Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
Rodriguez Hires Magee, Gibson, and Dews
Secondary coach FAIL
Who needs defense when you have offense?
Let's ask OK State and Oregon.
Why settle for #3 and #5 when we can ask #1 and #2?
whooshing sound above you.
The link is shortened to "rr hires ass...". I assumed it was referring to Gerg, so they should be set on defense.
he's supposedly an excellent recruiter.
Do we still assume RR has learned from his previous misadventures?
Perhaps Gibson's the paid waterboy rather than the secondary coach.
I wouldn't trust him to contain water in a cup. There would probably be a massive breakdown and the water would seep into the endzone untouched.
That was good.
I almost feel bad for RR. He seems unaware that his defensive assistants were his downfall at Michigan and/or feels too personally obligated to GIbson to leave him out. Oh well, they should have a good offense...
Magee makes some sense. Dews was not that special, has to be tons of WR coaches with west coast ties. Gibson is simply a walking defensive disaster. He helped Pitt settle into 70th in Passing Defense, a great improvement from 17th last year..
Those are Rodriguez's core guys, even if Gibson is a fail of a secondary coach. Best of luck in the desert.
Good for them.
AZ sports blogs take note now. GIBSON MINUS ALL THE POINTS!
How's that saying go? Bros before actual secondary coaches.
Vinopal must be so pissed right now.....
I imagine Carvin ends up at Arizona
Cullen Christian is angry...
And rightfully so
Why? He signed a letter of intent to Michigan and transferred a year later. Tony Gibson signed a contract with Pitt and left a year later.
It's the way of the world - people change jobs, change allegiances, etc. I understand being upset if someone lied to you, but you can't be a hypocrite about it and expect sympathy.
That's a dick thing to say. That does not preclude it from being completely true, though.
True, but players have to sit out for a year if they transfer. The coaches they sign up to play for can leave and immediately begin coaching somewhere else, even if they recruited kids with the promise that they would stick around. If that's what underlies his frustration, then I don't blame him.
If Cullen could transfer again without losing another year of eligibility, he would have no real right to be angry (as one of his tweets says, this is how it works in the business world.) But since players aren't allowed to the same contractual freedoms as coaches, I certainly understand his anger at followin a coach who then turns around and leaves.
He hopped from one school to another after a few months, yet someone else wants to improve their situation, and he's calling them out.
He explicitly says that Gibson lied to him and his parents, Magnus.
Someone was misled into making one of the biggest decisions of their lives by moving to a different college and being forced to stay there for the next 3 years, only to lose what brought them there without so much as a goodbye?
That's the business. It's been happening for years. It happens all the time, we talk about it, the media talk about it. That's college football.
College football coaches lie. It's not news. That's why you pick a school where you will be happy, even if your position coach gets fired or takes another job.
He was considering Pitt even when Gibson was at Michigan. Maybe he should just be happy that he's close to home and playing FBS football.
Again, I might agree with you if coaches were held to the same standard as kids. A kid has to sit out a year if he reneges on his commitment to a school/coach. A coach suffers no consequences whatsoever if he reneges on a promise to a kid. You're right in that kids should choose a school based on the school and not the coaching staff, but given the constraints they face with the NCAA, I don't blame them for getting upset when the coaches who recruit them break their promises.
The reason they have the rule is to prevent players from following coaches. Coaches are employees and players are students. The difference in relationship to the school is completely different. I feel for him, but that's why they tell recruits to pick the school that is right for them. Picking based on coach is just going to get you into situations like this in the future.
War happens all the time, that doesn't make it ok. I'm simply saying that what the coaches did was dishonest and morally wrong, I'm not saying they are terribly immoral by coach standards.
Magnus, in the post I responded to, you wrote "I could understand being upset if they lied."
Try to be consistent, man.
I also said "don't be a hypocrite." And that's exactly what Cullen Christian is doing.
the coach "promised" one kid he's be at Pitt until after said kid graduated? I doubt it, but even if he did, it should have been taken with a grain of salt. Situations change all the time...hell, Gibson could easily have been fired before CC graduated. Thats something he simply couldn't guarantee.
Also, you're taking CC's word for what was said. As of now, his word isn't looking any more reliable than Gibson's.
From reading that Twitter feed? What language is that?
Did he tell a 13 year-old to "put you coochie on silent"?
I can't stop laughing at the "+3 Insightful" tag on this reply above. Whoever did that, you are awesome.
something about committing to a school, not a coach... blah, blah....
I can understand having a relationship with a coach, but if he can only succeed under one coach he's not gonna get very far. Gotta let it go.
Christian will be lucky if he finds success in college, period. He's got to improve a lot to do anything in college, at least from the point where he was as a freshman.
Yeah, I'm on his side on this one. He's already transferred to follow these guys to the next stop and all of a sudden they're gone. I feel bad for the guy.
Maybe he should have been smarter.
While I think you were a little hard on Cullen above, you nailed this part. Why follow a lousy DB coach twice?
Also, he should have read between the lines and realized that RichRod would only be out of a job for 1 year and as soon as he found another, he would bring the gang back together. Gibson and RR are very loyal to each other and anyone on this board could have told him this would be the case.
Right, because the sophisticated side in this contract is definitely the 18-22 year olds.
He is upset about the coaches lying to the players. I guess what he is most angry about is how whichever coach got him to Pitt promised him and his family he was not going to do this when RR got hired.
How many of you thought RR would only be out of coaching a year, then gather up the old buddies from Pitt and WVU at whatever his new gig would be? That's what I thought. Thanks for playing along.
Maybe Christian couldn't think through this logic, but there's no way RR is going to stay at CBS long term. And Pitt and the Big East is not necessarily a destination job for these guys.
Oh, and thanks to whoever shared the link to Christian's Twitter account /s - arghhh!. Nice line about the 13 year old...
How many of us are 19 year olds and not adults that have developed a keen ability to distinguish between sincerity and bullshit?
That's what I thought.
My younger brother was much smarter than I was, he realized it was all bullshit at a pretty young age.
I mean, I completely agree with the message he's telling this girl here assuming she is, in fact, 13.
Is DeAver, who Cullen is tweeting with DJ Williamson?
I mean, Casteel's going to be coaching in a BCS bowl, maybe he'll pick up Casteel later. Of course, that's what we said last time.
Also, two of the Arizona QBs transferred this week.
history repeats itself...
*GASP* THE CUPBOARD IS BARE!!!
Lloyd Carr's fault!
Well, it is Arizona
I'm sure he'll be able to coach up a couple of freshman without a problem. Anyway, he's got his defensive masterminds to help him if the offense stumbles a bit.
