldn't fire the brand new coach. It was stupid.
You make it sound like things were going swimmingly on the staff and then RR just decided one day to fire his DC. That's not exactly how it happened.
Shafer isn't here because he and the positional coaches, and by extension he and RR, were oil and water. They could not get along, and RR decided to side with the positional coaches by midseason. The ill-fated move to the 3-3-5 was a clear signal that RR no longer trusted Shafer's authority. After that it was a matter of time until he was gone, either by his own call or RR's.
No one ever said he wasnt a stand up guy. He didnt understand what Michigan Football was all about. The media ate that shit up and destroyed him.
Is Michigan Football about a bunch of guys trying to get a ball over a white chalk line on a grass field?
I'm confused. Please explain.
Edit: Also, I think you meant what Michigan Football "is" all about, because if it changed then I am really fucked trying to figure out what the fuck you are trying to convey.
Here you go again. First off, cut out the swearing, youngster.
Second of all, you know very well that Michigan Football means more than the game of football, not only to the players in that program but the fans who support it.
Go flame away.
There is no "getting" or "not getting' Michigan Football. It's football. Linemen are big. Running backs are fast. Wide outs are tall. Also, fuck shit damn fuck deal with it, old man.
There is way more to Michigan football than just the game, just like at Notre Dame, Ohio State, Auburn, and every other school with a noted football tradition. Academics, prior football teams, prominent fans, a team's gameday traditions, the marching band, and on and on.
If you don't think this is true, you're supporting the wrong team. Go ahead and root for Florida Atlantic this year and tell me again how it's just a football game in Ann Arbor.
Oh, and your swearing makes you read like a 12-year-old. Keep it up.
I didn't get my degree from FAU, brohemia. Fuck ass shit cock BALLS.
It is not about just football, and I think the OSU situation explains that at an extreme. Its about developing youngsters into men, teaching life lessons, etc. Then there is also the tradition and a degree of loyalty to past teams (*not* a brotherhood per se ;) ).
I am not taking a stance on the whole RR "not getting it" issue. I am simply stating that Michigan football has always prided itself on being a successful program AND providing players with a basis for success in other aspects of life, and thus there is SOMETHING to "get" if you are going to coach at Michigan. Tressel, for example, clearly would not "get" it (although he seemed to perfectly get it at TSIO because, uh, its been their tradition to cheat).
I think if you are a high level coach you "get it" in that regard. You have been teaching kids how to play well and stay on the field for many years at that point. Even Tressel for all his cover-ups was still quite obviously a man his players respected and thought very highly of. It may be different here because the academics are at another level, but let's be honest some athletes wouldn't make the cut if they didn't run a 4.5. I agree that the tradition is to build model citizens as well as great athletes, but that is the case almost everywhere. I can't think of a single coach that says "Ah well fuck these kids. Win or get lost, assholes!" People don't make it far with that outlook. RR got it, Hoke gets it.
It sucks the way he treats some kids, I agree.
At the end of the day he must be somewhat of a quality guy to most of his players or the word would spread that you don't want to play for that guy. Until that happens even the guys we think are awful must not be all that bad to have as a coach. I have never played for the guy. I disagree with over signing, but it doesn't seem to be stopping kids from wanting to play for him.
I distinctly remember many of OSU fans calling RR a cheater. Oh, the irony.
One fan tried to tell me that "RR was the REAL cheater" because "practicing too much is ACTUALLY cheating" and "selling your own stuff isn't, it's different." I was like
Hey, there's nothing wrong with giving Rich Rod his due. Despite everything that went wrong, the OP makes a valuable point: Rich Rod was an honest, class act, and therefore deserving of our appreciation and respect. And the JT-tsio situation makes this clear in a new way. I am so glad to have Brady Hoke and his staff. But Rich Rod is still worthy of my admiration and respect.
I don't think that most would disagree with what you say - RR was a classy guy who deserves respect. But, the whole JT-OSU thing really has nothing to do with RR, so that is why there have been so many negative comments on the OP.
