Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
I wouldn't care about what that guy says, aside from the fact that there are people here who actually believe it. Does it really take more than 3 years to move from a 4-3 to a 3-3-5? Does it really take more than three to keep an above-abysmal kicking game? While I don't blame him for saying these things, since after all, he wants to coach again and can't come out and say, "Yeah, I did a terrible job," I do blame the Section 1s of the world who won't concede the fact that their arguments are so indefensible that it makes them certifiable in the college football world.
Hoke took a team (with no recruiting power/resources) from 0 to 60 in two seasons, while RichRod took his from 80 to 50 in three.
that not enough focus is put on Bill Martin's & Mary Sue Coleman's roles in the last 3 years. After all, they hired RR.
You're the head of Michigan & its athletic department. You know what Michigan football's history is. There's dissatisfaction among the fan base due to a mediocre (by Michigan standards) record the last few years.
So you're interviewing possible head coaches, and a leading candidate is spread-only offense. You look at his last job and he took over a team that was mediocre the last few years, but was 7-5 before the switch, and he goes 3-8, 1-6 in conference, his first year. Umm. Are the results of this spread only, have to blow up the offense to save it approach something you're willing to endure at Michigan? And yes, WVU only endured one year of this pain before they had a very solid 9-4. But that was against the Big East, which is not as strong and not as deep as the Big 10. So, do you, the AD and President, consider that with stronger opponents that there's risk that it will take more than 1 year to revert to normal? And is that something that Michigan and its fan base are willing to put up with?
After all, go back to the Bump Elliot era. He was fired after going 8-2 his last year (granted there were a lot of sub par years preceeding this, but still) because he wasn't getting the job done. Michigan has high expectations; is this coaching candidate's approach compatible with Michigan's history and expectations?
It is my understanding, Don, and if you have more information please correct me, that Fritz Crisler retired as AD, Don Canham was hired and Canham wanted a new coach who could fill the Big House. Remember Bump had lost his last game 50-14.
Bump was allowed to retire, because relations were cordial (Bump was that sort of guy), and because Bump was willing to accept an asst. AD job.
Correct me where I'm wrong.
To Assistant Athletic Director, and then named Iowa's Athletic Director, where he was quite possibly the best AD the school has ever had, and the greatest infulence on Iowa athletics since Nile Kinnick.
The 1969 Michigan-OSU game ball was given, rightly, to Bump, who gave remarkable support to the first-year Bo Schemechler.
Both while technically true just continued the "Michigan doesn't fire it's coaches" meme that used to exist. The question is, if they wanted to come back, as is, was that an option? In the immediate moment, no.
... "uh, promoted." Irony may have been a little too subtle.
He was kicked upstairs. But then he went on to become one of the great AD's the conference has ever seen. Bump has an answer to every question. All-American. Rose Bowl. National Champion. Rose Bowl Coach. Rose Bowl AD.
David Brandon really wanted to have a Bump Elliott Day last year, but Bump's wife was too ill. I hope that day comes soon.
And you, M-Wolverine, are not just technically correct about Moeller, you are correct, period.
But I didn't think posting board format was. Since my reply was obviously in response to Don, and not yours. And thus not a "correction" to yours. So maybe you out to take a little more time reading, before you get all defensive.
Though your last paragraph may have been a little more subtle. We may be in agreement, though I can't tell for sure. Moeller was told to take a ton of onerous restrictions that no one would accept, resign, or be fired; and was hurried into doing to before Bo could be contacted on vacation to squash the whole thing before it happened. In fact, it was pushed through so fast the President failed to consult the Regents about it, which in turn helped get him pushed out later. So yeah, we didn't fire Moeller. We didn't give him a lot of choice, either.
I agree that Bill Martin screwed up, but it starts a lot earlier than when he offered the job to Rich Rod. Keep in mind that Lloyd had basically told Martin in Jaunary that he wanted to retire. Martin had almost a year to put together a list of candidates and a succession plan, and he did pretty much nothing until Lloyd actually announced his retirement in mid-November. When the search did get under way, Martin was eventually outmaneuvered for one high-profile candidate (Les Miles) and turned down by another (Greg Schiano). Rich Rod fell into Martin's lap and "saved" a search that had run cold by mid-December (remember that it was Rodriguez' agent who initially contacted Martin, not vice-versa). By that point, he was probably so relieved to have interest from a high-profile candidate that he ignored the red flags.
