Rodriguez vs. Beilein

Beilein has the height advantage and a longer reach, but Rodriguez will probably put some more power behind his punches and really go for JB's body in the early rounds. My prediction: Rodriguez in a split-decision.
<br>
<br>....wait, are we talking about coaching?

I like watching RR's offense.  It thrills the hell out of me and is relatively proven.  OTOH, I do NOT like watching Beilein's offense because it seems too deliberate and typically ends with a clanked long-range jumper.  But then, I like the NBA much more than college play, so maybe I'm not the best critic.

Beeline

lies within the individiaul that each coach followed and the patience of the fan base in regards to the respective sport.

Beilein took over for a coach who was fired for incompetence.  RR took over for man who was revered and retired on his own accord.  And, more notably, football is King in Ann Arbor.  The coaches for the other sports will get the benefit of the doubt because, quite frankly, less people care so the grumbling from the agitated masses is a few decibels lower than it is when the football team stumbles..

Michigan basketball=hoagie. You can cut the dude making the hoagies a bit more slack than the guy making the pies, when you run a pizza joint.

Patience has been the key hallmark of Michigan coaching changes covering both basketball and football over the current modern period starting in 1969 with Bo (least time was Moeller for 5 years) and Johnny Orr (least time was Ellerbee at 4 years).

Beilein and Rodriquez are both most likely to get the benefit of that patience, regardless of whether we think it is a good idea or not.

Beilein used the gradual approach to convert the team to his style, initially tailoring the team to the strengths of the two stars he inherited, he made the tourney in year 2... We are now rebuilding in year 4 (yet nobody seems to care)

RR did the total makeover from day one approach, hugely painful in year 1, slightly less so in year 2 and even less in year 3 (going by record, bowl appearance in a year with a more difficult schedule not by actual "feel")  Yet, everyone cares.

RR did it the right way and may lose his job because of it, Bline bought himself the time he needs to build what he wants by winning in year 2. 

If you want to keep your job, I guess you go the bline way?

Obvious caveats about how different FB and BB are, and how differently each fits into the Michigan sports landscape, but here goes:

1.  Starting point (i.e. what they got when they walked in the door): 

Beilein took over a program in shambles.  The NCAA probations / sanctions were a few years back, but still being felt.  The team had been poorly run by the prior coach / admin and needed a rebuild.  Recruiting at Michigan for BB was not going to be easy.

Rodriguez took over a program that was still considered a powerful program.  Only 2 years before, we were 1 game away from playing for the NC (finishing with 10 wins), and even in 2007, we finished with 9-4.  While we did not have the usual stock pile of Michigan talent, we were far from bereft of Michigan-level players on both sides of the ball.  Michigan was still a name brand football program.

2.  Recruiting

Neither Beilein or RR has lit up the charts with their recruiting, but there are mitigating factors to both.  Beilein's are obvious - as discussed above, Michigan BB had been in shambles for years.  For RR, he came in with so much undeserved negativity, that recruiting was not going to be easy.  Add to that the win-loss results of the first 2 seasons, the constant hot seat media coverage and the major cultural shift in the program and he faced some pretty tough difficulties.  The only negative in RR's side of the column is that despite the negativity, Michigan's name still gets you in the door at most FB players' homes - from there, I would have expected him to close the deal better on at least a few more big name recruits.

3.  Changing the program

This is one area where I feel that Beilein had the right idea and RR the wrong one.  Beilein came in and did not immediately seek to change the whole culture of Michigan BB overnight (if we had a culture).  He worked the team to fit his two current star players, and the results were a less painful transition, which has probably helped him recruit this past year. 

RR, on the other hand, brought in an entirely new system on both offense and defense.  He did not tailer the team's offense to fit its existing personner.  Did it really make sense to try to run the zone read option with Nick Sheridan?  While I understand his reason for doing this - get all of the pain out of the way in one or two years - at a school that hasn't had a losing season in decades and that prided itself on its then longest current bowl streak, that was probably not the best call.  With the talent that we had in 2008, a more gradual approach would have yielded a 6-7 win season (illinois, Toledo, Pudue and Northwestern were easily winable, and even MSU and ND could have been tossups) and kept our bowl streak alive.  By going for the immediate and complete make-over, RR lost a large segment of the fanbase that he might have been able to retain had he made a better first impression.

4.  Team Play

This has been discussed above, but Beilein is known for stressing fundamentals.  Even when we lose, it is not because of fundamental breakdowns - it is because we are out-talented.  RR, on the other hand, really does appear to lack the ability to get his players to play fundamentally sound football.  Fumbles, muffed returns, stupid penalties, not knowing that a missed FG is a live ball, excessive dropped passes, etc. have plagued the FB team during the RR tenure, and this is an area that has not improved.  I have seen some talk that these issues existed in RR's prior teams, as well, but I have no idea as to whether this is true.  If it is, it is a concern. 

5.  Watchability

For lack of a better word, RR's team (let's put aside defense for now) is fun to watch.  When the offense is clicking, we look scary good and strike from many different angles - running, passing, short screens, long bombs, QB runs, QB fake throws followed by a run.  It is just fun to watch our offense when it is not stalling (I do expect the stalling to decrease next year if for no other reason than Junior Denard).

Beilein, by comparison, fields a boring team.  It is like watching 1960s style bball.  Now, at the endof the day, if it works, I am ok with this, but purely from a comparison standpoint, RR's team is more fun to watch.

6.  Media Style

In a surprise twist, I am going to give this one to RR.  Yes, ESPN loves Beilein and the MSM sings his praises.  He is a great guy, clean cut, says the right things, etc.  But now let's look at RR.  He has also handled the media with an amazing amount of grace.  I can't imagine that I would resist the urge to throw a microphone at the press crew as long as he has after being asked the same, stupid questions week after week for 3 years.  To me,  RR had done as good of a job as any person could do faced with his trying circumstances.  Many a coach would have had at least one media tirade by now, and he has not. 

Just my long, rambling thoughts.  Not meant to be a criticism of either coach.

1.  Beilein came into a program that had been in decline for a decade or more; Rodriguez came into a program that had the longest consecutive years of winning seasons.

2.  Michigan's basketball facilities were substandard; Michigan's football facilities are about as good as any.

3.  Michigan has one national championship in basketball and about a dozen in football

4.  The preceding three lead inexorably to the fourth difference:  the vast majority of Michigan alums and fans are more concerned about football than basketball. 

It's not complicated.  Beilein's second season (2008-09) was our most successful basketball season this century.  That bought him a lot of goodwill, and justifiably so.  Even if he couldn't sustain the success last season, it demonstrated that he was at least capable of attaining it. 

It must be recognized as well that we are way behind our Big Ten peers in basketball facilities - and I'm not talking about Crisler (though it, too, needs a facelift).  We don't have a practice facility right now.  We practice some of the time in Crisler, but there are five other sports teams that use it.  When one of them is there, we have to use the IM Building or Coliseum.  Try telling a recruit your school is serious about basketball when that happens.  When the basketball practice facility opens a year from now, it'll be a new day for the program.  We'll finally be on a level playing field.  At that point the expectations will go up.