is code word for "happy when we win games"
Supporting The Coach....What Does This Mean?
In one sentence you boiled down the whole issue perfectly. Also to add onto it. If the coach wins, he gets plenty of support. If he doesn't, he won't. Doesn't matter what state he came from originally.
Step 1: eat popcorn kernals
Step 2: poop popcorn kernals.
Step 3: rinse and repeat
that's how you get popcorn trees.
As we enter the Brady Hoke phase.....what are the fans supposed to do for him that wasn't done for RR?
Support him .
It means when the odds and world seem stacked against you and your team, you still support them. For a visual tutorial:
Four horsemen= haters John Wayne = RR/Hoke
If we're talking about Michigan football of the 1970s and 1980s, my archetype for supporting the coach in that time would be Bob Ufer. The salad days of I-form power football, the Big Two and the Little Eight, all that good stuff. Michigan was tops in the Big Ten and boy did we know it. We reveled in that success, and Ufer was there with Patton's horn, cheering us on to still-greater heights.
Times have changed. Michigan has seen its first coaching "bust" of the modern era. For whatever reason, RR did not work out at Michigan. So now we fans need to support the coach in ways we did not before. I struggle with this question too. I see signs of gross incompetency on the part of DB in the firing and hiring process. I see a deteriorating recruiting class. I see a team that will be lucky to do better than 7-5 next year.
Times have changed pretty dramatically in Ann Arbor, and Ufer-style support is not what we need right at this particular moment. I choose to support the coach by learning as much as I can about the program, its style of play, the coaches, etc. so I can make informed judgements about what actions they choose to take. It's very hard to get a good answer to this question because we can't vote on one coach or player over another, unless you happen to be a six-figure annual donator.
So, to wrap up this post: Stay smart, stay alert, don't drink the Kool-Aid, wear maize, and pray for success.
Check your browser settings, might be what stopped the clip.
Not the coach. If he is doing a good job you support the coach. If not, no. It is about the team, the team.
I don't think there is necessarily anything you can do to actively "support" the coach. Honestly, I think the biggest thing that people were criticized for during the RR era was for being overtly and consistently negative and looking for fault. As I see it, don't go out of your way to personally attack or be negative about the coach, and you're fine.
I think the whole idea of supporting the coach is kind of dumb, one way or the other. I want the coach to do well because I like Michigan and I want them to win. I think getting tied up in one coach or even one player above the fate of the whole team is unproductive.
The fans will do the same thing for Hoke that was done for RR. I hope he kick A-- and take names. If you cannot get the job done let them go. I think If RR would have fired GR after the UMASS game, he would still be the coach of U of M but RR was using his buddy passes and look where it got him.
I have a relative who was (and stil is) very close with Llyod Car and his family. From the begining of the RR era she had a negative attitude about him. Not based off any actual events though. I always felt she just had a negative image of some" southerner football coach" with a modern system. She would say things like:
"RR doesn't care at all about his players grades"
"RR yells at lot at his players at practice"
"RR is arrogant and doesn't care about his playeres or the values of this school"
She would even mention how much his wife didn't fit in Ann Arbor. I think her attitude reflects what people mean when they say RR was "not supported". A lot of the old gaurd michigan folks had this attitude that Llyod was kinda a grandfather like figure: one who cared about his players on and off the field, worked them hard but didn't yell too much, didn't demean them, etc. I think there were a lot of people who didn't believe RR could be that guy from the very begining. Not based of any real reasons, just off an image of a guy with a southern accent and a blond haired beauty paegent looking wife.
It was Mighty Ducks 3 where the kids went to college (or prep school) and had the strict coach who worked them hard and they all hated him. A lot of Michigan people saw LC as Gordon Bombay, and that new guy as RR...
I think thats what it means to not support a guy. I'm sure a coach can feel when fans and alums don't think you can replace the guy before you.
and probably still "close with Lloyd Carr and his family" makes it very hard for me to support this program.
Please tell them, for me, that there are many alumni, Victors Club members, and other supporters of the program who are filled with disgust over the way that Rich Rodriguez, his family and his staff were treated in Ann Arbor. And that we've been ashamed of our program ever since he was relieved of his coaching duties.