I agree with you completely until the last few words. I think RR saved Martin and there weren't really "red flags". At this time, RR was trouncing the BE and Casteel was fielding top twenty defenses.
Doesn't mean he didn't make mistakes, doesn't mean he shouldn't have been fired, but I don't really see the red flags in 2007, other than the obvious fact that he hadn't played OSU/Wisconsin/Iowa/PSU every year in a weak BE, which is the case with almost every coach at the major college level.
True. I guess no one could have predicted the way it turned out and the problems that would arise. Back then Rodriguez was the hot name in coaching, especially after he turned down the Alabama job.
But I guess it just goes to show that the biggest name isn't always the right guy for the job.
Howeva, you also have to admit that you are clearly the type of person whose beliefs are set in stone and under no circumstances could you be convinced otherwise. RR could have faced every forseeable stroke of misfortune short of the rapture and you still wouldn't cut him any slack. If you are going to bring up Hoke's past success, then why can't you bring up RR's past successes--(which, by the way are more impressive than Hokes)? I love what Hoke is doing so far with recruiting, but remember he hasn't won a game yet at U of M.
I'll leave the rest of this alone...but the 80 is a big time stretch...we weren't cruising anywhere near that my friend.
And he conveniently left out RR taking WV from 30 to 80, but hey, let's not let other data get in the way of making a point that has been made literally thousands of times here in the past 6 months.
/NOT a defense of RR, who unquestionably needed to be fired
West Virginia was not doing that badly. The man RR succeeded, Don Nehlen, is in the College Football Hall of Fame. Nehlen twice went undefeated in the regular season at WVU and had them as a regular bowl participant.
Something about RR seems to make people on both sides not think clearly. He's neither Urban Meyer nor Bobby Williams. He has some strengths and some flaws. His set of strengths/flaws ultimately didn't fit that well here. Maybe they will better somewhere else.
Changing Michigan from what it was into a successful spread-based team was like trying to do a 180 degree turn in a cruise ship. There was so much momentum going in the original direction in the form of history, culture, personnel, etc., that RR probably didn't grasp it all until he was turning the rudder and the ship was barely moving. I think that since he left and we've seen the resurgence of all that original momentum that none of us really understood how strong it was.
I agree RR deserved criticism and deserved to be fired. I disagree with the degree of hatred that comes from a lot of people in the anti-RR camp.
RR took an above-average to mediocre defense and turned it into an atrocity. For this, there is no excuse and that alone probably merits his dismissal. Although he seemed like a likeable dude, in some ways he was a PR nightmare (Josh Groban, etc.)
On the other hand, give credit where it's due. He is responsible for one of the greatest offenses in the country. He recruited and landed a kid in Denard that is both exciting on the field and impressive off it (though it is a valid point to note that he *tried* to land Pryor, but who knows how his trajectory would have changed in Ann Arbor). By all accounts, RR seemed like a good-natured, likeable dude. Although the NCAA violations are problematic and should probably be counted as a negative in RR tenure, they are not the type of violations that raise questions about his character (IE, those violations were idiotic - consider, in the supposed "year of scandal" in NCAA FB, how many people are talking about the "major" NCAA violations of the winningest program in NCAA FB history?)
RR should have been fired. But part of the reason that he could not work at U-M is our own damn fault. I look at the RR era with a more introspective eye. RR exposed some major flaws in our fanbase. Collectively, we did not give him a fair shake. His path was much harder than it should have been, and a lot of that is on us - fans, former players, etc. Some of the problems in the past 3 years were his fault, some of them were our fault. I'm not going to assign percentage fault, but I will say that at least part of the reason RR could not succeed here is because the U-M community was breathing down his neck from day 1. The fact that we, as a fanbase, could not support our coach even from day 1 is sad.