I hope that we get to a point where people stop relating everything in the college fb world to RR's tenure in an attempt to either defend RR (JT is such a scum - see how great RR is by comparison) or attack him (look, coach X came into a program and installed his new system in 1 year with no attrition - see how much RR sucks!!).
No, the OP makes the point that the guy who beat Rich Rod for three years was cheating. One way we measure our coach's success is his record against tsio. The fact that Tressel cheated the whole time he was beating Rich Rod calls for us to raise our estimation of RR's career here just a little bit higher. That's all. But it's still something. If it was my record, I would be glad that people were fair enough to point it out.
How can you say that I guy who consistently passed the blame onto his players was classy? Gimme a break.
I am changing my default to read all comments.
I logged in just to moderate a couple of comments back to normal. Yeesh.
People are trying to make mgoblog not worthy of reading by changing legit comments to flamebait.
Dude, don't you know you can't post here without mentioning Hoke?
My god, the pitchforks!!
Hoke Uber Alles.
You seem to have melded your own personal frustrations with Hoke and the football program with Section 1's sense of overweening paranoia.
Hoke. Uber. Alles.
Now you're just showing off!
Dude, I appreciate you. You're kind of like the angry friend that I had back in school, the guy that was pissed for an entire year after being dumped by his girlfriend. We kept telling him that she wasn't even that cool (in fact, she was annoying as sh-t) and that he'll find someone better. It wasn't until he had some good rebound s-x that he was able to turn it around . . .
Maybe Hoke needs to take Dudeness for sushi, take him home, burn some candles and oil him up. Then, and only then, will Dudeness forget about RR's sweet love of nights past.
Just made me picture a shirtless, oiled hoke reaching across a candlelit table, chopsticks poised delicately, to feed His Dudeness some hamachi.
It was glorious, obvs.
Thanks, but since it laid the ground work for the nightmare fuel that is a bare chested and oiled hoke, I now hate you.
But what if he was bare-chested, oiled, AND pointing at you?
You'd be a big gob of cookie dough in his hands, just waiting to be touched and molded into a (sinfully delicious) Michigan Man, that's what.
Maybe a nightmare for Dantonio. I can think of a number of Mgofans that would not resist such an embrace.
It's seems like he didn't like his results on the T.M.I. scale.
Mr. Rodriguez is gone. The ship has sailed. Let the man be.
let it go man
the thing about RR (and yes I felt he needed to go) is that when the NCAA started investgating a little too much supervision and practice time were the only violations they could find. There were never any suggestions of improper benefits or anything of the like. RR was not the right choice for UM but he had class and proved it when he left without a gripe.
I don't think the NCAA ever looked into any possible extra benefits here. They don't necessarily conduct program-wide investigations. They respond to specific allegations. The allegation against us was that we were conducting practice too long, so they looked into that. If there had been other allegations, they'd have expanded the investigation.
Odds are, given how football players are idolized on campus, that our players get the occasional freebie here and there. That's probably true just about everywhere.
Just thought about this. Was thinking what if everything that happened, happened last year instead of this year. It's interesting to think about, but it happened this year.
He will he some where next year.
If it happened last year, we wouldn't be in as strong a position to capitalize on OSU's weakness because of the combination of our own NCAA investigation and our coach's shaky job security. The biggest beneficiary may well have been MSU, or perhaps ND.
Shoe (or anyone else who knows), can you explain exactly what a show cause is, and what that would entail? Would it basically stop him from coaching D1 football?
Basically, if a school wants to hire a coach on a show cause order, they have to petition the NCAA for permission to hire the coach and to show why they shouldn't be penalized for hiring the coach.
It's not an actual blacklist, but it effectively makes it impossible for a school to hire him.
I don't think a show cause wll be the only thing keeping him from ever coaching again.
I would not hire Jim Tressel, ever.
I would only hire Rich Rodriguez as an offensive coordinator, because he displayed questionable leadership skills and decisionmaking (in balancing his roster, in disciplining his players, in recruiting decisions, in installing schemes during bye weeks, and getting badly outcoached against coaches not named Zook, Lynch, Brewster, Edsall or Weis) while in charge of a premier, national college football team.
