Some dumb Virginian broad, who is self-proclaimed hot shit, wrote in to Rittenberg claiming that RR needs 10 wins to keep his job this year. Rittenberg's rebuttal says that RR needs 8, maybe 9, wins to keep his job. This number seems to get larger and larger all the time...
Rittenberg: 7 wins or less and RR is gone
I wouldn't say he needs X amount of wins, but rather a top 3 or 4 finish in the Big Ten and a Bowl Game.
I would tend to agree with him
It should be seven wins or fewer.
Right/wrong is a judgment of morality. You should have said he's "incorrect."
On the Internet at least...
That's not actually all that surprising. 7 wins and a bowl win or 8 wins and a bowl loss. Anything less and I could see him being let go. I don't think it would be the right decision, but it's not out of the question.
if 3 of the wins are MSU, OSU and ND.
Thinking that he needs 10 wins to survive is foolish, he's safe for at least another year with 8 wins.
failure to be at 6 wins with three of them against MSU OSU and ND.
THat means we lost to a bunch of teams we should of beat.
We are at 7 wins before figuring these games IMO.
It's sad, but at this point, probably true (7 or 8 wins).
I'm hoping, and I believe that Dave Brandon sees the big picture, and hasn't set an ultimatum for wins. Personally, even if the team only wins 6 games next year and gets blown out in a crappy bowl game, I'd keep RR. He needs to be here four years.
RR's first full recruiting class won't be upperclassmen until next year. So I'm moderately hopeful for this upcoming season, but I think that next year is the year where we really put it all together. Tate and Denard will be juniors, as will most of the slot guys. The running backs will have another year of seasoning, and so will the vast majority of the defense.
It's just a matter of getting all of the rabble rabbles to hang on for one more year if this year isn't great.
We will be stacked everywhere in 2011 but just imagine this OL:
I would imagine Q Dub will fit in there somewhere as well.
And, maybe intentionally, you left off Huyge, who started most of last season and will likely start this season as well. He will be a 5th year senior with a lot of starting experience. He might not have the talent that Schofield has, but he'll be tougher to unseat.
I did think of Huyge and I agree with you that I probably should have mentioned him as well.
I was focusing more on our young crop of OL that will be emerging. However, I should not underestimate Huyge, or Mealer or Khoury for that matter.
It is my prediction, however, that with added experience and added strength/size, Schofield will be the starting RT in 2011.
Although, point taken.
There is a monumentally huge difference between setting a win total and a tenure total. That's all that I will say regarding the issue. If you don't understand it, fine, but it's a fact.
So let's say he doesn't get 7 wins. What coach would we hire to come to Michigan? I don't think there are many "spread" coaches that we would A) want or B) be available. I absolutely DO NOT want another 3 years of struggling pains to move back to a pro-style. That would be a disaster. Hopefully Brandon realizes this and even if RR's success is only a half-success, we keep him for the full term of his initially signed contract. Repeating ND's mistake of letting go their coaches too quickly would put us in a place I do not want even think about. RR FTW.
If we were to fire RR after this year, I can't see another top spread offense coach coming here. I also can't see another elite coach coming here, after all of the shit that Rich Rod has had to put up with.
We're on the verge of putting together an elite team, and to kill it after one more season would be a travesty.
We are Michigan, we don't fire coaches after 3 seasons. We're better than that. That's what Sparty, the SEC, and short sighted programs do, but we're smart enough to understand that patience pays off. After all, we do live by the mantra that those who stay will be champions.
I normally would agree with that premise that anybody would want this job, but oddly enough it didn't seem like people were beating down the door the last time the job opened up were they? They kind of got down the list a little bit before they hired Rich.
I would guess if they had to hire a coach that they would stay in the family this time since that seems to be so important to a lot of the high rollers, but a lot of the old cronies makes me want to hide my eyes. English? Debord? Hoke? Even Harbaugh had some shitty years out at Stanford. Are we sure we wanna go the old blue route?
Yea, the last time this job was open, the first two guys that were offered, (Schiano, Miles) both turned it down. So, clearly every coach was ready to kill for this job. So much so, that we were in a panic for a month before Rich Rod was finally offered the job.
So, with the media absolutely killing the coach, and much of the well to do alumni following in their footsteps, I'm sure that the job will be even more appealing after RR is run out of town, especially with all of those NCAA sanctions looming on the horizon from his "immoral" behavior.