Believe me, I've let her know exactly that lol. Keep in mind that she is an extreme example as she is personal friends with LC and is still close to a lot of players from the LC era, there was probably no replacement that could have made her completely happy. But she does reflect a lot of the "Llyod Loyalist's" attitudes. Also, she cheers as loud as anyone on saturdays, just for the players more than the coach. Ill allow her that opinion and cut her a tiny bit of slack.
good response. Your points are well taken.
Evenings spent at Dan's Downtown Tavern with the barmaid on his lap. Bo would have been home studying tOSU film instead of having a few brews with his buddies.
"...just about EVERYBODY in the UM program seems happy he's gone..."
This is one of those fact-free statements that sounds good right up to the time that anyone asks any questions about it.
Since YOU haven't talked to "everybody" -- no make that EVERYBODY -- " in the UM program," I take it that you are going off what you've gathered from the local media. Which is filled with "Wow, Michigan Man-love!"
When was the last time that Brian Cook was quoted in the Free Press? Jon Chait? When has anyone with Brian's critical views been heard on local tv or radio? The exceptions are of course completely noteworthy. There are the blogs, and there is WTKA. And then, what else?
The simple fact is that Rich Rodriguez's tenure in Ann Arbor was marked by nothing so much as a criminally negligent if not malicious level of treatment in the press.
The Boren story was never properly told; what that led to was the festering, for years, of the "family values" meme. It led to people actually presuming that Rodriguez was some sort of evil abuser. Why not? What else does family values mean? (Good reporting might have discovered that it meant "No legacy scholarship for little brother Zach.")
Then there was Stretchgate, which was a complete creation of Rosenberg. And the worst imaginable publicity for Rodriguez.
And then the drumbeat to get Rodriguez fired. The death of a thousand cuts. There was the 2009 Football Bust "Katrina" story -- a complete botch job by Mark Snyder that went viral, nationally. There was Rodriguez near tears -- justifiably -- when it became clear to him how Snyder and Rosenberg had abused the then-freshmen Je'Ron Stokes and Brandin Hawthorne. That alone is a monstrous story. That Rich Rodriguez was ridiculed, instead of the reporters. There was Demar Dorsey, and then the 2010 Football Bust. Not once, ever, was there a single voice in the Mainstream Media acting as a governor, a dissenter, from the Free Press party line.
I don't tell anybody what to think here, Sean. But I think an awful lot of fair-minded people have learned what a hateful propaganda machine the Free Press has been in all of this. They've made their own minds up, even if a lot of them don't share my unshakable admiration for Rich Rodriguez.
We can argue about many things. One of the things that is really beyond arguing, is the behavior of the Free Press as I've highlighted above.
As someone who got to watch a few Lloyd Carr practices, the idea that Lloyd "didn't yell too much" at his players is downright hilarious to me.
My dad made leveled this same criticism at RR as well, and I never understood it either. I always assumed it was a way of masking some other underlying issue.
Damn it Bando, that's a good fucking comment! Why don't you make more comments like that, Godammit? Did you go to fucking Albion? No, godammit, you're a Michigan Man!
Ahhhh... Here's the interesting point. Where on earth did the "bad language" meme come from, as it relates to Rich Rodriguez? It seems like such a bizarre, off-the-wall complaint to make of a Big Ten football coach. Jim Tressel and Joe Paterno might have different reputations; okay. (There is a cool video circulating of an alleged Tressel halftime speech at their last bowl game; it's not the Tressel you see in press conferences, that's for sure.)
Bo Schembechler, Gary Moeller, Lloyd Carr. None of them were faint of colorful language. Bret Beilema, Barry Alvarez, John L. Smith, Darryl Rogers, Pat Fitzgerald, Joe Tiller, Hayden Fry... did any of those guys suffer bad public images due to bad language in practices? Moeller-at -Excalibur, I suppose, might be the exception that proves the rule, but only in the oddest imaginable way. Had any of those guys been taped at a halftime, like the fantastic Bob Knight "fucking Purdue" halftime speech, it would have gone on their Wikipedia pages, and been laughed at and promptly forgotten.