Hopefully we will see you in the Rose Bowl a ways down the road.
I posted this because it was officially announced and not just a rumor anymore.
of our secondary play from 2008 - 2010...
Your future on D is DOOM.
I can't help but feel like there's a metaphor of some kind to be found in all this.
My Arizona fan friend seems to be in a haze about this hire and seems to think coaches can change at every stop. I've been trying to tell him that they aren't going to beat good passing teams(or bad for that matter) with Gibson coaching dbs, it's not phasing him at all. For me the worst place RR could have landed was Arizona, I received 25 text messages in 2 or 3 hours from him the night RR was hired. 2012 season can't get here fast enough! His eyes will be opened on September 8th when Oklahoma State comes to town
when Toledo comes to town.
but the truth.
That was a pick 6 that cost us the game, not a bad D. Point taken but let's be accurate when we bad mouth people.
I don't think Arizona is going to have the caliber of defensive players that we did in 2008.
You do realize Gibson coached at WVU when they had one of the best defenses in the country?
People making a big deal about position coaches is over the top. You have no idea if he's any good or not. Considering how bad RR wants to win you really think he would willfully hire a guy he thinks sucks?
He hired him because he is a good recruiter, he just gets stuck with him as a db coach
Who was he responsible for at Michigan? This is an honest question - I don't know. But if he was the guy scouting DBs, he's fucking abysmal.
Isaiah Bell, Denard Robinson, Fitzgerald Toussaint, Quinton Washington, Adrian Witty, Cullen Christian, Conelius Jones, Antonio Kinard, Jordan Paskorz, Ray Vinopal, Ken Wilkins, DJ Williamson,
Robinson and Toussaint have been good. Washington has been okay. Everyone else has been a bust or hasn't played yet.
I might quibble with Washington being 'okay' - we'll see if he can do anything next year after the position switch. It always seemed to me like he would have been a stud on the O-line in a man-blocking scheme, but considering our depth chart next year, I'm glad they made the switch.
He has called Tony Gibson his best friend. I'm pretty sure he'll hire him no matter how shitty his coaching is.
"Considering how bad RR wants to win you really think he would willfully hire a guy he thinks sucks?"
Who cares what he thinks about Gibson's ability? The important thing is Gibson's actual ability, or lack thereof.
Also, you realize that Rich badly wanted to win at Michigan, and he hired GERG?
Air it is then.
It's a comfort zone thing, these are RR's guys and I can't say I blame them for following him to a new opportunity rather than work for a guy who had to throw together a staff at the last second.
Who knows? Under a DC who knows how the 3-3-5 works, maybe Gibson actually knows what he's talking about.
That said maybe Candice Swanpoel shows up at my door tonight with a note from my wife saying "have a good time" All things are possible.
if RR can only be succesful with 'his' guys or 'these' guys then he just isn't a very good football coach.
Who doesn't want to stick with their guys? Look at who Hoke took with him to Michigan from SDSU, pretty much everyone except for Long(<Mattison anyway), and he wasn't going to use the 3-3-5 up here anyway.
Bottom line, I think if Rich is going to succeed, why mess with what worked at WVU? Especially if he gets Casteel, I see little reason to expect they won't replicate a lot of the success they had in Morgantown. They'll likely be able to recruit better than they did at WVU too, being that close to Texas and Cali should work well. Obviously, the UM brand is stronger than Arizona's but I don't think Rich needs top 10 talent to win it all.
Plus, I'm sure they're all hungry to prove themselves. I expect Arizona to be quite good. They'll have a winning season next year, that RS SR QB will be such an asset breaking everyone into the system.
The problem is that Gibson sucks. It's fine to stick with your guys if they can do the job. The evidence suggests that Gibson can't.
- First, he stunk at Michigan. I'm not going to even bother looking up the stats.
- At WVU, here's the passing defense rank of WVU for the last 4 years he was there. He had been coaching there a couple years by 2004, so he should have had "his guys" in place, so no excuses. Big East isn't the greatest conference (obviously) but did have some good passing attacks (e.g., Louisville under Petrino, Pitt with L Fitzgerald). Last, I realize the DB coach is not the only one in control of passing D (e.g., a great DL help passing defense greatly), but it's a good proxy:
2004: WVU is 32nd
2005: WVU is 34th
2006: WVU is 109th
2007: WVU is 14th
In short, WVU was good for two years, terrible for one, and very good for another.
I have no idea why he sucked bad here, but I'm guessing Rich Rod is going on his longer time of work at WVU under Casteel. If Gibson can put up similar to most of those years above in Arizona, they'll be fine.
NO, they won't. "Hungry" isn't enough to get the job done by itself. Their system takes the right players and a lot of time to perfect. 2013 perhaps.
I Google image searched Candice Swanpoel.... best decision of the day.
I mean at least they didn't just hire "one of the worst position coaches in the country". Wait...
Just get Casteel, and he'll be fine.
Arizona. Garman and Savage are transferring.
Mike Stoops told them to leave?
- I just looked up that Garman kid. He was declared ineligible twice in HS, once in OK and once in TX b/c his family moved him 4 times in 4 years. This now makes it 5 schools in 5 years.
- Savage said he transferred for his family. I have no idea if that's true, but he was already a transfer from Rutgers, so he seems to be on the move a lot as well.
When new coaches get hired, people transfer. Happens everywhere, including to Hoke this year (we lost something like 8 players?). The imporant thing for Rich Rod is unlike 2008, he already has a QB with experience who fits his offense in place, Matt Scott. RR will have to get freshman QBs for depth, but that's fine - he can point to Denard/Forcier in 2009 and get himself some talented newbie.
Next up Barwis.... Who's going to be the "Rent-A-DC?"
Doesn't get it.
Rich also uncorked this eye-roller:
""This is a good base for me to come into. There’s certainly a lot more experience than when I went to Michigan. I had no quarterbacks. I started with a quarterback who was a walk-on. I didn’t have a quarterback.""
Sorry you didn't read a depth chart, Rich.
It's time this guy shuts the fuck up.
Quarterbacks generally don't know how to play Safety either
I started with a quarterback who was a walk-on.
While this is technically true, RR left out that it was his choice to do so. Sheridan started the Utah game even though a scholarship QB (Threet) was available.
For this one. What page in Bo's Lasting Lessons was "blame your players and throw them under the bus to defend yourself"?
Everyone has already decided he wasn't a Michigan man, so what does does he care? Can you blame him for defending himself.....no one else did when he was here.