And you want to know what I'm smoking? Haha, clearly it's nothing compared to what you're toking over there in imagination land.
that follows a legend. You can say that "Bo-Mo-Carr" was collectively the legend. It took a guy with balls agree to change the stale taste the program was facing. Until the Cap 1 Bowl, the offense needed a spark. People were crying for a change and wanting Carr out. So the situation wont really be any different then it was back when we were sweating "who is our coach." RR will get 5 years. He will get the time to get a full class through the program. If he doesn't, Michigan will be a Poison Pill program to all the elite coaches. We would be looking at the guy who runs the rec center at the local Boys and Girls club to coach.
He wasn't exactly an elite level coach before leaving Youngstown St. You don't always have to go get the best of the best.... it's ok to go get a proven winner at a FCS school.
How about another guy that fits that description. BO.
... maybe Harbaugh?
Not advocating for it, but not ruling it out, either. And, FWIW, I think that a coach like Harbaugh could do fine with RichRod's personnel. He's more pro-style than spread option, but I think Harbaugh would make out just fine with a QB like Forcier.
and a crappy Bowl game invite.
As you pointed out, RR's first full recruiting class won't be upperclassmen until next year. If we got rid of him now, would we really be able to say we know what he could do with a team that is not composed of inexperienced players, freshmen, and walk-ons?
However, the gears shift dramatically in 2011. Keeping him around now is not because we are being charitable. It is because he needs to show what he can do with experienced players, players experienced in his system.
In 2011, he has that. In 2011 he MUST contend for the B10.
While any old Bowl game is good enough for 2010 while work is still in process, in 2011 he must return Michigan to its New Years Bowl game birthright.
That is what he was brought here to do, at a minimum.
I wish these people would STFU. That decision is entirely up to Brandon, not these douchebag sports writers and so called prognosticators. If Brandon wants to retain him after a sub .500 season, then so be it. He doesn't need every Tom, Dick, and Harry with access to the 'net to tell him how to do his job.
in a program like UMs, steeped in tradition and lots and lots of donor money, it will never be fully up to the AD to keep a coach
I gave you a point only because I didn't mean to neg you.
Donors and boosters can only incentivize the university, they'll never be in a position to decide anything. The pres and and AD are the only opinions that matter. If a president were to undermine their AD by firing a coach directly, they'd probably have to find a new AD also...good luck with a search under those circumstances.
Bottom line, the AD is the only opinion that actaully matters.
Al Glick.... if you don't think that booster's opinions matter you are on crack.
The money Glick gave gets him his name on a building and the chance to stop by the AD's office, but any personnel decisions are the AD's alone. He knew that going in.
I didn't say Al Glick's opinion doesn't matter. I said he's not in a position to make personnel decisions in the AD. The only decision he is in the position to make is whether or not to keep giving his money to the University.
My statement that the only opinion that matters is in the AD is in regard to the determination of RichRod's fate as HC at Michigan,
So you don't think that if Al Glick said "hey, I will give the football program 4 million to buyout RR's contract, lets get a new coach," that dave brandon would at least listen to that. I know Al Glick personally, and he would never do this, so I am in now way insinuating that he would, but a donor with his kind of money says fire the coach and I will personally buyout the contract, the AD has to listen, it would make no business sense if he didn't.
Why is this so confusing? Al Glick doesn't decide if RichRod stays or goes. In your scenario, Al would say something along the lines of the following: "hey Dave, I don't think it's going to work out with Rich. I think you to buy-out his contract. I'll cover the bill." If Brandon think RichRod needs more time, then he'd respond "That's very generous of you Al, but I don't think that's the best option right now." At that point Al would escalate, come out publically, whatever. He would give Brandon (dis-)incentives to agree with him, but he wouldn't finalize anything.
If the buy-out were an issue preventing Rich Rod from being let go, Brandon would approach the boosters and say: "look guys, I think its in the best interest of the University to part ways with Rodriguez, but the department needs some boosting in order to make the move. Can we count on you for support?"
In either scenario, Brandon's opinion is the one that determines RichRod's fate, not Glick's.
The AD at Michigan (Martin, Brandon, whoever) would listen to a major donors' offer for political reasons only. Assuming the AD wanted to keep a coach and a major booster didn't, you can't outright tell a big booster to get lost so you play politics and hear them out. Obviously this is all totally hypothetical, but I doubt any AD would be bullied into a decision like that unless they were facing a strong majority.
Just because I don't think he wants to start his tenure off by creating even more dismay. Brandon can afford to give RichRod another season, even if we blow again in 2010.
