When will we ever beat OSU again? I'm getting tired of waiting.
I thought that myself when I read that article that talked about a Data Scientist(tm)
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?