But I wasn't aware it was his players throwing him under the bus all that time, rather than him doing it to them. What does it matter? It reveals a lot about the player-coach relationship, and apparently defending himself is more important than doing that for his players.
It is beginnig to feel like history is repeating.
I mean things do not seem to be going well there. Arizona QBs transfering. Kids (or at least Christian) at Pitt upset that he hired their coaching staff. Rich talknig too much about the place he left. I can't imagine that Arizona enjoys him talking about Michigan any more that we wanted to hear about WVU in 2008.
Don't get me wrong. I would like to see him be successful. I also don't want to start the whole "what went wrong" conversation. But, I think there is a concensus that he didn't handle the transition here that well. I am worried that he is doing the same thing at Zona. He needs to forget about us and worry about Arizona.
Agreed. I'm starting to think that RR was just a great offensive mind that got lucky with the WVU gig. He's proven to be a bad leader, stubborn, prone to criticizing his own players, and obviously he doesn't get along fantastically with his players. Compare this to Hoke, if you want.
Good riddance to him and the band.
I was "All in" until the osu loss last year and the groban incident. The gator bowl debacle was just the icing on the cake for me.
He just sounds like a broken record now. Thank God some other poor fanbase has to deal with him.
I glad I'm not the only one feeling this way. I thought he got a raw deal here, but he's not making it easy to root for the guy.
Yeah, I was kind of worried about posting this and I would love to let sleeping dogs lie but his constant spouting off about his former gigs is really wearing thin and making it difficult for both sides to move on.
Dude continually speaks out of both sides of his mouth and then puts on the country bumpkin act to deflect criticism.
I am so much more happy with where we are now and the direction we appear to heading in under Hoke and Co.
I have this problem with my girlfriend too.
"I only talk about players who play for Arizona and walk-ons who played for Michigan that I opted to start over 4-star scholarship players if referencing them will give me a facile excuse for avoiding responsibility."
You know what? That post was worth the 6 postings. A great point. Stop talking a out michigan and move on. This guy had excuses from the first practice.
"I only talk about players who play for Arizona and walk-ons who played for Michigan that I opted to start over 4-star scholarship players if referencing them will give me a facile excuse for avoiding responsibility."
"I only talk about players who play for Arizona and walk-ons who played for Michigan that I opted to start over 4-star scholarship players if referencing them will give me a facile excuse for avoiding responsibility."
Well done, sir!
ERRATUM: See below - SEPTUPLE POST! RECORD!
I think Hoke has changed the tide on the rivalry. Hell people in Ohio are starting to believe him. Never in a million years I would have thought that. Selling Michigan jerseys is a good start.
What model is it? She seems to have a twitch.
And been universally plus'd up too?
WTF did you doze off on the L and keep hitting Save
And here I thought he would have learned from the last 3 years of PR disasters what to say and what NOT to say.
I am suddenly really glad he doesn't coach here any more. I'll still root for him at Zona, but I'm starting to reconsider it. I understand why he's bitter...but damn man, move on. Continually referencing Michigan in any way does nobody any good. Talk about the future, not the past. Sheesh.
FROM THE LION KING QUOTE HE DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND IN THE FIRST PLACE?
Bring the high character TP, he should have been on Mallett's doorstep the minute he got to Ann Arbor. Probably wouldn't have worked, but if he knew it was such a big problem his time might have been better spent doing that than arrogantly saying "I already recruited him twice" as you're making goo-goo eyes at the guy who'd beat you the next 3 years.
Between a QB and DC, that he acts like he knows were a problem, he has a tendency to prioritize poorly.
He's making it harder to feel sorry for him every time he opens his mouth.
RR made his fair share of large mistakes (Gerg) and continues to do so re: Gibson.
But the LAST thing I want in a head coach is the propensity to ass-kiss an imature drug-addled primadonna like Ryan Mallet.
for all we know Coach Carr "breifed" him on Mallet and RR decided to pass.
or, you could take the guy at his word in that he made two attempts to get Mallet to stay but soon realized that the kid was out the door no matter what.
Most QBs don't react well to coaching changes, offenses tend to revolve around them you know. It's one more reason to respect Denard's work ethic & attitude.
EVERYONE thought he was gone. And he stayed because the nw coach was able to convince him that he would work the offense around Denard's talents. I very muich doubt that RR promised Mallet that he would run a pro-style offense for the rest of Mallet's tenure.
Remember though, nobody promised Denard anything, either. According to Bacon, Denard offered to switch positions in order to stay on the field. Credit goes to Borges (maybe Hoke, too?) for finding ways to keep Denard at his position, but it's not like they made any great overtures to convince Denard to stay.
If Mallet had that determination to stay on the team, RR would have run his Shaun King offense, and nobody is going to convince me otherwise.
according to Denards own words, he stayed because he consideres this team his family.
I'm sure coach Hoke made that decision much easier due to his integrity AND his flexibility,
but it wasn't the only reason.
I'm not sure what you mean about RR & Mallet? Are you suggesting that the "Godfather of the spread" who was hired to bring Michigan out of the dark ages was going to base his offense entirely around the statue of Ryan Mallet? I'm fairly confident that if Mallet had stayed he wouldn't have just had him run zone reads all day.
Once Mallet left and Pryor fell through (thankfully) RR was left with an imoble Threet and a walk-on Sheridan. He stated at the start of the 2008 season that the offense was going to struggle no matter what they ran, so he might as well get the spread up & running ASAP.
Each head coach faced entirely different circumstances (and we'll never really know exactly how much of their own making).
I can't imagine anyone doing much better than Brady Hoke with what he inherited this year, but I think WHAT he inherited (a singular athlete, senior leadership, etc) partly made his job in 2011 easier than RichRod's was in 2008.
But what is the evidence that RR was "hired to bring Michigan out of the dark ages"? I know there were people in the broader community and especially on this board that felt that way, but they weren't involved in the hiring process.
Was there anyone that was involved in that process that had this point of view? Certainly not Lloyd Carr, who apparently was the first to reach out to Rodriguez.
We fell into the spread because there weren't a lot of options at the time. There doesn't seem to have been a deliberate choice to go that route. They were looking for a good coach and the best guy available happened to be a spread guru.
The notion that Rodriguez was hired to "bring Michigan out of the dark ages" never made any sense to me for one simple reason: Greg Schiano was offered the job first.
What are they putting in the water at these press conferences that has the new coach talking about his last job? The fans at your new school don't care about that crap. Nobody at Ohio wanted to hear Urban talk about how Florida was his dream job (though most of them had probably fallen asleep by that point). Nobody at Arizona cares about RR's excuses for his failures at Michigan.