Hoke is facing the same issue as well, and IIRC, Lloyd Carr was not people's first choice either. In fact, it is likely that if Moeller was selected today, in the era of the internet, that people would have been screaming as well because of his abysmal head coaching record. Anytime you go into a new place you have to expect to have those who will support you, those who will oppose you, and plenty of fense-sitters waiting for a side to fall onto. Additionally, you have to have a plan on how you are going to deal with each of these factions. This is creating cultural change 101, and Rich Rodriguez did not seem to have a plan. In contrast, Brady Hoke has come in, built relationships with those who supported him, reached out to those who didn't, and has built a lot of momentum with the fense-sitters.
Rich Rod is known as a control-freak (probably why Casteel did not follow him...which btw I have heard he may not even be at WVU next year as his relationship with Holgorsen is not good) and tried to do it all on his own, his own way. If he knew it was going to take more than 3 years after the first spring, why not play a style of ball that the current players could be successful with instead of struggling with an entire class of players? Install your offense incrementally and do what is right for the players. If you don't have the players you need to run your offense, why try? I liked RR and wanted him to succeed, I was hoping that he could upgrade what he was able to do at WVU, but he didn't. Coaches are paid to get the best out of their players...I believe that includes setting them up to succeed not accepting failure until you can get "your guys" in there. He had an obligation to do the best he could with the kids who chose to stay...and it is obvious from the statements he made that he failed them...and still chooses to blame Lloyd Carr. If RR had given Lloyd's players the same assurances that Hoke gave Denard, I am quite sure more would have stayed and we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
in part because of the way Brandon conducted the search. DB made sure to be seen as publicly considering both Miles and Harbaugh.
The people he has left to win over are myself, and a many others on this site. We like his regional recruiting wins. We like how he hates Ohio State. We are concerned the return to manball might equal Tressel or Lloyd ball, and cause re-transition issues. We are concerned about his coaching record to date, and how that will translate to the B1G. (Obviously Rich's track record was better when he was hired, so why would we not be concerned about Hoke's?) We are concerned about how things looked at the spring game. We are a little concerned about national recruiting, but we'll see on that one.
The interesting thing is, we (Section 1 included maybe even), are not close minded like some of the most ardent low point Rich Rod bashers who have come out of the woodwork on this site. We are just waiting to see how the product is delivered on the field, and are steeling ourselves against the though of another rough transitional period.
David Brandon took a risk in hiring Brady Hoke. I think we get the criteria he considered in hiring him. A lot people hope he was right / really don't want to be Notre Dame.
Although the NCAA violations are problematic and should probably be counted as a negative in RR tenure, they are not the type of violations that raise questions about his character (IE, those violations were idiotic - consider, in the supposed "year of scandal" in NCAA FB, how many people are talking about the "major" NCAA violations of the winningest program in NCAA FB history?
RR is both mentioned and pictured in the cover story of the ESPN The Magazine "Busted" issue.
It's been for more like the last 30 years....
"We like to think that every place we've been to, including Michigan, that it's in a better spot than when we first got on campus. "
I would agree to the extent that there is more talent and experience on the roster now than there was when he got here.
If we're taklking about the new facilities.
Outside of the improvements to the weight room, for which he is to be commended, I'm not sure whether he played much of, if any role in the facilities upgrades that occurred over the past three years.
I would agree to the extent that there is more talent and experience on the roster now than there was when he got here.
I wasn't agreeing with the idea, just pointing out that your response was arguing a totally different point. R Kelly made a comment specifically referencing the personnel that Rodriguez inherited v. left behind and you responded with various streaks and (obviously made-up for effect) stats that didn't address anything about personnel.
That said, I think your list a couple posts down is a little misleading, as players like Manningham (and arguably Mallet) were more than likely gone no matter who the coach was (Rodriguez, Carr, Hoke, DeBord, Miles, etc). So they weren't really "inherited" by Rodriguez, they just weren't seniors in 2007.
Again, you're not really responding to the point being made. You're aiming (slightly, at least) off target again.
I specifically said that players like Manningham were more than likely gone regardless of the coaching situation. Denard transferring because they brought in Hoke would have been a different issue than Manningham going pro independent of the coaching situation. I absolutely credit the new coaching staff for keeping almost the entire team at Michigan; Rodriguez definitely lost a lot of players unnecessarily. I'm just saying there is a difference between a new coach losing players that are there waiting for him v. a player who was out the door no matter the coach. That's the difference between Manningham (who I wouldn't "count") and Clemons (who would have "counted").