The more one thinks about the "bad language" story, the crazier it gets. My conclusion -- and I'd quite like to hear other theories -- is that it all relates to the Boren "family values" press release. And that if Justin Boren said that there was a lack of "family values," it must have been something like bad language or bad treatment of players, or... well, whatever. (Nevermind the fact that the Boren family are some of the roughest-language toughs you'd ever not want to run into in East Columbus.) That story, particularly compared to the real Boren story, is one of the most wildly misreported, negligently unreported, stories in the sad and disgraceful history of the press' treatement of Rich Rodriguez at Michigan.
"Supporting the coach" isn't really something that means anything in and of itself...basically, you'll only know when it's not there. For example, not "supporting" the coach was a definite factor in RR's firing, as I'm sure DB was swamped with angry e-mails and whatnot from deep-pocketed big shots with a take. The general aura of discontent was a contributing factor, but how much is uncertain.
In the grand scheme of things, though, supporting the coach to a reasonable extent probably has a more significant effect on this here blog than it does in the actual world of decision-making re: the football program. Why wouldn't you want to support the head coach (an extension of the team, the program)? Cheer up, guys, we will have nice things again soon.
Fan support will come.
Supporting your coach isn't necessarily something that is done on an individual basis, but is more of a community thing. I guess in my opinion it's hard to actively support a coach. If the fans want a coach to stay, that's support. So think of it more as showing approval not support.
A lot of it has to do with the public eye. People are able to tell if we're pissed, questioning the coach, or ecstatic about the way things are going.
Like good ole' Lesticles for instance....
My support is great and all... But "support" is a subjective thing. And it's going to be interpreted in a thousand different ways by a thousand different people to fit their particular slant on the program.
"Support" from people who never even set foot inside Fort Schembechler doesn't teach a kid to take the right lane and finish a tackle. It doesn't help a kicker put the ball through the uprights. It doesn't help a receiver to keep his concentration and not drop a pass. It doesn't create an offensive scheme or a defensive game plan. That's what coaches do, and whether or not they have this mythical, undying "support" from people who post on message boards has little impact whatsoever on their ability to competently do all of the above.
And that's where we've lost the plot in the last few years, and that's how we're losing it now. You don't "support" Brady Hoke, whatever that means? I'm sure he's going to get up in the morning with the same vigor to do a job he wants to do, and he's going to try his best to make his team better every day once he gets to Schembechler Hall. The external world doesn't matter nearly as much as the task he has in his workplace.
Same thing was true for Rich Rodriguez, and until we start admitting that it wasn't "lack of support," but "lack of fundamentals" and "lack of winning" that sealed his fate, we're going to keep having discussions like this over and over and over again, and go through the same tired motions every week until September.
Around here it means glossing over 15-22 while condemning hoke before he coaches a single game
Glossing over? I find this funny. How about we all gloss over a 47-50 head coaching record? Or let us gloss over RichRod having 1 winning season here at Michigan and Hoke having 3 winning seasons in his entire coaching career. I don't understand how you can accuse people of "glossing over" RichRod's losing record at Michigna but completely ignore Hoke's losing record his entire career.
Just because I supported RichRod doesn't mean I am completely blind to the clusterfuck that was our coaching search and hire. Some of us actually believe we would have gotten better bringing back 20 starters under Rich. Go figure.
Youre right, no one ever made excuses for rich rod in this space.
RR is 15-22 in the b10/at michigan. Hoke is 0-0. There is very little evidence supporting the hypothesis that either one of them can be a successful head coach here. But there is a shi t ton of evidence that one of them can't. Good lord if you people put 1/10 the effort into rationalizing hoke's losses as you put into rationalizing rr's, you'd be comparing him to lombardi
Some people actually believe that 60-80-100 is a bad trend for the defense. Some people believe that losing by 30 to every decent team you play is a bad sign. If returning 20 starters from that team is all youve got, youre not really making a compelling point (for the record, compelling points are there, but you certainly didnt make them)
Difference is when anyone pointed out that evidence of failure AT MICHIGAN, they were attacked for not supporting the coach, meanwhile saying hoke will certainly be an average coach here before he has coached a game here is acceptable "skepticism".
You cant have it both ways. Well, you can, but only if you are an RR fan, not if you are an M fan.
Whatever. This blog lacking objectivity and credibility?
Good fucking grief. Bite me. Better yet, GTFO and start your own blog if you think in depth football analysis and coverage is so easy.
