RR is capable of fielding good defensive teams
The premise, implied or explicit, of all of the "fire RichRod" posts is that he's incapable of putting forth a competitive defense.
Rich Rod's later WVU teams played excellent defense -- go take a look at the highlights from the 2006 Sugar Bowl against Georgia or the 2008 Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma.
In that 2007-8 season, WVU had the seventh-ranked defense (by yardage) in the country. Indeed, in 2010, WVU is ranked fourth defensively under Jeff Casteel.
Here are the total defense / scoring defense rankings for WVU in the last six years:
2005: 15th / 13th
2006: 62nd / 49th
2007: 7th / 8th
2008: 36th / 11th
2009: 36th / 31st
2010: 4th / 5th
I realize that the Big East is not the Big Ten. However, WVU showed in those bowl games that their defense was for real. Jeff Casteel has achieved those rankings running the 3-3-5, FYI.
The point I'm trying to make is: RR is clearly capable of coaching a team with a successful defense. Why hasn't he had one at Michigan? As has been noted many times by many people, (1) because the defense was famously decimated; (2) highly touted recruits haven't worked out and/or left; (3) he naively thought the defense would be fine, and focused heavily on getting the right players on offense given the radical overhaul he needed to execute and has successfully achieved; (4) Jeff Casteel didn't come with him to Michigan.
RR is capable of running a competent defense. Hence, firing him because you think the defense won't get better seems senseless to me. As does firing him because you're frustrated with the losing (as we all are).
There is only one reason to fire RR: because you believe that Michigan will be a more successful football program, over the long haul, with someone else as the coach. In order for that to be true, there needs to be another coach out there, who is available, who you think would win national championships at Michigan. (Keep in mind that Lloyd Carr won one, Gary Moeller won zero, and Bo Schembechler won zero.)
Personally, it's not obvious to me that there is an available coach out there, Harbaugh included, who is clearly superior to RR. If other people believe otherwise, I'm happy to consider persuasive arguments.
Personally, I still believe that once we get a full defensive roster here, with this offense, we will be an awesome team. While it's true that these last three years may well have gone better under a more traditional coach, it's hardly clear that a Harbaugh type could lead us to MNC titles. On the other hand, the RR offense combined with an above-average defense will.
We gave RR time on the offensive side of the ball, and he has given us the best offense we've had at Michigan in generations, along with one of the best individual athletes in Denard we have ever seen here. Let's see how RR does with an upperclassman-led defense before blowing up the program again.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:15 AM ^
I know we can get the D figured out eventually.. I just get sick of hearing people saying RR can't coach in the big ten, or going on ESPN and see Rittenberg's dumbass say "this does not work in the big ten".
Give me a fucking break.. He built a team that sucked for years at WVU into a BCS team that shit all over one of the best defenses in the country in Oklahoma..
When RR came to michigan he didn't forget how to coach. it looks grim now, it doesn't matter how we got to where we are on the defense, but we are there. It definitely won't get any worse from here on out.
We may only win 1 more game against purdue to get to a bowl, but at least it is a bowl and the extra practice time will be key.
Firing RR will set this team back again, and we will have started to turn into ND.. I don't wanna hear any more about bringing in Harbaugh.. Who gives a shit if he is a michigan man. Until he starts winning BCS games consistently what has he accomplished that RR hasn't? We sure know he still can't beat a solid spread team as of yet.
*this is not a rant to the OP, just addin my take
November 1st, 2010 at 12:15 AM ^
I agree with you. I'm terrified that we won't improve, like I think almost everyone is, but I still think that Rich Rod is one of the best coaches in college football. Maybe that's naive, but he made WVU into a great team and I don't think you lose that ability this quickly. We've had a lot go wrong, he's made mistakes, but I don't want to go through another transition.