You're right that there will be outside pressure, but I think Brandon will side with RichRod unless the 2010 is an absolute disaster.
I get the impression that Brandon is a pretty strong and confident AD. I don't see him rolling over because he is afraid of some booster or Mary.
I like how you say nothing is more annoying than a thread like this...
...and then you basically say "6 wins is enough to keep his job."
Cause if so, that'd help a LOT.
Saying any coach anywhere needs 10 wins to keep their job is foolish. USC didn't win 10 games last year. That's a high bar for anyone.
That said, I think 7-5 regular season, regardless of bowl result, will be enough for him to keep his job. If we had a senior laden team, it would be different. But 7-5 regular season proves steady improvement, and that's hard to disagree with. Considering the talent that we'll have coming back after this fall, 7-5 regular season will probably put us into preseason top-25's for 2011, and rarely do coaches get fired who have their teams in preseason top-25's.
10 wins is ludicrous. I think if RR can show significant signs of improvement with this still very young team, I think he will get another year. If we have to put a number on it, I'd say 7-8, regardless of bowl result.
That would mean 5-5 in real games, up from 2-7 last year. With (most likely) 8 defensive and 10 offensive starters returning for 2011, that would put us in good shape.
Apparently this woman has been pestering Rittenberg for months now yammering about Coach Rod's employment future. The idea that Michigan would dismiss Rodriguez after a 9 win campaign is absolutely ridiculous. Why would Brandon fire a guy who is demonstrating a clear progression forward? It's just beyond idiotic.
MICHIGAN! ANYTHING LESS THAN A NC IS UNACCEPTABLE!!!!
But if we suck in 2010, are you sure that it doesn't require advanced football knowledge to see how good we'll be in 2011?
who's inclined to let people outside the program dictate to him who he hires and fires, and when he does it. He also seems to be a pretty level-headed, non-impulsive manager, which probably means he understands the consequences of firing RR three years into his tenure here. To be sure, if we go 3-9 again, the pressure to dump RR will be enormous, but if we get to a bowl game, I would think that would be sufficient progress.
My bet is that we'll go 6-6 while struggling early but coming on late, and then beat the absolute living crap out of our bowl opponent in an epic 62-24 ass-pounding sort of thing. There will be plenty of people still unhappy, but I think that would get him another year at least.
Brandon personally has every incentive to roll the dice on RichRod in 2011, unless RichRod finds a way to mess up beyond comprehension. If I were a new AD, I'd much rather roll the dice on a returning coach with an experienced team, rather than going out and shaking things up again.
If Brandon fires RichRod and messes up the succession, he'd end his career as AD before he even really got started.
I haven't heard that number thrown around at all. What an epiphany.
I think Brandon, being a football man, will know all he needs to know to make what he considers to be the right decision just by hanging around the program a lot this fall. I could see extenuating circumstances either way that could get RR more time after a bad year or fired after a good year.
Either way, I think "doing things the Michigan way" will factor into Brandon's decision almost as much as wins and losses. It does appear that he likes what he sees so far, FWIW.
That being said, I think this team will win eight or nine total this year and make it all a moot point.
1. 8 wins.
2. Bowl victory.
3. Beat MSU.
Two bonus items:
4. NCAA Spanish Inquisition ends up as fart in windstorm.
5. Knock Terrelle Pryor back into Stone Age and eek out an OSU victory, derailing the Buckeyes from NC consideration.
And any two of the first three, RR is back. With #5, they start the castings for the RR bronze statue outside Schembechler Hall.
Might I ask what MSU is doing above OSU on that list?
Be reasonable. Beating OSU won't be impossible but they will have a very solid program next year. I think we have a better chance of going 11-1 than beating OSU in the shoe.
When will we ever beat OSU again? I'm getting tired of waiting.
I think that Rittengerg is off by 1. I think that RichRod needs 7 wins to keep his job. 7-6 gets him another year albeit on shaky ground. Michigan could go 7-5 and get a really tough bowl game, because they are a big draw. It's not unthinkable that we could go 7-5 and play in the Alamo Bowl against 9-3 Oklahoma. In that scenario, a loss is not just acceptable but expected. 7 wins to me represents significant improvement over last year's 5-7 (which was compiled with an easy schedule).
going to be? Neither UConn nor ND are gimmie losses. They are toss ups I expect to go 1/1 against. ND wasn't good last year and won't be much better this year with the coaching change.