It's a hell of a way to drum up enthusiasm....
No, he's fucked up enough defenses that he deserves to get shit about it for the rest of his career.
And if they do, I'll kiss your ass on the courthouse steps.
GERG is still sitting by his phone
Where are all of the cries of "cronyism"?
When we hired Brady Hoke Brian said it was croneyism. And it was. Sweet, sweet, Ohio- beating Greg-Mattison-hiring Denard-keeping BCS-bowl-getting Nebraska-pounding dood-steeling Greg-Mattison-hiring Romer-getting croneyism. Thank God for croneyism.
EDIT: I just noticed that Greg-Mattison-hiring is in there twice. Damn right it is.
Then what about Brian and his extensive UFR analysis? He came to the conclusion that Gibson sucks by watching defensive replays of RR's 3 years here, and now coupled with the drastic turnaround this year. But I guess that sort of fine-toothed analysis isn't so-called "evidence" but rather constitutes "cronyism".
BTW, isn't RR hiring all his friends again at Arizona regardless of what seems to be evidence to me (but not to you) cronyism too?
It's proven not to be "cronyism" because instead of filling the entire staff with his guys, RR always made sure to have a coordinator position filled with an outsider who could be fired at the end of the year.
Hiring outsiders is not "cronyism".
Gibson was Assistant Head Coach. Good thing Rich didn't promote his buddies to high positions though... /s
yet. Maybe not bringing Casteel would be a good idea - sacrificing a DC every December might stave off another uncomfortable buyout for a year or two.
"You doing some Lloyd Loyalist bidding there?"
No. Just asking a question that you didn't care to answer.
"Insinuating that Lloyd didn't get a fair shake from people who liked or sympathized with RR?"
No, and never have. Lloyd got a perfectly fair shake. He was allowed to coach the greatest program in the land for 12 years. He gradually lost support and didn't do enough to make everyone happy. He lost to Appalachian State, and everyone, including me, knew if was his time to leave. He left. The new coach lost a lot.
"It is cronyism, even if that word hasn't been used yet."
Well, that's not much of a cry, but I'll allow it. Why doesn't it bother you that he is hiring a bad coach? It bothered some people that we even considered hiring Hoke, and he's a good coach.
"Now, Lloyd made his cronies actual coordinators. We have statistical evidence for their units that those guys sucked."
Yes, like when he made Jim Herrmann coordinator of the world-beating '97 defense. He promptly won the Frank Broyles award for best assistant coach. Or like when he replaced Herrmann with Ron English, who presided over the soul-destroying 06 defense.
You should not be allowed to just make stuff up. And yet you still do.
I fail to see anything that Barwis did that another S&C coach couldn't have done as well. I will probably be negbanged to hell and back, but all this talk about RR and "his guys" is starting to get old. I wish the players who left the program well, but beyond that, I really don't care. Ditto for the coaches.
When Arizona starts kicking the shit out of USC and Oregon on a regular basis, I will start paying attention. Until then, color me a skeptic.
I actually think Barwis did some harm.
This staff has talked, since day 1, about how the team needs to get stronger. That seems to be a direct indictment of Barwis's methods.
And, I remember Barwis saying something along the lines of, "If you are doing the bench press motion on the field, you are probably on your back pushing the guy off you." This is crazy, considering 5 offensive lineman begin every play essentially bench pressing 4-5 defensive players. Every play. And I remember how I was shocked about how that comment went unremarked upon back then.
And, when Barwis came in, there was a lot of talk about how they would be in better shape than old Michigan teams, despite the fact that RR's teams had a horrible habit of blowing games in the 2nd half and actually getting worse as the season progressed.
I don't have anything against Barwis. Unlike the football coaching staff, his results aren't easy to spot. But the new staff seems to disagree with him, and we know how Gittleson felt about him.
Watching the teams fielded during RR's tenure, I felt as though Barwis' methods worked okay for the skill positions and the secondary. However, it seemed as though Barwis' methods also cut too much mass and strength from our lines on both sides of the ball.
After seeing the athletes that Coach Wellman has put on the field this past season, I think he has a much better grasp of the type of training that B1G linemen require. I never felt as though our lines were significantly outmuscled, though they were outquicked by MSU's front 7, partially due to their talent level, and partially due to their anticipation of M's snap count.
I am also thankful that Coach Wellman seems to have maintained our skill players' speed and quickness while possibly enhancing their strength a bit. I also enjoy his anonymity because for me Barwis had lapsed into the realm of self-parody a while ago.
The anonymity is something I really like.
Hoke talks almost entirely in platitudes. Borges is a bit more open, but he basically treats the media like mushrooms. The only guy who really talks any football at all is Mattison.
We hear nothing from the strength and conditioning coach or individual position coaches. There is a reason for that. S&C is fairly standard everywhere. Lift weights, run. Unless you are trying to reinvent the wheel (Barwis seemed to suggest that with the no-bench-press thing), there isn't much to say. Position coaches are into schemes and techniques, neither of which interest the media, who only care about QB controversies and vague schematic complaints (more deep passes, fewer inside runs, etc). Also, position coaches are in the business of shitting on mistakes, which should never be done in public.
I'm liking the Forth Schembechler attitude. It can get boring, but even if the media were allowed access to everything, they would still just write their own prepackaged storylines and tell us nothing football-related. Bacon sat in on a lot of position meetings and practices, but tells us nothing about individual coaching methods (aside from a few things in QB meetings). Can't blame him, he doesn't know what the hell it is. The rest of the media is the same.
This way, at least we get fewer controversies.
Gibson must have some dirt on richrod
or richrod is so focused on the offense that he literally does not understand that Gibson was a huge part of why he failed at Michigan. HUGE part
I think they're just good friends, and RR doesn't have the stomach to let his friend go.
But he did hire him (again). And I personally doubt he'll ever fire Gibson, no matter how bad it might get for the AZ secondary. The two are very tight - I remember reading about how RR was the best man at Gibson's wedding (or maybe it was vice versa).
I think RR learned his lesson in regards to installing his system from day one. However, they are in a bad division in the Pac12 South with SC, UCLA, ASU, Utah and Colorado. They should at least finish 2nd behind USC, which will win the national championship next year.
Why do you assume that, given that two of his quarterbacks just transferred?
And you make this prediction of them finishing 2nd based on what?
Listed USC and 4 terrible programs. Sound good to me!
That RR will win there. Weird things happen when A coach is embraced and the DC has half a pulse.