November 1st, 2010 at 7:38 AM ^
November 1st, 2010 at 12:17 AM ^
I will say I oppose the firing of Rich Rodriguez at this point for the reasons you identify. That said, I do not oppose seriously looking at significant changes in the defensive staff up to and including the defensive coordinator.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:23 AM ^
I think what a lot of people have suggested -- hiring a first-rate, college-experienced DC and giving him full rein over his assistants is the way to go. I think RR is reluctant to can the defensive coaches he brought over from WVU. That's why the Tall rumor actually sounded good -- get one of his guys that he trusts as the DC, and let that guy take full control.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:36 AM ^
So then why the hell did he hire GERG? To not trust him and not let him take control?
November 1st, 2010 at 12:44 AM ^
Gerg has a rep as a DC and the Superbowl jewelry to prove it. It should be noted, however, that GERG had some serious talent in Denver and later at Texas where he was DC for Mack Brown. He does not have this sort of talent in Ann Arbor (except you, future NFL first rounder Mike Martin).
November 1st, 2010 at 12:29 AM ^
I don't wanna hear any more about bringing in Harbaugh..
Then you better stay away from mgoblog for a while:
Loss will cause me to... spend the next four weeks talking about Harbaugh.
http://mgoblog.com/content/preview-penn-state-2010
That is unless Brian is still too busy ripping a single branch off every tree in Ann Arbor out of existential spite to live up to his word.
November 1st, 2010 at 10:44 AM ^
surely, you've heard of the term "hyperbole"
November 1st, 2010 at 12:18 AM ^
And I'm thrilled that you're vision is 'who's best to deliver us to MNCs'. Like you, I'm willing to be persuaded, but "they're a Michigan man" better not be anywhere near the equation. Bo's disgust for Frieder's move has become too far flung a comment. Guess what gang, Bo wasn't a Michigan man, he became one (he was a Redskin and a Buckeye first).
The primary measure is right now should be whether players are getting better. I think we'd all assert the answer may very well be 'no' on the defense. As for the offense, the answer is 'yes', and I believe special teams is close.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:23 AM ^
You said it perfectly. That's what it is. In many ways I believe all this might be the best thing that has ever happened to this program, we can't live in mediocrity anymore. It's hard to see the big picture but it's there. Just please beat Illinois.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:25 AM ^
Was Casteel there all of those years?
Maybe RR lucked out because of Casteel - he was the only thing making the defense good. Did RR have a big role in their defense? Or was it Casteel who handled everything there.
I don't know just throwing ideas out there.
November 1st, 2010 at 6:32 AM ^
Casteel joined RR at WVU in 2001 as DL coach, and was promoted to DC the following year. He's been there ever since.
November 1st, 2010 at 7:30 AM ^
I've wondered the same thing. Maybe RichRod got lucky on his first major defensive coaching decision.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:33 AM ^
The defense is terrible but not because of coaching right now. This defense or really lack thereof was created over the last few years. I think RR if he is guilty of anything on this focused a little too much on offense maybe. When he came here the defense was competant, but the offense he totally changed and he totally needed his type of players, thus we complained about why nine slot ninjas in each recruiting class. I dont think you could take any of our past defenses even the great ones and field them all as freshman and sophs and expect great results. We have in the recent pact always had a couple solid/great upperclass lineman, LB's and DB's on every team. We have Mike Martin now I think a Junior. And we have young talent that is really inexperienced every where else. That isnt coaching that is year to year management and recruiting issues that RR could be guilty of. The last couple of our classes have been offense laden, now the offense is in rythym and recruits can see where they are going, the defense now needs to be built over time and recruiting classes, RR lost a lot of talent on D for almost every reason you can think of. This is hard times, I hope he doesn't give uo, I hope these young men don;t give up, I hope the fans support them through this cause they will get through this. Two years fromn now, with two senior QB's and the best offense in the nation and this defense with additional talent and senior leaders in every level will be top 5 team I would bet a lot of money on that.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:44 AM ^
you could have been more spot on with this post! Im sick of all the mich fans wanting rich's head. Rich is a big time college coach and hes shown that at every stop he has been at. Attrition, youth and lack of talent on the defense is killing this team right now. I am hoping that there will be a change, kinda like Illinois did in bringing in a new staff. We need to get good def college coaches in Ann Arbor and recruit defensive talent and suddenly we could look alot like that good ball club that hails from Eugene Oregon! Rich will bring us back we just need more depth/talent on D!