" questionable leadership skills and decisionmaking (in balancing his roster, in disciplining his players, ..."
Serious question, what were his questionable decisions regarding discipline?
I agree that Rich did several right things in disciplining his players.
Perhaps jg112 was referring to the whole wingless helmets thing. I believe we have discussed it on this board and feel that while earning your way onto the team / into the lineup is good leadership, publicly identifying your situation was poor leadership.
The whispers about a "secret" suspension for Brandon Minor in 2008.
Suspending Will Hagerup for the most important game of the 2010 season when other more appropriate disciplinary options (during the bowl season) were available. Bad punting and kickoffs helped dig Michigan's first half hole in that game.
The whole "earning your wings" situation. Just silly - the implementation of a weird program given that the coach was 8-16 at the time.
Suspending Will Hagerup for the most important game of the 2010 season when other more appropriate disciplinary options (during the bowl season) were available
Really? Taking a principled stand in the most important game of the year shows a discipline PROBLEM?
I hate everything.
There was no reason Rich Rod couldn't have taken that "principled stand" in a different way, without taking one of the team's most important special teams players off the field for a game not only all those players, but all Michigan fans, wait for each year.
That seems a lot like suspending some players for five games from the next season, but letting them play in a bowl game.
This one dude once reminded us that justice delayed is justice denied. Some guy named Glenn once said, no player is more important than the team. No coach is more important that the team. The team, the team, the team. Between the two of them, the answer is pretty damn obvious.
and is exactly what did tressel in: Favoritism.
Hagerup's violation was a repeat offense of the stupidest kind imaginable (I know what it was). He repeatedly chose to do something he shouldn't have and thought he was bullet-proof. He let his team down, not RR.
You used to be pretty well-reasoned.
I'm arguing that some other form of punishment might have been appropriate, I'm not arguing for punishment to be ignored, or delayed. If he did what we all think he did, punishment was appropriate. I saw no reason at the time why Hagerup couldn't have been suspended for the bowl game. I highly doubt anyone here would have been outraged if his suspension was moved for a game - isn't that what Lloyd did with Mario Manningham in days gone by, and the program still existed?
First you were all:
I'm not arguing for punishment to be ignored, or delayed.
Then you were all:
I saw no reason at the time why Hagerup couldn't have been suspended for the bowl game. I highly doubt anyone here would have been outraged if his suspension was moved for a game.
...and then my head asploded
Congratulations! You just won the MGoAward for Dumbest Argument of the Day! This calls for a celebration!
Only discipline them if they are not important to the win, that'll learn 'em!
Way to derp yourself into derpland, derp-tard.
Your arguments are no longer valid. Not that they were anyway.
Wasn't it you that was teaching us all about how Michigan Football is different?
So basically your question is:
Would you hire a spread guru who couldn't get it done in the Big 10 or a guy who is likely to have a show cause levied against him?
I'd go with neither, since I enjoy having integerity and a functional defense.
If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let 'em go, because, man, they're gone.
What's your point.....smh ..... that OSU's f***up was greater than ours on some morality scale?
Please stop. I love RR. But he's gone. When we bring these things up, it just makes some of us feel worse for the guy and others insult him. It's not productive. I frankly share some of your feelings. But bringing it up here is not going to do anyone any good. Hoke is the coach, and so far he is doing a hell of a job.
I agree with most of the posters that its all water under the bridge. That said, its nice to see some positive words about Rodriguez. Maybe he didn't fit at Michigan and needed to go, but many of us enjoyed having him there and the positives that he brought. And I don't think many doubt that he could eventually win in Ann Arbor. There were just too many growing pains that people were unprepared to experience to give him more time. But whats past is past. More importantly, we need to bask in the glory that is Tressel's demise. (Picture the munchkins dancing around the Wicked Witch of the West's dead body)
It's a pointless thought experiment, of course, but I personally came to believe that 8 wins or so was the ceiling for Rodriguez at Michigan.
He certainly didn't seem to know how to hire a defensive coordinator, and his recruiting was not entirely impressive - and trending in the wrong direction.