I find when people cripe about things like objectivity it is usually because they lack their own. Just a thought.
Oh, you mean integrity like the way over-exaggerated accusations the Freep put out, and then all the commenters on the Freep, M-Live, and The Big Show trumpeted left right and center without ever checking what the NCAA regulations really say is countable and not countable?
I'll admit when I stopped commenting on the Freep, and started commenting over here (two days after Rosenberg's allegations), this was a Rich Rod haven, and you were likely to get neg-bombed if you were too critical. But as time went on (the breaking point was Illinois 2009), if you phrased your criticism reasonably, people listened, and considered.
So, sorry, but I'll continue to get my news and analysis from MGoBlog, DetNews, and Michigan Insider - all of which appear to have supported the team with, and by extension its coach for the past three years.
is going to have an overall losing record like he has. What he was able to do at both schools before he left each one is a testament to his abilities to create winning teams.
I supported Rich and Michigan over his three years - wore the Colors year in and out. But just as I have no control over how Rich got to Michigan, nor how he left - I'll just keep supporting whomever is the coach at Michigan and especially those kids on the Team.
I'm going to look for the positives and continue to have faith that we can win again, hopefully sooner rather than later.
Bo is gone, Mo is gone, Lloyd is gone, Rich is gone. Brady is our coach - and the kids who remain at Michigan are our team.
If I verbally tell my kid that he's a loser and won't ever do anything in life - chances are, that's exactly what will happen. I will remain positive around the "naysayers" and yell as loud as I can when I attend the games. I will talk positive at the tailgates, before and after each game - regardless if we win or lose. I will do my best to find the good that is Michigan football and focus on that in my texts, posts, and conversations about this great University and its football program.
Can't wait for the Spring Game.
First rule of coaching, never follow a legend. Even if you are the greatest coach ever, all your actions will be evaluated with WWLC do. You can never be as good as the Legendary Coach. Let someone else be the sacrificial goat.
Regarding your original question. There is nothing Joefan can do to get a coach hired or fired short of pictures with a dead hooker or a live boy. Alumni Donors and then former players have all the swag when it comes to moving coaches. So just buy your M-gear along with the occasional ticket, sit in the back of the bus and pipe down.
cures everything. If he wins- we will all look back on this time period and laugh.
I don't think most fans that put their fannies in the stands are/were the problem. And it seems like Hoke won a lot of people over on here with whatever it is he's done thus far, so that definitely helps.
I will support the he'll out of any coach that rolls with the maize and blue, coach Hoke will get even more support because he is a Michigan man and wants to be here.
Then plenty of strong floor joists, good solid sub floor and floor boards, probably not really important for support - but the little pucks under the feet are nice if it's on carpet. But why isn't this OT? I mean why should we care about supporting couches? Oh - sorry, what does it mean to be a "Coach Supporter" - not sure but I'm guessing something similar to an athletic supporter. Here's the ultimate way to support "the boys."
15-22, 0-6 to MSU and OSU and blowout losses to Wisky,OSU, and the last straw a mediocre SEC team in MSU with a month of practices to prepare did him in. That and a historically bad defense that regressed throughout the year rather than showing any signs of growth. His stubbornness with how the defense was managed did him in. The lack of support from former players and boosters within the program was merely icing on the cake. You have to ask yourself this: would RR have a job if the fans supported him from day 1? Maybe. Maybe not. Depends on whether RR wins more games because he knows he has full support (and the answer to that depends on who you talk to)
What if he still had support after the Gator bowl? That, I think, would not have mattered to DB. I mean, I was supporting RR from day 1 and did so up until the Gator bowl, because I am no football coach and RR didn't get hit with a dumb stick upon arrival at Michigan (he was a good coach at WVU, he didn't suddenly transform into a bad coach when he got here). However, even the most stringent of RR supporters couldn't really give a convincing argument to keep him around next year save for saying "Well, we can't really fully evaluate the guy until he complete's at least his 4th year". And while that may be true, that's not a very high level of "support" IMO.
How about as a start... Not assuming the worst at every opportunity and spouting off about it in every available forum.
If you can nail that...
About the only thing left is to root for the team.
as to original poster, it appears he didn't have a clue. RR making his own crater, or whatever. What the Hell type of facts do you have that are opposite the facts of being hired to build the team as you did in all your previous stops and then getting booted the first year you can anticipate 18-20 starters back?