Hail
November 1st, 2010 at 1:24 AM ^
However, I think our AD will be making a change if he doesn't win at least 2 more games. I'll be pulling for RR all the way and I hope he can coach the best game of this career next Saturday and possibly save his job. Though some rumors I heard last spring was that RR had to win one of the following MSU, PSU, WI or OSU games? If we can only beat Purdue or not win another game the pressure for change will be overwhelming. We'll see? But I love our spread offense and I know our defense will improve with better talent, age and depth.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:47 AM ^
Fuck it....wake me when RR is gone.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:51 AM ^
The team, especially the D, better come out and play like rampaging animals on Saturday. Maybe we can get all the defensive players helmets equipped with earphones and just play Rage Against the Machine the whole game. I actually hope a few asses in the media call out RR, G. Robinson, and our defense so the players can play possessed to defend themselves. I am hoping SO MUCH for 4 down lineman and for Drew Dileo to go all Danny Woodhead next weekend. Even when things are bleak, GO BLUE.
November 1st, 2010 at 1:07 AM ^
November 1st, 2010 at 8:47 AM ^
Let's objectively separate facts from opinion:
The D for 3 years under RR has been historically poor. This is evidence by our awful record.
Dwarren leaving and Troy's injury is a fact that rattled this D, out of RR's control.
Same with the MM injury on the Dline.
My opinion-injuries have been as bad, if not worse, then during Lloyd's final year. However, it's my opinion when you claim to be a "multi-front" D and your head coach says he doesn't work with D much, yet we are moored to the 3-3-5, RR is ultimately accountable for his UM record. When Schafer was under water we switched to 3-3-5 against Purdue. When MM gets injured Saturday, we remain in 3-3-5 even though we all knew they were going to run w/ a walk on QB and we all know our LBs and Secondary are suspect in tackling. Where's the "multi-front" 4 DL, move Roh down rather than bench him (speculation-unless he was injured?), bring in another LB (like they did with Fitz eventually) and make them beat us over the top.
I understand the facts to keep Rod for another year. I don't understand the stubborn scheme we employed on Saturday after a bye week.
All that matters are the facts of last 3 years, and the opinion of one Dave Brandon.
November 1st, 2010 at 9:37 AM ^
Not sure what game you were watching, but the whole second half we had 4 Dlineman
November 1st, 2010 at 1:24 AM ^
I completely agree with this I don't think their is a defense in the country that would be much better than what we have if it was predominately freshman and sophomores, the problem is it's going to take time to fix this situation and I just hope RR is given enough of it to truly see what kind of complete team he can field
November 1st, 2010 at 2:06 AM ^
and I want him to stay and be successful. Also, as you state, he knows how to field a good defensive team as he did it at WV. You have to believe that as a successful head coach in the past he understands what ti takes to compose a decent defense. Where I have always been skeptical though is when it comes to GERG. His past as a head coach has not been good and I have always wondered how good of a DC he really is. To me, his defense has to show at least some improvement by the end of this season. I know his players are young but it strikes me as odd that they have not gotten even a little bit better in 1 1/2 years. By now there should be at least some inkling of progress in what he is doing. Dave Brandon is a sharp man and he also understands football from a player's perspective. I am confident that he will do what is necessary to improve the defense and the team. RR should stay; but my guess is thar GERG and his staff will be gone at year's end.
November 1st, 2010 at 3:33 AM ^
November 1st, 2010 at 3:41 AM ^
The premise, implied or explicit, of all of the "fire RichRod" posts is that he's incapable of putting forth a competitive defense.
Rich Rod's later WVU teams played excellent defense -- go take a look at the highlights from the 2006 Sugar Bowl against Georgia or the 2008 Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma.
In that 2007-8 season, WVU had the seventh-ranked defense (by yardage) in the country. Indeed, in 2010, WVU is ranked fourth defensively under Jeff Casteel.