I was reading the scrolling Twiiter feed on the right side of that link and it looks like 2 QB's are already transferring from the program. RR says: not this shit again
Notice how in the linked article RR trots out the excise that when he came to Michigan he didn't have a qb on the roster who has taken a snap. Untrue - he had mallet but couldnt convince him to stay. Also, dude, stop mentioning Michigan. The excuses are old and tired.
That's funny; I remember another time Michigan had that problem, and for a similar reason (although baseball was maybe a more wholesome habit than whatever led to Mallett's early retirement from the school).
And by God John Navarre stepped up, as did his position coach and everybody else involved. It may not have been pretty that first year but it wasn't a tire fire and he was still in there pitching, and with success, three years later.
I suppose there could be extenuating reasons for this, but it certainly does NOT support the notion that Gibson is a good secondary coach.
I get loyalty, but man find a different posting for Gibson. Compliance, academic monitoring, quality assurance, head of the film room, some kind of fancy title that involves no coaching but sounds nice.
If something ever goes wrong, good luck explaining to the NCAA why the head coach's best friend was put in charge of compliance.
I guess when RR said he wants Arizona to be his last stop he was thinking of retiring there in three years after his 118th ranked defense gets him fired.
Gibson? Really? Dude......
That's really disappointing to hear, you would have assumed he learned that Gibson can't coach for shit. I think that also means Gibson was never gettting fired at Michigan if RR had survived the axe.
I was angry when they fired RR, I couldn't be more relieved now.
Instead of hiring his pals, he should have hired a good DC and let the new DC have some say on who his defensive coaches will be. Who knows may be they will get along with his new DC!
Where do you guys think RR falls in the spectrum of coaching personalities? At this stage, he seems to be more loyal to his buddies than he is concerned about his own success - an odd thing to say about a big-time football coach.
It's not that he's not concerned about his own success, it's that he doesn't think coaching failures at any level were responsible for what happened at Michigan (well, except for Shafer). He's made it clear that he thinks they were on the right track and he predicted 10-2 for Michigan this year, which seemed to me to imply that that's what he thinks would have happened if his staff were left in place.
...but this gem comes from the Arizona scout.com board (I'm quoting the bit that's publicly available at google)
Former Memphis defensive coordinator Jay Hopson is another possibility. Hopson was removed earlier this season and currently does not have a job.
They think they're getting Casteel but they're thinking through the alternatives in case they don't.
Wasn't Forcier his only CA recruit here in 3 years? UA needs to recruit California to be successful and I don't think anybody currently on his staff has stepped foot in the state.
I guess he wants to keep hitting Florida hard.
As it stands there are assistants at WSU, UCLA, ASU, and UA all looking for jobs. I'm a little shocked he hasn't grabbed up/retained some of the best recruiters simply to help him establish himself. He keeps moving further away from the Deep South while retaining a Deep south staff. Looks like some kids from the Muck are going to the desert.
...setting himself up for some brutal recruiting travel if he really plans to continue recruiting FL kids while he's at AZ. The jet lag alone will take a significant toll versus the staffs that focus on recruiting CA, the Pacific NW, and some of the talent in TX and the Mountain/Plains states.
Cali and Texas recruits he doesn't get will be in uniforms playing for the other teams in his conference.
That cannot be true. It's almost like he's going out of his way to hire bad defensive assistants. Is GERG next on the list?
He's filling the staff with his friends--who he's sure are good coaches--and at some point he'll need to find a DC who's willing to have them as position coaches. That'll either be one of the gang, like Casteel or Hopson (but that has the drawback that when things go south one of them would have to take responsbility), or someone that doesn't mind, like a former head coach who's just happy to have a chance to stay around the game for a few more years.
With all this blackboard material that RR is throwing out there, Hoke is going to turn loose the beasts he has been recruiting and it will give a new meaning to taking someone out behind the woodshed.
We pretty much just proved the "You have to fire RR to fire Gibson theory". So I guess we test the Casteel one next.
Even worse, Gibson was Assoc DC at Pitt. What if Casteel and Hopson don't come, so RR promotes Tony up to full DC...
I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here, but who knows if Gibson could be a decent coordinator? Maybe he's got a skill that wasn't visible when his job was teaching technique at a specific position.
Teaching technique, game planning, program management are completely different skills. It's a problem, I think, that they're treated as stops along a career path. I remember Brian ciriticizing the consideration of Hoke because "he's never been a coordinator on either side of the ball." Good thing; he'd be a lousy coordinator IMO but he's a fabulous head coach. RR is a great offensive schemer but his management skills are...well, I can't quite come up with a word for it.
was fired as co-defensive coordinator half-way through this past season at Memphis. so its not like he's doing anything right now.
Memphis was #117 in total defense.
"Rich was going to revamp his whole defensive staff if given a chance to stay to go with his unstoppable offense." It's looking far more likely Brandon said there had to be changes and Rich said no.
Matt Barkley may want to stay for his senior year now.
think RR's defenses are awesome. Right now they are #110, and already the worst in the Pac-10. They really don't have much room to get worse..
Well they could get worse but what's really the on-field difference between 110 and 112?
They have little chance of getting substantially better with his current staff...
fix Arizona's defense?
then none of this matters.
For all the talk of how bad Gibson was here, the passing defense was fine at WVU.
If he doesn't bring in Casteel, we'll see whether Gibson was really the problem or not.
Also, the QB who is staying a 4-start dual threat who would seem to be a good fit for his offense.
Much ado about nothing.
Its really good to see all of the anti-RR guys on this thread. You know, the same guys who constantly quit telling people to stop talking about him, out in full force, talking about him.
To be fair, one of the QBs that transferred was a long way from home. Rich Rod said the transfer had "nothing to do with football" and the QB tweeted something about cancer needing to be cured. Maybe he's just leaving because his family needs him. I'd buy that.
Not much explanation for the other transfer though.
...is Daxx Garman. His backstory makes Tate Forcier seems stable, so it's not a surprise he's gone. He was declared ineligible in OK and TX in HS b/c of his between school movements.
Not saying he's a bad kid - just seems to have very involved parents and a desire to move around a lot.
They have been consistently in the top 40 or so over the years.
If you want to say he's been "good in a bad conference" then I guess there is no point in ever hiring anyone who isn't already working in the Big Ten, PAC 12, SEC or Big 12.
The problem is that Gibson has convincingly demonstrated that he isn't good. How is a DC going to cover up for a terrible secondary coach in the most pass-happy conference in the country? The Big East didn't have too many high-octane passing teams when those guys were there, other than Louisville - and Casteel's defenses always struggled to stop the Cards. In 2007, WVU beat Louisville 38-31. The year before, they lost 44-34. In 2005, they won 46-44.