I'm not trying to defend Rodriguez, the guy had some terrible luck at Michigan but he clearly screwed some things up all on his own. Just that this (recent, as far as I can tell) mentality that the 2008 squad that Rodriguez got (even before the rash of transfers) was somehow equivalent to the 2007 squad that was loaded with seniors (and at least a couple NFL bound juniors) is odd and, in my opinion, wrong.
Just watch the time and keep good records, okay? And for God's sake, don't talk to any reporters about it.
I'd rather keep my lunch than jump on the merry-go-round.
Cue the "RichRod didn't try hard enough to keep Manningham and Arrington out of the NFL draft" ridiculousness.
If the "RichRod didn't keep Manningham/Arrington/Warren" thread ever came into conatact with the "Beilein let Morris go to the NBA for the good of all mankind" thread, the universe would collapse on itself.
I think you need to look up what apples to apples means. 2 players leaving to get paid millions of dollars in the NFL is an apple. 2 players transferring and playing football at another college because of a coaching change is an orange. You can't compare the two because they aren't even close to the same.
So the facts you want to compare are the people who left under RichRod, who was here for 3 years, and the people who have left under Hoke, who has been here for a couple months? Sounds good to me. Let's start with Manningham, Arrington, and Mike Martin. I mean, RichRod is totally to blame for those 2 WRs leaving and I love Hoke because he totally kept Marting on the team. This alone shows that Hoke has won more games at Michigan than RR did.
Go back and read what I said again. I explicitly stated that I was only speaking about the talent level on our current roster as compared to the talent available on the roster in January 2008. I don't think anyone is trying to argue he left the program as a whole in better shape.
"Ebi Ezeh" couldn't even knock Obi Ezeh out of the starting lineup!
This list is misleading. Besides the fact that you listed four players who never played a second for RR (already been pointed out above, not a discussion that I am going to get into), you also listed some players who were either very young and not ready to take the field in 2008, or were never very good players at all.
Hemmingway (IIRC, out for the majority of the season due to illness, and only a sophmore)
Warren (only a true sophmore)
Mouton (very little, if any experience when inherited. Still undersized)
Stevie Brown (still at safety in '08. No one here would argue Stevie was an effective college safety)
Greg Matthews (true sophmore with little experience)
Obi Ezeh (the struggles of Obi have been discussed ad nauseam on this site)
Molk/Schilling (very little experience, very young)
Graham (inherited as a 287 pound monster of a DE, transformed into his upperclassman form under Barwis).
This year's team returns close to 20 starters, most of which are upperclassmen with multiple years of playing experience. Most importantly this team will have depth, talent and experience at the most important position on the field, quarterback. 2008's team was at best a 5-7 football team. I think most everyone here would agree that this year's team would be greatly underachieving if they only finished at 5-7, in December we were all expecting at least 9-3.
Did you watch the whole Q-and-A session on the linked video?
Generally, when people freak out about a quote here or there, from somebody who is ordinarily and widely regarded as a good guy, it merits watching the whole encounter. I'm not suggesting that your mind might be changed. You may have already seen it. It's actually a fairly long video file, as you may already know. I just wondered if you had seen it.
You know what's funny? You say it is an arguable point that he needed more time, which I am assuming because his players are just now reaching their senior year, and then in the same breath you want to compare a team where the majority of RichRod's players aren't even juniors. My point being - the reason we don't completely know whether the team is in better shape is because of the youth of the team....but you have no problem comparing that youth to senior Mouton and senior Brandon Graham. What happens if one of our sophomores, like Marvin Robinson, comes out of his shell and becomes an all american and the first pick in the draft? Then what happens if Fitz runs for 4500 yards the next 2 seasons? As it has been posted above, Mouton was not a good safety and it was possibly his position switch that got him drafted. You don't understand the difference between the actual usable talent on the team in 08 (Graham was good, Trent was good, Warren was ok) and the guys who turned out good but were impact guys in 08 (Hemmingway, Mouton, Molk, etc...).