Here are the total defense / scoring defense rankings for WVU in the last six years:
2005: 15th / 13th
2006: 62nd / 49th
2007: 7th / 8th
2008: 36th / 11th
2009: 36th / 31st
2010: 4th / 5th
I realize that the Big East is not the Big Ten. However, WVU showed in those bowl games that their defense was for real. Jeff Casteel has achieved those rankings running the 3-3-5, FYI.
Yes, a Rich Rodriguez coached team can put forth good defenses. However, this was done with a very good defensive coordinator. Considering Rodriguez's hiring record, which includes Shafer, Hopson, and Robinson, this does not look like something that will be replicated.
The point I'm trying to make is: RR is clearly capable of coaching a team with a successful defense. Why hasn't he had one at Michigan? As has been noted many times by many people, (1) because the defense was famously decimated; (2) highly touted recruits haven't worked out and/or left; (3) he naively thought the defense would be fine, and focused heavily on getting the right players on offense given the radical overhaul he needed to execute and has successfully achieved; (4) Jeff Casteel didn't come with him to Michigan.
RR is capable of running a competent defense. Hence, firing him because you think the defense won't get better seems senseless to me. As does firing him because you're frustrated with the losing (as we all are).
There is only one reason to fire RR: because you believe that Michigan will be a more successful football program, over the long haul, with someone else as the coach. In order for that to be true, there needs to be another coach out there, who is available, who you think would win national championships at Michigan. (Keep in mind that Lloyd Carr won one, Gary Moeller won zero, and Bo Schembechler won zero.)
Personally, it's not obvious to me that there is an available coach out there, Harbaugh included, who is clearly superior to RR. If other people believe otherwise, I'm happy to consider persuasive arguments.
November 1st, 2010 at 7:24 AM ^
Thanks for taking the time to make a thoughtful defense of the Fire RR position. Here is my response.
Our current defense is regressing as the season goes on.
Our best defensive player, Mike Martin, is out. That is a significant part of the recent regression, in my view. Let's not forget that this same defense allowed UMass to score 37 points in Week 3 -- so to me it's not obvious that we have regressed significantly outside of the Martin injury. We were bad in the beginning, and we're bad now. Yes we played worse at PSU then we did against MSU and Iowa -- but every defense has good games and bad games; that is not necessarily the same thing as regression.
Yes, a Rich Rodriguez coached team can put forth good defenses. However, this was done with a very good defensive coordinator. Considering Rodriguez's hiring record, which includes Shafer, Hopson, and Robinson, this does not look like something that will be replicated.
You blame Rodriguez for hiring Shafer...a DC whom Rodriguez poached from none other than Jim Harbaugh at Stanford. So, if Rodriguez is incompetent because he hired Shafer, is Harbaugh incompetent also? As to Robinson, as others have noted, Robinson had a strong resume as a DC, rightly or wrongly. While Robinson's retention can be debated, it wasn't an obviously bad hire.
The only valid defense of Rodriguez here is that he was hurt by a lack of depth when he took over. The problem is that he hasn't exactly done a ton to help the depth chart because he's focused on offense and he hasn't gotten enough defensive recruits to campus. So yeah, I think he deserves a lot of blame.
Once again, being capable of putting out a good defense doesn't mean that you will put out a good defense. Rodriguez is heavily dependent on his assistants on the defense and hasn't hired good ones when he has a far wider talent pool available to him at Michigan than he did at West Virginia. His hiring record makes it look like Casteel was the exception and not the rule when it comes to the defensive side of the ball.
Also, national championships are not the only measure of success. Big Ten titles are successes. BCS bowl games are successes.
Maybe Rodriguez and Harbaugh are equally likely to win national championships because they will only do so if they live up to their fullest potential, but Harbaugh's record at Stanford (a school where it's very difficult to succeed at) certainly makes it look more likely that we could at least be competitive on a yearly basis.
November 1st, 2010 at 10:57 AM ^
Here's hoping Dave Brandon has your level-headed point of view.
This is the biggest over-reaction to a single loss I've seen since App State. There are four more games to be played. Anything can happen.