In 2005 and 2007 it took them 49 and 45 attempts to get their passing yardage. They went for around 5.4 yards per attempt in 2005 and 7.5 (their average for the season) in 2007 with two picks in 2007. Not exactly unstoppable.
If we're going to use one game examples, the 2007 WVU defense held Oklahoma below their yards per game and yards per attempt in the bowl game, with a large portion of Oklahoma's yardage coming in the 4th quarter down three scores.
So like I said, we'll see if he craters Arizona.
As is, this post was more in response to Casteel being disregarded "because he was at lower level" or whatever. If that's the case, not sure why OSU hired Tressel or Michigan hired Brady Hoke.
And really: Why are you even on this thread? I seem to recall you being one of the "why are you obsessing over RR?" crowd, yet here you are, obsessing over his every move.
out of curiousity, how many kids have we lost since Hoke took over?
Seriously....the dude hired assistance coaches. What's next, Hello posts for his recruits?
No. This is totally relevant. Rich Rodriguez is hiring back an assistant coach, Tony Gibson, who coached with him at Michigan. Tony Gibson did a pretty horrible job at Michigan, with the passing defense going from 17th to 70th in one season. The fact that Rich Rodriguez is hiring Tony Gibson back suggests that he still does not Get It on defense. He is hiring a man who by all accounts is a good friend but not a good coach. We are watching Arizona to get some better insight into why Rich Rodriguez failed at Michigan (and also for his peanut butter jelly time offense, which is almost always entertaining). The fact that he is bringing back one of the same people responsible for the Great Defensive Coaching Malpractice gives insight into what the hell happened to Michigan over the past 3 years. He's also at a minor Pac-12 school hiring guys whose recruiting experience is all on the east coast, so there's that.
If we are creating entire threads about hiring non-coordinator assistance coaches, then I can safely assume that we will have Hello posts for his recruits.
I'm more interested in the gorgeous outfits Miss Rita will be wearing in the desert heat.
Those famous nachos should also be a big hit in the southwest.
I can promise you one thing. We sure as hell wouldn't be going to the sugar bowl with 10 wins under our belts.
I will go out on a limb here. I have no inside info on AZ or RRs other plans.
I can't believe RR would be so numb to his past mistakes as to hire Gibson as a D position coach BEFORE hiring a DC.
So, I think he has hired TG as a special teams guy.
But then why would Gibson leave his job as a DB coach at Pitt to coach special teams at Arizona? That'd be a definite step down.
Sorry to ruin your theory, but Gibson was hired as secondary coach. This is from an Arizona press release:
University of Arizona football coach Rich Rodriguez has named three assistants to his new Wildcat staff - Tony Gibson, Calvin Magee and Tony Dews.
All three coaches join UA from the University of Pittsburgh staff and have direct ties to Rodriguez from his previous tenures at Michigan and West Virginia. Magee will serve as associate head coach and offensive coordinator, Gibson will be Arizona's secondary coach, and Dews becomes wide receivers coach.
One former player who was back to visit during RR era told the story of his first encounter with Gibson. "I thought to myself, this dude doesn't know what the hell he is talking about."
I like RR and I apprciate his loyalty, but I think we can all agree that his defense was not well coached. Not to stray too far out on a limb, but maybe that had something to do with their coaches!
Gibson is a real problem for any DC Rodriguez hires, with the possible exception of Casteel, who has already worked as Gibson's boss. Having Gibson on staff is the equivalent of having the owner's son as your assistant manager. I wonder how much of a problem that was with Gerg, where the lines of authority and communication get blurred because of friendship and sense of loyalty. Who has the head coach's ear? It should be the DC. What if it's a position coach instead, and the DC's authority is undermined, either in perception or reality? Maybe making Gibson DC would be the best option.
And for those who are such RR cheerleaders, if the atrocious defenses at Michigan while RR was coach aren't RR's fault and aren't Gibson's fault, whose fault are they? I mean when it's 3rd and long and the defensive backfield looks like the keystone kops, running around clueless, who's fault is that?
I suspect it was an even bigger problem for Shafer. Robinson had been a head coach. He was just playing out the string; his career was behind him. Shafer's career was ahead of him. He had less experience and a lot more at stake.
I could not agree more about your observations regarding chain of command. It seems clear that neither of our coordinators had control of their staffs because the position coaches could just bypass the coordinator and go directly to RR. No organization can excel under that structure. No wonder our players did not communicate well on the field! Our coaches could not communicate off the field!
Well, this just confirms that Washington State, and not Arizona, will be my rooting interest in the Pac 10.
I think watching the RR saga come to pass at Arizona is going to be painful, because it's the same dude with the same schtick again. The fanbase is geeked, the cupboard is bare and 'you guys are just going to need to be patient.' The team 'is making progress' but we're not happy with how we're playing right now. Probably grab some diamond in the rough guys from random states, but definitely a couple from Florida. Few pan out, most transfer or drop out.
I'm thinking it'll be like watching a guy getting hit in the nuts, in slow-mo, in an infinite loop with Yanni playing in the background.
I hope he does well, but it feels familiar so far.
I think that there's a good chance, fair or not, that there aren't a lot of currently employed assistant coaches that would be willing to flip over to RR if he wanted them. Especially on defense. Given what a trainwreck his time in Ann Arbor was, both on and off the field, he may not have much choice but to beg his buddies to come work with him. Any non-desperate soul would be wary of becoming a character in the next Three and Out.
Totally disagree. Our linebacker/secondary performance took a special level of coaching ineptitude. Almost any FCS or non AQ coach would jump at the opporunity to coach for Arizona. And let's not forget that with two exceptions all our coaches were coaching non AQ schools last year.
Quite frankly, the people disregarding him as a coordinator are clueless
WVU's YPP rank from 2003 to now
Average of 25th.
Michigan from 2003 to 2007
Average of 27th.
If you take into consideration that WVU recruits at a level that probably puts them at about the same advantage that Michigan has over their conference opponents (possibly less), to say that Casteel "isn't a proven commodity" and might not make a difference is ridiculous.
If Rodriguez's plan is not to bring in Casteel and saddle some other DC with the same guys, then he is probably an idiot who doesn't understand the importance of all phases of football. If he does, then I think he will be quite successful at Arizona.
Greg Mattison's run at Florida 2005-07
1. He'd be 25th over that time.
2. His performances would be an improvement over Michigan's.
3. Mattison is a "God" isn't he? Can you add and divide? In his Florida years, guess where he falls: 30th. Add in Michigan's 39th place finish this year: his defenses have averaged 32nd in the country in yards per play given up.