The four wins should be wins, but a shaky D or less than average output by the Offense puts the games closer. I think we go 5-1 vs those teams personally. We get to 7 wins and get in a bowl game vs whoever. But you never know in a bowl game how the other team will come out and play either. Michigan will be pumped to be in the first bowl after a 2 year drought. I think they play anyone tough.
but I think we are going to destroy UConn and even probably beat ND. You want reasons why? Because this team is better than the last year one. We are just afraid to recognize it. Somehow the last two years have lower our expectation and now we just sale ourselves short.
Almsot every program gives their coach 4 years. And an earlier poster was right, we'll be loaded in 2011. The only problem I see is the NCAA investigation.
Remember Bob, Ty, and Chuck all won with the other guys players the next year. What could each of them done if they got one more year?
I don't think overall record ever matters much in these decisions. When you're casting judgment on a coach after 3-4 seasons, a single really good or bad year will inflate or deflate the record. What matters is whether or not you can determine, based on the available evidence, that the coach is the right guy to coach the team the next season.
Ty Willingham went 10-3 in his first year with Davie's players and then nosedived. There was reason to believe ND could do better in 2005. Weis went 19-6 his first two years with Davie's/Willingham's players and then nosedived. There was reason to believe ND could do better in 2010. RR went 3-9 his first year with players he didn't recruit. Last year represented a very modest improvement. The key will be to pull off more significant improvement this year. Can someone else do better in 2011 with these players than RR can? How we do this season can help us to answer that question.
bowl game or bust
But, this is the only year where just reaching a Bowl game will be good enough.
We did not bring RR in here so we could be like Northwestern.
8 wins, counting the bowl game, will be good enough. 7, counting the bowl game, could go either way. It depends on who we beat. If we lose to ND, MSU, and OSU, then it might not be good enough.
I think any of us would argue that we have underachieved the past three years (with maybe the exception that 2008 is N/A), but I feel this is the year we finally overachieve. I think anything over 8 total wins would be an overachievement.
People need to understand that Brandon will be evaluating Rodriguez by, after this season is over, determining if the program is moving in the right direction or the wrong one. Wins and losses are part of the equation, but not all of it. There will be a lot of behind-the-scenes instinctive analysis of if the program is being run the right way.
A program that is 7-5 and gets to a bowl game (even if it loses the bowl game) is going to survive if the AD agrees with the way things are being done.
A program that is 11-2 after a BCS bowl victory will not survive if the AD disagrees with the way things are being done. For example, I don't think John Calipari has a snowball's chance in hell of ever being our basketball coach while Brandon is the AD.
EDIT: In other words, I agree with Tater. (Sheesh, I fumbled there. Sorry, Tater.)
is so concerned about us becoming the next notre dame. ive heard that thrown around all over this message blog: "we lose rich we become notre dame"
to you, aaamich and anyone else i say: oklahoma, usc before carrol, nebraska, texas before mack brown, florida with ron zook, osu with cooper, alabama before saban.
godamnit, notre is NOT the rule, but the exception. michigan will be ABSOLUTELY FUCKING FINE NO MATTER WHO IS THE COACH.
There is no reason to believe the NCAA investigation has had any serious impact on our recruiting. We would not have signed a 27-man class otherwise.
You implied that the investigation had affected our recruiting prior to this class. There is no evidence of that whatsoever. And I'd bet that when this class is signed, it will be very highly ranked as well (and Hart has a good chance of being in the fold).
The bottom line is that it seems a little silly for you to act like a coaching change is automatically a good thing when you're now arguing that the change to Rodriguez was a bad thing. There is no guarantee that the next hire would work out, either. If you consider the RR hire to have been unsuccessful, then we haven't made a successful outside hire in four decades. And if we do let RR go, we'll probably decide that the move to the spread was a mistake and try to hire someone who runs a different offense, leading to more transitional fun.
I believe that when you are a program as rich in tradition, intelligence, and success, as Michigan, then you understand certain things about football.
One of them is giving your coach a chance to succeed or fail.
Upon making a bold hire, as RR was, and especially one replacing a coaching legend, a program must give that coach a chance to establish himself.
I'm not going to rehash that fact that it was such a monumental change in coaching philosophy, but understand that when any new coach is brought in, the first year is hard, due to attrition, and it was particularly high for RR, seeing as he runs a different brand of both offensive and defensive football, from that which Michigan is accustomed too.
It is therefore widely accepted that a new coach's first recruiting class is not considered "full," because recruiting classes are typically two or three years in the making, with scouting, building relationships, let alone actually recruiting the players.