I have no doubt that if he stayed our offense would have consistently ranked in the top 10 in total offense every year, though.
For better or for worse, I just loved watching the spread option offense. It was so exciting when it worked, and the potential for excitement was enough to get me through the games where it was not working. I think that's the part I'll miss. I am indifferent about Rodriguez as a person and won't necessarily miss him being on the sideline. I'll just miss the "new age" offense and the excitement it brought.
Rich Rod's new age offense sputtered to a halt against good defenses. It was very fun to watch against Bowling Green and coaches like Ron Zook and Bill Lynch, but when it mattered, he got owned by good defensive coaches.
Hence my statement that the potential for excitement was enough for me to get through games where it stuttered. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that Rodriguez had the ability to adapt the offense to compete better against stronger B1G defenses. Alas, it was not to be.
This has been disproven so many times it's to the point of stupidity.
He never had a second year QB at Michigan. The system works. You can witness it against OU. If he had been given time to get his players into a second year in the system it would have been able to sustain against "good defenses."
It nearly beat a Utah team that finished the year ranked #2. Pretty good defense on that team.
When you remember only the bad parts the history of everything seems pretty shitty.
You have to go all the way back to game #1, when Michigan scored a grand total of 23 points, to prove your point.
Name me the game in 2009 or 2010 where Michigan's "system" was efficient against a good defense. Note: being "efficient" does not mean "getting 80% of your yards because your team is losing by 14+ points and the other team is playing prevent defense."
I can think of one: 2010 v. UConn.
And I'm not sure where you've been, but Rich Rod was coach at Michigan for 3 years. They ran his offensive system for 3 years, you might recall the angst about Threet and Sheridan running his system.
So Iowa doesn't count? I guess being down by 1 score in the 4th is a good time for the opposing defense to put subs in and drop into a prevent defense. I'm sure iowa just gave up. Also, don't tell SDSU fans and hoke fans that because they like to point to TCU last year as hoke going up against a good defense and doing well. Also don't tell the national champs as they wouldn't be national champs if not for a comeback down 3 scores at the half.
Michigan never had the ball in the second half with the chance to tie Iowa.
SDSU did against TCU. So did Auburn against Bama.
That is really awful logic. So the offense didn't do well enough because the defense couldn't stop Iowa down a score with 7 minutes to play? That is your defense? Iowa had a top 10 defense.
No, I'm with you there. Some of the excitement, of couse, was due to the two QBs I've seen running Rodriguez's offense - Denard and Pat White. But still, when it was humming it was something to behold.
Rich Rodriguez is as polarizing of a figure as politics when it comes to Michigan football. Even though Rich Rodriguez' tenure at Michigan is directly related to Michigan football, the underlying purpose of this blog, I think there'd be less flaming on the board if we have a discussion of who we voted for in the last presidential election and why. Since it seems like 80% of the replies in this thread just want the topic buried for now, it makes sense to simply make it a website policy to not bring him up until next year at the earliest.
Maybe not more than a "RR vs. X" thread. I figure we'd have 400 responses, at least 10 ban hammers drop, 6 "goodbye cruel world" posts, 5000 neg votes, new swear words invented, 40 days of darkness, rivers and seas boiling, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria.
Oh, what the hell ... It sounds like fun. Let's do it! It'll be one for the ages.
I wish there was a line of code Brian could put into the posting script that would ban the use of repeating Rs, if simply because I've had enough RR-compared-to-[insert name here] posts.
He's gone, he was a nice guy, he'll get a new job next year. Please, please, please, enough is enough.
Fact: more tattoos = fewer turnovers.
Rich has his place in the picture. He may be the redheaded stepchild, but he's still part of the family.