But can we end the myth that Barwis magically made Brandon Graham a monster by making him an upperclassman, when becoming an upperclassman makes you an upperclassman? I would HOPE a great player is better as a Junior and Senior than as an underclassman. Not that Barwis did a bad job; he was good at what he does. Very good. So was the guy before him. And the guy after him. Because if you're going to start giving S&C guys credit for every great player being great, you're going to have to start giving them blame for every crappy player who stays crappy. They're helpful, they do good work...but they're not miracle workers.
I never understood the Brandon Graham as evidence as that Barwis was a S&C god. What this board fell in love with was a bunch of YouTube videos of an intense sounding coach with a great coaching voice. So that made him out to be the guy who would produce lions where others would produce kittens. Never made sense and yet it didn't die off until the RR was finally shown the door. Actually lasted a few weeks longer until Barwis finally quit.
I believe Koger, Campbell and Demens go up in that "Mike Martin" list who were already committed (and maybe needed to be re-committed) when Rich got here. Now, Hoke is inheriting them too, but it's questionable "who" left them behind.
80-some percent of the readers know you're a huge tool, but that doesn't mean you get to lie.
* Roy Roundtree
* Martavious Odoms
* Patrick Omameh
* Tate Forcier (At least a few moments, right?)
* Taylor Lewan
* Craig Roh
* Will Hagerup
AFAICS, != "nothing."
They're all young, too.
These are all very good players. But, for a team like Michigan, that's a very small group. RR didn't recruit nearly enough quality players (especially on defense). That's pretty obvious.
Fair enough -- but that's somewhat beside the point here. The doofus "Ornery" said it was Robinson and "nothing."
"These are all very good players. But, for a team like Michigan, that's a very small group. RR didn't recruit nearly enough quality players (especially on defense)."
Possibly; and possibly not. Iowa has shown that with the right position coaching, a team can achieve good things and play over its head consistently.
I would venture an educated guess that, on defense, Michigan may have had good players who were not as well coached as they might have been, and therefore played under their potential.
I'm not into finger-pointing and blame, so I don't really care who's at "fault." I just hope it gets fixed, and soon!
I realize that Roh is young and has been misused. BUT, he also hasn't really done anything, despite the hype. He's not conspicuously bad, which puts him in our defensive top 3.
Tate got benched, then couldn't hack it.
Hagerup? You're going to a punter to demonstrate the talent level?
Odoms has been fine. Good blocker.
My issue is that sort of Denard, he didn't recruit one all conference kid. (maybe Roundtree?)
Omameh, Lewan - they could get there.
You'd have to take out of the equation all the talent he was left with, which makes up some of our best current players, as well as players gone by. (Speaking of linters, how soon we forget Zoltan). It's like everyone forgets while the offense needed overhauling, the defense was left with more talent than it currently has. There's no Brandon Graham replacements (heck, or even Donnocsn Warren), and we jones for leftovers like Troy, Martin et al.
These statements don't bother me; they don't surprise me.
And I can hardly think of a single time in the last two years where I have argued with somebody over the merits or demerits of a particular defensive scheme, player selection or play-calling, etc. I am one of those people who think the coaches -- all the coaches -- probably know a lot more about football and their football teams than I do. Shocking, I know.
Sorry; you'll have to find yourselves some other bogeyman.
And cigol; Your concluding bit of baseless, insulting trashtalk isn't worth my time.
If anything, what the story as reported at Freep.com proves, is how much the Free Press craves stories about Rich Rodriguez. That they would assign a staff writer to plow through a local West Virginia radio station's video reports on a public statements given by coach Rodriguez at a Glenville State charity golf outing, saying little more than what he's said before.
It doesn't bother you, because it shouldn't. Getting upset over something as trivial as that, we'll have you in the ground a solid 15 years early.
Just take a step back and chill. WHo cares ultimately what someone else thinks. You have your own opinion and have expressed it... I have heard someone say before opinions are like assholes, who gives a shit!
I'll get down voted but I'll always root for RR. I think he did leave the program better than he was handed. And to think that people actually actively worked to sabotage the efforts of a Michigan coach is absolutely 180 degrees from what I might imagine a Michigan man to be.
What baffles me is all the people on here telling everyone to move on from the RR era yet everytime he opens his mouth they are the first ones to post it on here....if you want to move on why bother to even mention his name or what he says at other functions?
Obviously he believes what he wants and the rest of you believe what you want.