The first recruiting class of a new coach is typically made up of a few players who committed under the previous coach, as well as a few last minute editions by the new coach.
The second recruiting class is what is considered the first "full" recruiting class, because it gives the coach a full year and then some, to establish new connections, as well as reaffirming old ones. Therefore, it is not until a coach's fourth year that he has upperclassmen that are considered "his players".
This is why most successful programs give their coaches time to grow, while many unsuccessful programs are always rebuilding after three years.
Patience is indeed a virtue, but when it comes to athletics, it is often cast by the wayside, due to the "win now" and "win at all costs" mentalities that permeate college football today.
Michigan is better than that, and that is precisely why we give our football coaches more time to succeed than other programs, because we believe in much more than the bottom line. There is more to success than wins. Possible NCAA violations are a concern, but the GPA of the football team has increased under Rodriguez, and I view that as a success.
We are Michigan, which is why we don't believe in things like ultimatums for our football coaches, or a necessary number of wins in order for them to maintain their jobs.
Like it or not, but we made a commitment to RR when we hired him as a head football coach, which means we give him time to bring his players into the program, and we will only judge him as a coach when his players are upperclassmen. That means 4 years.
I am not one of those holier-than-thou Michigan fans but I believe that anything less than four years, and we become Michigan State and others of that ilk.
If you want to call common sense an excuse, that's fine by me. I'm just glad you have no power over our athletic program or it would be in shambles. Yikes!
Speaking of "zero facts of support," would you care to comment on Rich Rod's "my way or the highway approach", and would you please provide us with factual evidence that he used such an approach?
Pic? Link? Context?
If you're building a case, then you need more than one fact.
Google and Yahoo searches for:
Rich Rodriguez "detractors not welcome"
Rich Rodriguez detractors not welcome
Rich Rodriguez "detractors not welcome" sign
Rich Rodriguez detractors not welcome sign
all came up empty. As did the image searches.
Oh, so it was recent then. Well, that makes sense after the 7654355 negative articles written about him the past 3 years, and the division in the athletic department over his hiring from the start.
You made it seem as though he came into the program with a "my way or the highway" approach from the start. I guess that's not true at all then.
That makes me feel much better. Thank you for the context.
I have two alternatives:
1. You make fewer typos
2. You get the banhammer
Typos may cut it for Eastern Michigan, but not Michigan.
That said, I'm supportive of your membership.
Before I begin, let me first say my response was a play on your post, and the ridiculous nature of it.
In any event:
"Make a bowl game",
The comma goes inside the quotation marks.
Maybe for Eastern, but not Michigan.
This is a sentence fragment.
I don't love RichRod, but can learn to love him if he wins 8(+1) and keeps his nose clean.
There is no space between the "8" and the parentheses.
If he doesn't, Brandon can fire him for cause, lift the cloud, and take his time finding a replacement of his choosing (kinda like how RichRod just needed "his" players...Brandon might need "his" coach).
1. "kinda" isn't a word
2. The parenthetical is a sentence, so the period after the parenthetical should be before it, and
3. There should be a period inside the parethetical.
I'm fine with either outcome. We either win now, or cut ties and win soon. The future looks good.
I hassled you for "RichRod has to win 9+" ridiculous bullshit, but you failed to see that for what it was, and whined about not really making typos/grammar errors, so I pointed them out. No, real "hassling" would be for me to go back and neg every one of your posts, not just the one I had a problem with. Of course, that's what you did. Maybe we should both quit while we're behind.
Not sure if you're serious, but this is pretty funny.
The problem is, with the way our team is set up for 2011, you'd be doing the program a disservice by firing Rich Rod just because he fails to meet some arbitrary mark. Our team is stacked for 2011, and firing the coach and having to make that transition again would waste what's being built.
In my mind, I don't even count 2008 against him. More importantly, I see the future being laid for the program.
The last thing we need right now is for our program to look like a revolving door. We'll lose transfers and our recruiting will take a massive hit, regardless of who comes in (I'm hoping for Harbaugh if RR does get the boot). Kids will be afraid to come here.
Revolving door? 4 football coaches in 40 years...
it will be 3 coaches in 5 years.
That's ND territory.
It'd be 3 coaches in 17 years. You can't act like Lloyd was here one year...
was that we need to avoid the *perception* that our program is a revolving door. Whether it is one taking the long-run historical perspective doesn't really matter, since most high school and college kids don't have very long memories.
Which certainly could be the start of a revolving door.