I'm tired o the overwrought morality play that the OSU/Tressel situation has taken on with respect to UM. Yes, OSU ran an overtly dirty program with lots of issues, but I for one do not want to start comparing the "morals" of the coaches and players. UM may have never had someone as sociopathic at Pryor, but there have been bad apples here who in a different context could have caused some siginficant trouble. And while I believe that Carr, RR, and Hoke do have high standards, they are also big-time coaches who expect to win, and sometimes that pressure can supersede your better judgment. And let's not forget that Gary Moeller was fired basically for drunkenly embarrassing the university in a restaurant. So while it is sweet schadenfreude to see Tressel get his comeupance, it doesn't need to be a referendum on the morality of both programs.
In common law there is a concept called the "Doctrine of Unclean Hands." In short, it goes that an aggrieved party is not entitled to recover from a defendant if that aggrieved party contributed to the event that caused the damage. In the present case, it could be said that Michigan fans would be well-served by focusing on Tressel's downfall rather than doing any kind of comparisons between the Michigan and OSU programs. As we all know, the Michigan program does not necessarily have unclean hands (NCAA investigations, several questionable characters, etc.)
I don't disagree, though the doctrine you speak of typically applies in circumstances where specific performance is the only option for making the aggrieved party whole, and is a means of protecting against abuse by the party seeking the remedy. In this case, UM did nothing to abuse OSU or lead to their violation of NCAA rules, and any violations by UM are likely unreleated to the circumstances at OSU. Plus, outside of UM asking for their losses to OSU during the Tressel period to be replaced with wins (specific performance, since financial renumeration would be inappopriate), the only relief UM can derive from this situation is cool, sweet schadenfreude.
My question is whether or not this is appropriate given the fact that most major college programs have their fair share of dirty underbellies.
Of course you are right that the doctrine does not really apply to this situation. However, it was fun to apply it nevertheless.
RR is not only a guy with morals, he is a football genius. Unfortunately I think he lacks the leadership qualities to really succeed. Hoke is the complete opposite. I don't think he's a football genius, but he's certainly a leader who surrounds himself with good people.
But he sure as hell had a rough stretch on putting the right guy in charge on the other side of the ball, though at least some of that seemed to be because he was forcing his DC choices into a ready-made staff, and to some extent, a narrow choice of scheme.
It's a shame. But it's also promising to see how differently Hoke operates. You're right-- Hoke is not a football IQ genius, but he may be a people-management IQ genius, and for a head coach, that's far and away more important. Decided schematic advantages are for coordinators, not HC's. I don't think I ever understood that before the RR Era, much as I enjoyed the O last year.
I don't think anyone on this board has the knowledge to state that Brady Hoke IS NOT a football IQ genius.
What I do know is that his Michigan defensive lines were all pretty darn good, and after gaining some head coaching experience he has been able to turn around two programs.
As the queen of Team RR and someone who may not truly ever be over it, can we please move on?
I would say that Dudeness would be most qualified but I think he might be a little MGoUnstable (teasing, Dudeness). Can I take over the throne in his stead?
Only if you'e cool with how I'm getting the RR shirts I bought from the Salvation Army sale mounted. :)
I'd much rather see Michigan shirts hanging on my walls than the "stylish" stuff my spouse insists on hanging!
You should try to get the shirts taxidermied as well.....
Might be taking this a little too far...
Oh, the SHIRT. Nevermind.
Dudeness could be your court jester.
The power of the BISB Corollary.
Look forward to golden poop.
Let RR rest in peace. The Dominos didn't fall right for him
RichRod is a Michigan man. He was our coach, and while it didn't work out, he tried and tried hard, and seemed to have done so on the up and up. Were there alot of things going against him that were unfair? Yes, but he is a big boy and this the biggest stage there is.
The best thing the M nation can do, is I hope Hoke after he beats OSU this year, presents RichRod with the game ball, just as Bo did, giving the ball to Chalmers Elliott. Bo said that he won with Elliott's players, and Hoke will have done the same with RichRods.
I also hope that RichRod attends many of the football events going forward and is not treated as a persona non grata. THIS is where the Michigan family may fail going forward. He needs to be welcomed with open arms, because he is, in fact, part of the family. After Coach Moeller's incident, I heard for the longest time he stopped going to the events, likely felt ashamed, until alot of them forced him to go. It takes leadership to get someone to go against their will, for the bigger picture, and I sincerely hope they do the same when RichRod likely scoffs at returning.