November 1st, 2010 at 1:48 PM ^
Our best defensive player, Mike Martin, is out. That is a significant part of the recent regression, in my view. Let's not forget that this same defense allowed UMass to score 37 points in Week 3 -- so to me it's not obvious that we have regressed significantly outside of the Martin injury. We were bad in the beginning, and we're bad now. Yes we played worse at PSU then we did against MSU and Iowa -- but every defense has good games and bad games; that is not necessarily the same thing as regression.
Yes, Martin's injury is a huge issue. But at the same time, we were going up against a bad offensive line, which should have mitigated his absence to some extent, which it clearly did not. As for UMass, that was more understandable because UMass was a clear possibility for a letdown game, considering that we had just beaten Notre Dame in a thriller the week before. Penn State, however, had a terrible offense that could not run the ball on anyone all year and was starting a walk-on quarterback. We had two weeks to prepare for this terrible offense and used the time to make a lot of position switches to supposedly improve the team. And then we put up our worst defensive showing of the year against what was at best the third-worst offense we've faced all year (ranking UMass and Bowling Green below them, although that might not be fair to UMass).
You blame Rodriguez for hiring Shafer...a DC whom Rodriguez poached from none other than Jim Harbaugh at Stanford. So, if Rodriguez is incompetent because he hired Shafer, is Harbaugh incompetent also? As to Robinson, as others have noted, Robinson had a strong resume as a DC, rightly or wrongly. While Robinson's retention can be debated, it wasn't an obviously bad hire.
Shafer was not necessarily a bad defensive coordinator. In fact, he did well at Stanford and is doing well at Syracuse. However, he did not mesh well with the team or the coaching staff. It is a forgivable mistake to make once, but when you go 3-9 and have done a host of other things wrong, then you'd better do something right on your next hire. Greg Robinson's resume was not all that strong in my opinion, especially when you factor in his defenses at Syracuse, and his performance has, in my view, been very poor.
I completely disagree with this. During the LC era, this board was seething with frustration at our success in the mediocre Big Ten but our failures at the national level, exposed by teams like USC, Oregon, OSU, etc. etc. The goal at Michigan is not merely Big Ten success but national success, and I guarantee you that, if we were winning occasional Big Ten titles but losing our BCS bowl game every year, sometimes by several touchdowns (i.e., Lloyd Carr in most of the 2000s), people would be calling for RR's head with almost as much vigor as they are now.
Your hypothesis about why Harbaugh might be successful at Michigan is not crazy, but it is just that -- a hypothesis. It is the same hypothesis that brought RR to Michigan. Was RR a bad offensive coach in 2008? No -- he just didn't have the roster to do things on offense. This was more obvious to the average fan because it's easier to follow offensive skill players. Similarly, RR is not a bad defensive coach now -- he just doesn't have the roster to do things on defense. He deserves his share of blame for the state of the roster, but he is just as aware of the problems as we are and our decent underclassmen on defense are a sign of this. I wonder how much better the D would be if Woolfolk wasn't out and Warren had stayed: I'm guessing significantly better.
It is a huge risk firing a coach and bringing in another: the recruiting disruption; the difference in offensive philosophy; etc. Is it worth the guaranteed disruption to bring in a coach like Harbaugh that might be successful? To me, the answer is most definitely no.
November 3rd, 2010 at 10:30 AM ^
You make a lot of fair points here. The one I would disagree with the most is that the lack of success on the field is a recruiting disruption. If recruits believe the team will improve over time, they will come. Maybe we lose out on some guys, but a depth chart fully stocked with 3 stars would be an improvement from where we are, and is achievable in our current situation.
The recruiting disruption from a messy coaching change will be far, far worse.
November 1st, 2010 at 3:51 AM ^
RichRod didn't bring Jeff Casteel with him...
Clearly, that was huge!
November 1st, 2010 at 4:36 AM ^
Mrs. Casteel didn't want to leave W.VA 3 years ago. May be she will after this season! So RR may be reunited with his former DC.
November 1st, 2010 at 7:33 AM ^
Topic du jour (RichRod) aside for a moment ...
"Keep in mind that Lloyd Carr won one, Gary Moeller won zero, and Bo Schembechler won zero."