Fact is Brady is coming in to a much better situation and more upperclass talent then RR even sniffed. Also it seems like so far RR recruited the right guys to the program seeing as how most of them are working hard and not quitting like that senior class of 08 did.
What is going on here (a Rodriguez hate-fest) is NOT what David Brandon and Brady Hoke want.
Personally, I don't care about being part of their team, and following directions as to how to bring Michigan back together, and move it forward. But I thought that many of you guys did care about that. No matter what, your sniping at Rodriguez is NOT how they want Michigan fans to move forward.
Stop posting here. And stop telling everyone else what to do or think in a condescending way.
If Section 1 leaves because of your own whining, david, PLEASE GOD go with him.
I'm going to be out most of the weekend. If you could wait until Monday I'd really appreciate it. I look forward to bouje14 popping up in early June.
hey guys, you probably wondered when I was going to show up to the meltdown party, but i just wanted to tell you I'm heading outside to play some tennis and go to the arb so you'll have to have this meltdown on your own, i believe in your abilities though, good luck
not the guy for UM. The only thing I credit him for is bringing DRob here....which is one great thing, but take away DRob from the offense and we are maybe 4-8 last year at best. Denard was the only string of hope RR had to keep his job and THAT IS NOT RIGHT. You need a COMPLETE team.
God, what a paper, and what a readership!
Top Five Most Popular stories at Freep.com, at 11 am Saturday:
And this is among the 67% or so of Detroiters who can read... /s
Shut. The. Fuck. Up. About. The. FREEP.
We get it already.
It seems like about 50% of Section 1's posts are immediately followed by a post by you yelling at him. I'm starting to think maybe you secretly like Section 1. Maybe you're in looooooove with him. You two should just kiss and get it over with already.
The Rodriguez-at-Glenville State-story, nicely placed on the front page of the print-edition Free Press Sports section, has now shot up to Number 3 on the Freep.com "Most Popular" list. U guys rock.
You have problems.
Why do we care what RR says at this point? I wanted him to succeed here because I love Michigan and I don't want to see us do poorly EVER. But, he's gone. Old news. Who cares now. Hoke and Matts and crew are wrecking recruiting right now and it seems they are better teachers of X's and O's. We shall see soon and I think we will be pleased with the results. Go Blue.
FTR I didn't bother reading the article. It's the freep. Nuff said.
Here's the WV Metro News site, with complete video, if you prefer:
What does it take to build a program? Does it take 2-3 years to really get things moving at a major university? I have no clue because I've never tried it. Sure a lot of coaches have made turnarounds happen and the current and previous coach at Michigan have done it, all before they came to Michigan. Maybe there's a lot more to deal with than just X's and O's when you go from a smaller school to Michigan that neither me or anyone on this board will ever know.
So to sit there on a computer and claim an accomplished college coach "doesn't know what he's doing" is pretty disingenuous. I support Michigan. I supported Michigan with coach Rodriguez, coach Carr, coach Moeller, coach Schembechler and now coach Hoke. I would have supported Michigan with a coach English or even a coach Deboard.
It's just gotten old seeing any post on Rodriguez and seeing the same comments over and over.
wait to see him coach again. As much as I can be a fan of a coach. RR was pretty high on my list even before he came to Michigan. Also I can't wait to see what Hoke and company can do with this team.
Talent not withstanding, RR did seem forge a pretty good team and family mentality. These kids that are present on this team they are ready to play for Michigan.
On a side note Bacon's book should also shed some light on the RR era. I anticipate the revelations in that book may provide some 20/20 hindsight especially the flap over the No. 1.
he'll never get over the hump until he learns how to coach his system with better size, and believes that defense wins.
He can win with what he did defensively in the Big East, but not in one of the 5 major conferences.
pretty sure he was already "over the hump" when his teams were winning 10+ games a year and beating Georgia and Oklahoma in BCS bowls.
But I hope people aren't expecting Bacon's book to be some tell-all unauthorized biography of sorts. An overview of the 3 years, and the times, but Bacon is too much of a homer and afraid to lose future access to be completely throwing anyone under the bus. I expect a lot more of the type of stuff he's mentioned on his blog, like how ridiculously hard student athletes work than chapter after chapter of program dirt.