I like yards per play better because while it isn't advanced, it takes TOP out of the equation. So Casteel, playing with less of an advantage in recruiting than Mattison over their competition has consistently outperformed the guy who everyone is touting as DC of the year. This isn't a knock on Mattison, it's just to show the outrageous bias everyone shows in regards to ANYTHING associated with Rodriguez. Suddenly, because people want Rodriguez to fail so badly, they'll disregard the effect having Casteel would have on his team or disregard him as a coordinator, even though he has proven to be on the level of the guy who saved this year's Michigan defense.
On top of this, if RR's offense is in full flow, 25th best defense in the country is all you need. Probably better. Ask Oregon and Auburn.
(Note: I don't think TOP matters in wins and losses, but it does matter in total yards and points scored)
If he goes to Arizona, all the bashing on this thread is pointless.
to actually post a response, but that would require showing off your incredible lack of intelligence, so I understand why you choose to neg in the shadows.
I NORMALed you, so the FLAMEBAITer can suck go suck an egg.
When my parents told me I would grow up to be normal...this must have been the day they saw.
WVU's opponents run 10-12 more plays a game than Michigan's opponents.
Also, scoring average: Do you know how many of those points came from special teams or defensive touchdowns? Get back to me.
Finally, the reason I used YPP is because it takes out the area of TOP which contributes to total yards and total scoring.
And really, the point wasn't ONE YEAR. It was based over a series of time. So when I show you the numbers from 2007 and Casteel is better than Mattison, is Mattison now a trainwreck coordinator? No they are both consistent on a similar level, with ups and downs based on talent and circumstances such as the offenses used to support them or coaching staffs. But of course you take a defense of Casteel as some sort of shot at Mattison when really I just used Mattison as an example of how delusional some Michigan fans are. That's you.
But hey, go ahead and hate Casteel because he is tied to Rodriguez. That seems productive.
because you just proved the lack of perspective so many Michigan fans have:
So a defense of someone's track record as a DC who is getting trashed on is now "RR fanboy status"? Right. He is now "my guy"? I'm merely pointing out how wrong people are to say he would make no difference at all, when over time, his defenses stack up favorably in comparison to the guy people are hailing as the greatest DC of all time here at Michigan. Like I said, if we use your assessment of one year, then I guess I'll use 2007, where Casteel's defense was better than Mattison's so therefore he must be better always all the time and Mattison must be a trainwreck. Except I wouldn't because my mind doesn't work like a simpleton's mind.
Seems like my assessment is far more accurate.
Turnovers...we can have this argument all day. I guess you need to explain to me how in two years Mattison's Florida teams could average 2.2 takeaways per game, but then in 2007 only average 1.5. I guess he really stressed them more in 2005 and 2006 eh? Or wait, I guess when WVU averaged 2.6 Takeaways in 2007, Casteel was stressing them way more than he was this year, when they only averaged 1.7?? Yeah, you're take on teams forcing turnovers is an argument with no holes. Sounds like its either A. Blind luck on the bounce of the ball or B. depends greatly upon the talent your team holds. But hey, you keep thinking that YPP isn't a good indicator of a strong defense.
By the way: you have no point. The people agreeing with you have no point. You took ONE YEAR and made it your whole argument, when I took a look at a body of work over time. No one has bothered arguing that fact, because, as usual, it would reflect positively on someone tied to Rodriguez.
But like I said, carry on with your blind hatred while I carry on being reasonable and fair. I expect people who agree with someone's ridiculously slanted opinions to neg me. I'm just glad you opened your mouth to prove how right my assessment of those doing the negging was.
Did Mattison's defense produce so many fewer takeaways in 2007 than they did the years before and why did Casteel's defense produce more takeaways in 2007 than they did in 2011? Why do Casteel and Mattison have similar YPP in some years and wildly different YPP in others? Oh you answered that with my own caveat on how certain defenses perform due to factors such as - gasp - talent and experience. That is ALWAYS the biggest factor. Once again, your response makes little sense.
And no, I held my doubts about Hoke to myself. Most of them left after Mattison was hired (hey, look! A guy with a proven track record!). After that, my only concerns were whether they (Borges and Hoke) would try to enforce the wrong style on Denard (happened somewhat, figured it out) and cost us some games we should have won. I'm different from you. I don't trash someone just because I think Rodriguez got a raw deal, while you are here, trying to prove that a good DC isn't a good DC because you hate our ex-HC.
You're right about one thing: We don't know things for certain. But there's a good chance he would have made a difference for a variety of reasons.
I'm sorry you can't handle the fact you've been so blindingly wrong in all your responses but I can't help that.
In fact I gave you credit for being right in saying that we don't know FOR CERTAIN whether someone will succeed at a new job based on their previous line of work.
But, why do coaches/coordinators fail at the college level? You say Weiss failed: He looked pretty good when he had the Brady Quinn teams did he not? Two BCS bowl appearances, 19-6, 1-1 vs. Michigan. Oh right, he had talent. Then it left. Suddenly he is no longer successful. Now you can make a case that he didn't recruit correctly, but when he had talent in 2005 and 2006, he was successful.
Mattison's defense was fantastic at Florida in 2005 and 2006 in both metrics we used. Then in 2007, it wasn't. Why? Because most of his talent left. In 2006, Casteel's defense suffered steep drops in most stats. Then in 2007, it was a top 10 unit. Why did Hoke go 12-2, then 7-6 at Ball State? The examples go on and on.
What people fail to realize about Casteel is this: Bringing him in would have cut many of the problems that Shafer faced off from the beginning. Rodriguez would not have mettled in Casteel's affairs. It is far less likely he would have fired him after one year - I doubt we would have been as bad - and we would have kept stability there, plus not hired GERG.
You saying that he has been "serviceable" or reluctantly conceding he is "above average" is fine. It's at the bare minimum of a compliment, which is more than I would ever expect from someone with such an anti-RR standpoint.
I personally think that coaches can only do so much. I think GERG affected a youthful defense that suffered every bit of injury and attrition imaginable as much as a coach can negatively. I think Mattison did the same in a positive matter with a much more experienced unit and that explains your wide swing. I think that if you look at someone like Casteel, he consistently has an above average defense that occasionally puts in a great year. This is more than enough to win a bunch of games with a Rodriguez offense in full gear.
The point is, if he gets the right players, he will be successful. If he doesn't, he will be like most coaches and suffer the consequences. People look at Team 132 like they are the Bad News Bears. As if they have no talent and the coaches are responsible for every bit of improvement. While they are the reason for SOME, the biggest factor in the success this season is that we have a talented, experienced team...the most in those areas since 2007 and we are much healthier this year. You add the Mattison effect and you get the wild swing we've seen.