Please tell this to every Old Blue you meet. Also tell them that, during the "Ten Year War," the Big Ten went 1-9 in the Rose Bowl.
It's a sad fact that winning the Big Ten championship has sometimes been a so-so achievement in the big picture.
November 1st, 2010 at 8:11 AM ^
I love Bo as much as anybody, but people seem to forget that Bo was absolutely atrocious in bowl games.
November 1st, 2010 at 8:08 AM ^
It's hard to imagine that RR could have made a more catastrophically self-destructive decision than to hire Robinson as his DC, since there was abundant evidence to contradict the notion that Gerg's Super Bowl rings showed that he was a defensive genius.
.................
1982-1988: Robinson is DL coach at UCLA under Terry Donahue. During this period, UCLA goes 63-17-4, wins seven straight bowl games.
1989: Greg Robinson is promoted to DC. UCLA promptly goes 3-7-1.
..................
The first below is from ESPN from 2001 or 2002:
10. Greg Robinson
We don't know how much Robinson makes, but it's in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, which is way too much for the Chiefs defensive coordinator. The Chiefs are mired at 8-7 despite averaging 31.6 points per game, the most in the NFL. Gee, could defense be the problem? You betcha. The Chiefs have the worst D in the league, giving up almost 400 yards per game. Coaches don't play, and the Chiefs sorely lack defensive talent, but, as Jason Whitlock recently wrote in the Kansas City Star, "Here's why Robinson can't duck responsibility for K.C.'s defensive failure: Not one defender has improved in Robinson's system. Not one ... His defense has failed collectively and individually. His unit doesn't produce big plays or playmakers." Even though he has been publicly backed by coach Dick Vermeil, Robinson already looks like he's on the way out; he recently interviewed for the head coaching job at UCLA, which -- not surprisingly -- he didn't get.
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/NFLoverpaid.html
.........................
" Crennel is fast becoming the star of this Chiefs season. That’s not an easy thing for a defensive coordinator, but this group finished 30th last year and is now giving up 18 percent fewer yards and 46 percent fewer points.
November 1st, 2010 at 8:17 AM ^
It's fair to say that Gerg's record was mixed, and that there were reasons to doubt him.
Let's address this topic in a different way: if we were to hire a DC replacement, who should it be?
November 1st, 2010 at 9:20 AM ^
Agree that's the real pertinent question. RR's interaction on the sidelines with Robinson the last three weeks tells me he's less than thrilled with what's he's seeing out of Robinson, and I can't imagine that Robinson will be back next year.
I don't know enough about other team's DCs to give names, but I can come up with some criteria for selection:
1. Don't consider somebody who's just been fired.
2. Concentrate on candidates who are DCs at FBS schools right now.
3. Don't limit yourself to candidates currently coaching in BCS conferences; are there dynamite DCs in the WAC or MAC or Sun Belt waiting for their next opportunity?
3. Only consider candidates whose defenses excel against their competition; don't accept middle-of-the pack performances.
4. Put heavy emphasis on candidates who can recruit effectively.
5. Seek candidates who have experience either as player or as coach in the Big Ten, but not to the exclusion of candidates from other parts of the country.
6. Seek candidates who combine intensity with intelligence. We don't need DCs who are all fire and no brains.
Yes, these are obvious criteria that any fan can come up with. The problem is, if RR had used them, he would have never hired Robinson in the first place.
November 1st, 2010 at 8:48 AM ^
If by "generations" you mean since 2008, that's correct.
If you mean "generations" in the more traditional way, that's just silly. We've had elite-level offenses under Bo, Mo, and Lloyd.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:14 PM ^
2000 was probably the only comparable year to this one in terms of points and total offense. And like this year, we had a weak D in 2000 -- I'll never forget that Northwestern game. A shame Drew Henson didn't stay.
November 1st, 2010 at 1:36 PM ^
This offense for the ages is fourth in scoring in the Big Ten:
http://cfbstats.com/2010/leader/827/team/offense/split07/category09/sor…
November 1st, 2010 at 8:50 AM ^
Problem is the guy cant recruit. He very rarely even goes in recruiting trips. If your a shitty coach at least recruit well.