But I may be wrong. This may be the last book he's planning on writing on Michigan.
I'm not saying Bacon's going to write a puff piece. He has opinions, and isn't afraid to state them. I'm just thinking too many people are expecting this to be the tell all of all the behind the scenes things that happened over the three years, when really it was meant to be a book covering the transition, the daily life of a football team 365/year, and just turned into a book that had an ending written for it because the arc of the story DID come to an end after 3 years. But considering the original intent, and the fact he's not going to try and paint Rich, Lloyd, Martin, Brandon, or pretty much anyone else involved with Michigan Football in a particularly bad light, it's not going to be all scandal and revelation. I expect a lot more Brandon Graham, Denard, Tate, and their trials and tribulations than Casteel, Les Miles, and all that. I'm sure it'll all be touched on. But the emphasis will be on the life of a football squad, not the politics...except maybe where they uncontrollably cross over.
This is exactly right. I love John Bacon, he's one heck of a guy and an incredible writer, but it's absolutely true he's going to hold back a lot for this book. He gets the access he gets for a reason, because he's a consumate professional who knows better than to write everything he knows to sell a few more books or make a few more headlines. Bacon has too much respect for the University, and it's safe to say Rich Rodriguez as well, to do that.
I expect this book will fill in some blanks for sure, but it's not going to be a tell-all exposé.
You'd probably agree with me, on reflection, that being "incredible" is not the goal of most journalists.
And, moreover, that "holding back" is not exactly what makes a journalist a "consummate professional."
You write what is true, and what is important. You use your judgment, and try to tell what is important, about an important story. You try to write in a way that is interesting and compelling. You don't cover up for favors, and you don't use the front page of the Sunday paper to conduct personal vendettas.
What do you suppose Bacon's book will do with this picture? It's Bacon, kneeing in front of Shaw in the bottom right hand corner of this particular cropping of our favorite picture:
I'm going to speak for everyone and ask, "who the hell cares about your endless rhetorical questions and pretentiously worded opinions telling us what to think?"
after John wrote his column for the Wall Street Journal explaining that he had exclusive access to the program for his book, was Angelique Chengelis' hardly-surprising comment to me that Bacon had been an "embed."
That's good, inasmuch as John will have real news to report. But it's also a journalistic challenge, in that as an "embed,' he will have a special obligation to defend and support what he writes.
When Angelique calls John an "embed," it is slightly newsworthy, inasmuch it is no longer John U. Bacon mentioning his access, which any ambitious book writer might like to mention. It is confirmation from another reporter.
And as we know from recent history, having Michigan as your alma mater is not a bar to some opportunists attacking the program for their own fun and profit.
Welp, this thread now has it all. Section 1 telling us what to think, BRCE trolling in lockstep right behind, a bouje appearance, David from Wyoming being David from Wyoming, slapfights over RR's legacy, Freep hate...
Put it in the time capsule to show the kids. THIS was what it was like to be in the MGoBlogosphere in 2010 and 2011.
You can think whatever you want. I mean that from the bottom of my heart.
And moreover, I'll be with you; supporting the program. Like you have, for the past three years.
Lloyd Carr put together four top ten recruiting classes before his retirement, so please stop talking about how RR didn't have the talent when he got here. More importantly, Rod didn't seem to communicate well with players as I'm pretty sure more kids have transferred in the last 3 1/2 years than in the rest of the program's history.
Rod is the one who decided he would've rather had Nick Sheridan running the offense instead of Ryan Mallett (he should've got over his pride and ran a spread offense and not a "spread read" offense his first few years with Mallett). Maybe with Mallett putting up 3500 yards and 30 TD's three years in a row Rodriguez would maybe have won a game not named Bowling Green and still had a job.
But, I agree. Can we please not talk about RR anymore. I would prefer to focus on recruiting, player progression, beating Western Michigan (haha), and other things then how Rodriguez claims he "didn't have the talent" (even though Carr's classes blew WVU's out of the water).
Just stop! That post is filled with so many inaccuracies I'm not going to waste my time pointing each one of them out.
Will always respect RR and how he handled himself while at UM. He sounds like he genuinely wished he could have turned it around, and I wish him the best.