What makes you think that if we cut ties now, we'll win soon? Don't you think continuity will be better for winning soon than another changeover?
Also, why would he be able to fire him and take his time finding a replacement? Because we'd like all the kids we're recruiting to forget about us? You really haven't thought this through too much dahblue, it sounds like you're just a dogmatic RR hater who can't look past this fall.
We are going to be stacked for 2011 and I would be really disappointed if RR didn't get a chance to coach the squad he built. If 2011 rolls around, and with "his guys" as upperclassmen and tons of returning experience he still can't win, I'll be right there with ya. Until then, it's too early to make a 9-win ultimatum.
I'd still be curious as hell to see what he would do with the team he'll have in 2011.
You and the poster above nailed it. If we suck in 2010, what make people think we'll magically get better in 2011?
Sorry. I for one am not buying this magical turned around somewhere in the future. Fans will always pin their hopes on the future, but at some point we need to see results.
I said above that I think Brandon will be lenient with RichRod. If I had to put a number on it, I'd say 7 wins total (bowl included); or 6 wins - with a few big wins and a few close losses.
If we go 5-7 again, then I don't really care to see what kind of magic we can conjure up in 2011.
It's just that if 2010 doesn't go so well, then I'll be out of reasons to think that 2011, 2012, or anything beyond that will go particularly well either.
I've been wrong the last two years, that's for sure.
I think the David Brandon hire actually helps RR, at least in getting to '11. I'm not saying anything new when pointing to that year as the first legitimate chance to make national noise. The Team should be ready to bust out.
Brandon won't fire Rich until at least 2011, unless he sees a regression in institutional control.
I see the first two games as being crucial to the success of the season. They are obviously swing games against opponents that represent "unknowns". They are also both at home. To me they are the difference between 9-3 and 7-5 regular season. Win or lose those, having played two games with a young team, I can see 7-3 afterwards. If we can take those two 9-3 is solidly in play, maybe even better.
I think we win both.
is in South Bend in 2010. I fear this will be enough for UofM to lose the game to the hated Domers as SB has usually been a House of Horrors for UofM.
The team goes 3-3-5 this year. Everyone knows that. Geez.
Well the Union army lost both battles at Manassas Junction, better known as Bull Run, to those pesky Confederates, but the Union Army ended up persevering and eventually subduing the Rebellion. To hell with this dumb Kelly bitch from Old Virginny, she couldn't get elected to the House of Burgesses. Really she couldn't, back in them days they didn't let woman hold public office, it was one of the many peculiarities of the day.
RR now needs to emulate Shermans march to the sea, but not onto Savannah, Georgia, and the Atlantic Ocean, but onwards through Columbus Ohio, the Midwest, ending in Pasadena, California and the 2011 Rose Bowl.
Yes, I think this dumb bitch from Manassas, Virginia, is indeed a positive omen. The Michigan God Hating Whatever you guys call it, has indeed taken a fortuitous turn from evil to good, from losing to winning, from despair to football's valhalla.
on the Big House the past two years. To my knowledge, no anesthesia was used in the many procedures. Hopefully, he'll be back to his usual self next fall.
And you know what they say about opinions...
7-5 with five losses by a total of, say, 15 points is a lot different than 7-5 with more of the 38-13 drubbings.
Remember 1996? We finished a disappointing 8-4, but we could have won every one of those games. And we know what happened the next year.
Barring a disaster, RR will be here in 2011.
Our President previously commented on the amount of time that Coach Amaker was given:
“I don't think it's fair to coaches to bring them in and say, 'We're going to give you three years,’” Coleman told the paper. "When (former Michigan basketball coach) Tommy Amaker came in, we stuck with him for six years. It just wasn't going to work; it wasn't the right fit. But it wasn't a rushed decision.”
But it didn't take me six years to see that Amaker wasn't working out.
is missing a bowl game yet again a disaster? I would say so. Therefore, he needs 6 wins.
...but we're on post #103...
If Michigan goes 1-11, but that one win is the national championship, RR is set!
There's not much mention of Bill Martin. He's done an excellent job financially for Michigan. But his two biggest decisions, the hiring of Beilein and RR, have so far been disappointments. If RR ends up being a disaster and Beilein can't at least compete in the Big Ten, shouldn't the responsibilkity fall on Martin?
i feel as if rich rod has to win atleast 7 this year and that 7th win has to be against OSU. i think 7 wins and another loss to the bucks will seal his fate but i dont see him being here next year because of all the baggage and drama that he has brought to AA