November 1st, 2010 at 9:12 AM ^
2006 Sugar Bowl against Georgia:
Georgia had 501 yds of total offense. 224 yds rushing on 28 attempts for 8 yds/carry. 20 - 33 passing for 277 yds passing. Not exactly a stout effort defensively.
Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma. OU had 419 yds of total offense. 177 yds rushing on 43 attempts. 21 - 33 pashing for 242 yds. Good but not great.
I'm not sure if these are best examples to use to support that RR can have real good defenses..
November 1st, 2010 at 10:36 AM ^
I'm assuming you think Iowa has an excellent defense. We put up 522 yards on them two weeks ago. Do you now think Iowa has a terrible defense?
Watch the games -- they're on iTunes I believe -- I think you will be impressed by their tackling and their hitting and their overall athleticism.
November 1st, 2010 at 9:33 AM ^
it anymore, he literally has four weeks to do it or he will not have another chance. RR has been living on what is "possible" for the better part of three years, that card has been played too many times. Whether it is scheme or motivation, he needs to turn this around in a big way right now. There can be no more" we can beat Purdue and that gets us bowl eligible." If the man wants this job after Thanksgiving, enough "that is a winnable game" bullshit, and enough of "he is capable of a good defense." He has four games left, there are lots of teams in this country playing with a lot of youth on defense and all over the field, and they win. Win these games. Beat Illinois, beat Wisconsin, fuck it, beat Ohio State, I'm afraid the clock is really ticking at this point.
"There is no tommorow!" -Apollo Creed, beach scene, Rocky 3.
November 1st, 2010 at 9:51 AM ^
Name some teams that have plenty of "youth" as in what we have on defense that are winning, that actually play in a tough conference
November 1st, 2010 at 10:38 AM ^
I sympathize with your frustration and your desire to lash out at RR for the performance on the field. We are all frustrated. But you're not thinking about the next step: if you fire RR, what then?
My sense, based on what I've seen on this board, is 95% of people who want to fire RR aren't thinking about the "what then" question, which is what this thread is all about.
November 1st, 2010 at 11:32 AM ^
to get where I am right now, but the answer to your question of "what then" is anything but this.
I did not advocate taking any action with regard to his job after 08, or after 09, but what I am saying in my post is that it is put or shut up time. This is his 3rd year, he has Illinois, Purdue, then Wiscy at home. Win those games, not the "winnable" games, this team decides which games are winnable, not if the game is "winnable" as somehow objectively defined. To me, one win the rest of the way and a 6-6 team or god forbid 5-7, it is time to go, period, and the peices fall where they may.
November 1st, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^
When Minnesota fired Glen Mason, they were thinking along your lines. When Tennessee fired Phil Fulmer, they were thinking along your lines. "Anything but this" is positively frightening. You seem to incorrectly believe that things can't get worse. If you fire RR, they most assuredly will.
November 1st, 2010 at 9:40 AM ^
RR is an offensve coach. And I doubt anyone is going to argue that our offense sucks.
Defense is the GERG's area ... and the defense (plain and simple) fucking sucks. And please stop with the "we need experience" .... take a look at Florida's defense that has as many frosh players as we do. We cannot stop anyone.
I don't think RR should fire GERG .... instead GERG needs to man up and RESIGN. He is failing in his job responsibilities. Michigan still gets top athletes ... every bit as good as anyone in the B10 (except perhaps OSU) . Sometimes you have to simply look at the facts ... W's and L's and yardage statistics & points per game & 3rd dow conversions and on & on. And the facts are very simple to interpret - our offense in top 10 in the country and our defense is pathetic. And you can't blame it all on the players !!!
We are 119th in creating turnovers !!! Defense causes turnovers ... we don't cause tunovers because we don't have a defense. Zero turnovers in the last 3 games ... we have to be close to setting an NCAA record ! I gotta go puke ...
Go Blue !
November 1st, 2010 at 9:54 AM ^
Florida has as many young players as us.. Ya and look at their record it is the same as ours, and they will prob lose more games too..
They barely beat a terrible Georgia team in OT this wkend.