Anti-rich rod post: -1
Pro-rich rod post: +1
anti-freep post: +5
You should ask Section 1 how well that formula works.
Anti-rich rod post: -1
Pro-rich rod post: +1
anti-freep post: +5
They come and they go, Hobbs. They come and they go.
I have one of A.C.'s away game tear-away jerseys...it's sweet.
...what are seamless pads? Can honestly say I've never heard of them.
thread are highly entertaining. I think a group of 5 year olds could discuss the RR subject with more maturity.
I thought the Free Press headline was abominable, and completely unprofessional, and a joke with all their defense that "hey, it's not a personal vendetta".
On the comment side, all I got from it was that apparently all those people who were saying Rich was trashing who and what he was left with from day one were apparently right, because now even Rich is saying he was telling everyone that 3 years ago, just nobody was listening.
I really wish no one would mention rich rod ever again.
The only solution is to fire that fucker again, clearly.
What do you expect him to say? "I left the program in shambles, and all the players I recruited suck"? I'm guessing that any coach who is looking for work again would say what RR said.
I am in concurrence with everybody else in this thread, RR sucked at M but he is a good guy. If RR plays his cards right, he might get another shot coaching good old Glenville State!!!
Any talk of what Rodriguez did for the program has to be put into the context of what we are actually evaluating. Other than guys who were true freshmen last year, we are basically only looking at one full recruiting class and the few guys he poached immediately after being hired, the bulk of whom were still underclassmen.
That group has produced (already):
QB: Offensive player of the year in the Big Ten, leading rusher in the Big Ten, (near) consensus All-American as a true sophomore (Denard), and another guy who won a handful of games starting as a true freshman.
RB: A guy with 802 career rushing yards and 11 TD (Shaw, who has another year of eligibility), another guy with 877 career rushing yards and 10 total TD (Smith, who has another two years of eligibility), and another 4 star recruit who has been hampered so far by a series of injuries but has three years of eligibility remaining (Toussaint)
WR: Second leading receiver in the Big Ten (as a sophomore) and a guy with 1,369 career receiving yards and 10 TD (Roundtree, with two years of eligibility remaining), another guy with just under a thousand career receiving yards and another year of eligibility remaining (Odoms), plus multiple years of eligibilty remaining for 4-star recruits Je'Ron Stokes and Jeremy Gallon.
OL: Freshman All-American left tackle (Taylor Lewan), solid starter at right guard (as a sophomore) and Manti Te'o's daddy (Omameh), plus two 4-star recruits poised to be multi-year starters as upperclassmen (Schofield and Barnum), plus another 4-star recruit with two years of eligibility left (Mealer).
DL: Roh, Washington, and Campbell are all blue-chip recruits who've shown loads of physical promise at Michigan and have multiple years of eligiblity remaining.
LB: Freshman All-American (Cam Gordon), a guy who would have started last year as a sophomore but for injuries (Jones, still has three years of eligibility left), plus guys like Bell and Hawthorne.
DB: Only real weak spot overall, Floyd and Gordon have played but neither look to be world beaters, hurt by flameouts from Turner, Witty, and Vlad. Could add Kovacs here, I guess, since he's been the best player at the position group out of this bunch.
Not too bad for less than a class and a half.
Throw in the guys who were already in the fold in the 2008 class (Demens, Martin, Stonum) and you have a pretty awesome two year haul everywhere save the secondary (further hurt by flameout of Cissoko). With a few other old guys still around (Hemingway, Molk, RVB, Huyge, Woolfolk, Koger), the immediate future looks very bright assuming the team can get any contribution from last year's freshman class (and that looks very likely what with the freshman performances of guys like Johnson, Avery, Hopkins, etc.)
• "I knew after my first spring, it was going to take more than three years, and I told them that. Maybe they forgot (laughter)."
Wow talk about fixin' something that wasn't broke. M hadn't missed a bowl game in 30+ years and poor RR walked into a 4 year rebuilding project. He should have mentioned this to Martin in his initial interview, it would have saved everybody 3 years of grief.
My vote for best post copied and pasted from MLive and Freep.com.
Also, since when did RichRod insult Moeller and Schembechler?
I just find this all very entertaining with all the "flamebaiting" going on. Cattiness is our way of life yo.