I just don't see how you can look at the stats and numbers over a 10 year period at WVU and say its unlikely he would be of any help to Rodriguez. It's not a SURE thing, but it's a probable thing.
You also need experienced players. Football isn't like basketball, its rare that you can just plug in a freshman and he will dominate.
The coaching aspect of it: Oklahoma's YPP this year is 5.1, which has them in a tie for 32nd in the country. So out of 120 teams, they are at the top end of the spectrum in performance. My point would be: that's pretty good. So if you had a better coordinator/coaches, maybe you get to that 15-20 range (that WVU range!).
That fact is, coaches often stay at places for longer periods of time than players are able too. In those tenures, you see wild swings. How can you explain that? How can you explain Mattison's defensive stats dropping significantly in all categories in 2007 when he is clearly a great coordinator? It's talent and experience. The next year, Florida shoots back up the rankings, but Mattison is gone...
Michigan in 2006: Great defense. Came up against equal talent at the end of the year and got beat. There is your coaching difference.
Michigan in 2007: Good against bad teams. Against the spread? 30+ three different times. There's your coaching difference.
This says to me either:
1) RR thinks that what happened in AA was beyond his control. He doesn't see himself at fault at all. He sees himself as a victim. So it's ok to hire these guys because they were successful at WVU and what happened in UM was not their fault.
2) RR just doesn't care that much. He is milking his name and WVU accomplishments for another contract or two. Oh sure, he'll do the work, but he's not going to be crazy about it. Hanging out with his buddies is pretty important too.
I think it's a lot of both. I was a big fan of M hiring RR initially, but when he said at the start of year two, "I was like anyone else, I thought, it's Michigan. Just roll them out there and you'll win your share," I have been RR Hater #1. I wouldn't want someone with that attitude running my 7-11, let alone my school's team.
Taken so out of context its unbelievable.
What was the context that you think I'm missing? I just did a quick google of it and found a Wojo article with that quote. There's a whole paragraph quote along with it. I see nothing there that changes the meaning.
I agree with #1 - that's a very valid assessment and quite possible.
But if you seriously think, with #2, that RR, who worked himself up from a student assistant job 30 years ago and has been in football ever since, got a multimillion dollar job, puts his reputation (which was seriously damaged at Michigan) on the line and moves his family across the country just so he can "hang out with his buddies" and not really "do the work" that's just weird.
All evidence from stories that have been written (see that one in SI this week for just one example) say that he wants to win badly at AZ. You can certainly criticize his coaching choices, offensive philosophy, etc, but I would need hard evidence to say he doesn't really care and he's just "milking it." You don't have any shred of that.
Gibson is a really good recruiter. That trait may be somewhat useful to the program.
but I have no faith in Tony Gibson as a coach. Good thing Pac-12 defenses are already used to giving up 30+ points a game, because these guys will probably fit right in.
The best thing I've took from this topic is the posts from some you unwavering Rich Rod loyalists who are finally seeing the light. John U. Bacon, take notes.
It is the same old Rodriguez-haters who have been complaining all along. And doing the same old fact-twisting and quote-mangling.
The sportstalk radio-fanboyz are talking past the rest of us.
We say, "Rodriguez was treated badly, and unfairly, when he was at Michigan." Three and Out documents that fact rather exhuastively.
The fanboyz respond with, "Rodriguez wasn't a good coach," or worse, "Hoke is tremendous!" We are talking past each other, with arguments that are fundamentally non-responsive to each other. And worse, become proxy arguments for our respective sides. (Proxy arguments in which the sickest Freep-subscribing elements of the Michigan fan base hope for Rodriguez to fail, which would somehow excuse the way Rodriguez was treated here. And those who demanded fairness for Rodriguez thereby feel pressed to root for the new Arizona program or worse, for Brady Hoke to experience the same problems that Rodriguez had.)
I am not going to waste my time arguing with some anonymous fans on the internet who probably don't know any more about football coaching than I do (which is next to nothing) about who is a better coach. My argument was always, "Rodriguez was treated unfairly by my university." I thought I always had the best of that argument, and now there is a book reporting from the inside of the program that largely proves me correct. I don't need anything more. It isn't my job to win games.
If it just ended at "Rodriguez was treated unfairly by my university," I would have no problem with it. I think it's when some people then go on to imply "Rodriguez would have been a stunning success at Michigan if only he were treated better" that many are not convinced. And that's why there will never be an end to this argument: there is no way to prove one way or the other how much different, if any, the outcome would have been if Martin weren't incompetent (at least at some things), and L.C. weren't a big ol' meanie, and the fans and former players were more supportive, and so on.
The best test might very well be RR's performance at Arizona. If in 4-5 years he starts churning out an occasional Big 12 champ and fairly regular BCS bowl participation, that'll be pretty good evidence he's the great coach his fan club thinks he is. Depending on how far below that mark he hits, that'll be evidence that he's not so great.
Rodriguez was treated badly at Michigan. I think that argument has been won. If it was ever in doubt, or otherwise beyond argument.
I just don't have a lot to fight about beyond that. I'm not a faux-expert on college football. Although having won the argument and established that Rodriguez was treated badly, I am mostly interested in who treated him badly, how they did it and why they did it.
I'm fine with your observations and curiosity. Just be sure to allow your curiosity to look in Rodriguez's direction as well. Most of the "haters" are curious too. They just happen to think the head coach needs to be front and center when explanations for Michigan's football failures the past three years are discussed.
Yes, the Arizona AD seems all in on this hire and ready to defend his guy. They had RR saying things like "Desert Swarm" and "Bear Down" right out the gate. So they have the PR side of things all set up. So now variables are RR's staff and we'll have to see how they do.
feel pressed to root ... for Brady Hoke to experience the same problems that Rodriguez had
The more you reveal that at least a small part of you is rooting for us to fail. Because you'd rather be "right" than have Michigan succeed. Some fan.
And you might want to go back and reread comments by redwhiteandmgoblue, joeyb, and others. It's not all the same old same old....to a lot of Rich's supporters his act is getting old.
I rooted for them to succeed, I just didn't delude myself like a lot that we actually were, and realized a change needed to be made. It was a successful change too. I wanted us to win; we didn't. The difference is, he, and you, feel like we need to lose, so you can be right, wins and loses be damned.
That way you can complain on the internet more to compensate for your small penis.
he used to hang out with at Dan's Downtown Tavern. Barmaids on lap and all.