I think the program is in real trouble if we can't accept someone other than a "Michigan Man" as our coach. It's like we're being racist. All we're really doing is limiting the talent pool. I think Hoke is great, and I think he'll do a fantastic job. I think he was actually the best man for the job after seeing the job he's done already, but I think that's a little bit of luck (that he's a Michigan Man) and a lot of David Brandon being a good judge of character.
You're right, to the extent that if there were no good "Michigan Man" candidates out there and it limited us to hiring Notorious MDB or his ilk we'd be screwed.
But there are real benefits to the Michigan Man attribute. First, there is the fact that the alumni and the media eat that shit up and will trip over themselves giving said Man some extra slack. Related to the alumni angle, Michigan Men will be more plugged into the alumni network (both football-specific and university wide), which can only help with recruiting, donations, etc. In Hoke's specific case, being a Michigan Man is what connected him to Greg Mattison and convinced the man to leave the Ravens and come to Ann Arbor. Finally, I would venture to guess that having deep ties to the university and the football program can only help on the recruiting trail - Hoke will always be a little bit more credible when talking about how sublime Michigan is than someone like Rodriguez.
Of course, if said Michigan man doesn't know how to coach, or how to hire assistants, he'll still be useless. Also, it might be more important to have ties to Ohio and Michigan high schools than to Michigan alumni specifically. I Just wanted to point out that the idea might not be totally vapid when it comes to coaching hires.
There is no putting the defensive implosion aside. That represents half the team! That is- unless you want to include special teams, but do you?
Rich Rod is not a genius. His weaknesses as our coach during his three year tenure are obvious and do not need rehashing. Nor was he a "victim" of the UM alumni, the entire fanbase, or the media. Even the most loyal MGobloggers now acknowledge that the program was not headed toward a major turnaround this year or next.
As a Michigan coach, he is not in the same class as Gary Moeller or Lloyd Carr. He strikes me as several levels below Bump Elliott, who enjoyed a modicum of success in the Big Ten.
Thank you sir, may I have another?
Amen to that. I've grown weary of the "genius" title or even the "offensive genius" title being thrown around in reference to RR. His version of the spread option offense was innovative in 2005 but did not evolve to meet the defensive responses to it. It reminds me of high school, where often the QB is the best athlete on the team and his passing ablility is secondary to his athleticism. Others in the coaching ranks have taken what he created and modified it to great success, this I do not dispute. However his system as created at Tulane, refined at Clemson & WV & attempted at Michigan has, IMO, lost its advantage.
I know others here will trot out Oregon, Auburn, Florida & others to defend the merits of the spread offense, however as I've posted before. None of those systems come even close to RR's in terms of QB running attempts. They all modified the spread to counter the defensive adjustments to the straight read/option spread. Lumping all of those offenses together and coloring them with the same brush is equivolent to saying any team that uses short passes in their scheme is a "west coast team" when thats just not accurate.
We hire Hoke as the head coach, get Mattison as a result, and let RR be the offensive coordinator? Not that RR can't handle being a head coach, just that clearly he has no contacts in the defensive world.
What would you rather be, a pencil or a Q-tip?
Of Rich Rod was a mess, he made mistakes but M arrogance was the ultimate demise and if you all can't see that after the last 3 years then you are blind nothing more nothing less.
I knew I shouldn't have looked at this thread. Dammit.
We're still actually discussing RR vs. Tressel. The man was fired five months ago. You can't even recognize the horse. It doesn't matter if his cheating was less than or worse than Tressel. Doesn't matter if he's an offensive genius, or football genius, a good coach at smaller schools, a bad coach at traditional powerhouses, or anything inbetween. It doesn't matter if he's a sloppy record keeper, a snake oil recruiter, a poor recruiter, or anything else.
He had one winning season at Michigan, two losing seasons, went 0-6 vs. tOSU and MSU, and got hammered in the only bowl game of his time at Michigan. Thank you for the effort, good luck in your next job, and the comparisons are done.
Let's move on, there is nothing to see here.