As to the coach, just read Yost and you might grab a clue.
OP: you don't think newspapers, former players or AD personnel had responsibility for RR's downfall? Forget about trying to learn whether to support the coach (which, by the way, you shouldn't; you should support the school), you need to learn how to pay attention to the facts, my friend.
....that newspapers, former players or AD personnel had responsiblity for RR's downfall. Not even close. If he had won more games, he would have kept his job. It's pretty simple.
That's what I could never understand. What did Rosenberg, Braylon Edwards, Jamie Morris, Stephen Ross or anybody else related to the program do to prevent RR from successfully executing his job? He wanted a certain coaching staff and he got it. He wanted a new weight room and he got it. He wanted to recruit heavily in Florida and he got it. Dave Brandon gave him an endorsement immediately upon becoming AD and then proceeded to help did through the NCAA investigation mess.
Personally, I thought that RR was given all of the tools that he needed to succeed. Certainly people might not have liked his style, but they didn't stand in the way of him winning football games. It's too bad that he won't get a fourth year to see "what might have been" but after three years, I think that RR pretty much disqualified himself from Year 4.
1. He wanted Jeff Casteel, and didn't get him. I'll be the first to say that I don't know the full depth of that story. It would be nice if somebody reported, with fairness to all sides, but most importantly Rich Rodriguez. Did Michigan do everything possible to get Jeff Casteel? Probably not, since he stayed at WVU at a rather low salary, at least compared to top national coordinators as in the SEC.
2. People like me don't blame Rosenberg for "not supporting" Rich Rodriguez. We blame Rosenberg for concocting a story that led to an NCAA investigation. The NCAA investigation was a distraction from coaching and team affairs. It was a detriment to recruiting. It may well have injured the coach's reputation with high-profile traditional Michigan donors. If you don't think that the Head Football Coach's relationship with donors isn't a massive part of that job, you need to get out more.
3. People like me further blame the media, for being sucked in by the Rosenberg/Freep reporting. The media in Michigan disgraced itself with the lack of accountability in that episode. You can count on the fingers of one hand the places where an interested reader could find hard, detailed criticism of the media and the NCAA investigation. MGoBlog. Jon Chait. A very few others. Meanwhile, Free Press stories are being hyperlinked by 800 other newspapers. ESPN, and sportstalk radio are running with the story. We had to overcome a huge hurdle to get Dee Hart's commitment, because of the NCAA-investigation story. Who can even know how many other recruits we lost in the process.
And there is the general toxicity of the press treatment of Rich Rodriguez. No, it didn't cost us 15 yards here or there. No, we didn't have a game-winning TD called back, because people were mean to Rich Rodriguez. Nobody ever claimed such a thing. But that's not even what David Brandon was thinking about. David Brandon isn't like a general manager of an NFL franchise, any more than Mary Sue Coleman is like your econ professor. There is fundraising, and alumni relations, and a conference to deal with, and the NCAA. Oh, and more fundraising.
Be assured of this; Michael Rosenberg clearly knew the worst way to hit Rich Rodriguez was to hurt him in the "University respectability" area. And that is what he did. He alleged that Rodriguez fell way outside of the great tradition of Yost and Crisler and Schembechler. That Rodriguez was not only a cheater, leading a new gang of cheaters from West Virginia; but that Rodriguez was hurting Michigan players, and Michigan's pure "scholar-athlete" tradition. The investigation that Rosenberg prompted showed his story to have been a lie. But the damage -- the intended damage -- was done.
Paraphrasing former Secretary Ray Donovan after he was acquitted of federal charges: What University of Michigan office building does Rich Rodriguez go to, to get his good reputation back?
Buying tickets and showing up shows support. What any of us spout on blogs doesn't matter so much.
I don't feel RR was supported or loved by many, but that ship has sailed and being bitter doesn't help. RR would have had sufficient "support" if he had won more. In retrospect, I think he should have spent a lot more time, resources, and effort on the defense immediately. I am one of those who believe he came into a crummy situation (in terms of depth and cupboard when he got here.) And for whatever reason, I don't think Carr helped much. I also believe RR was screwed by the press. But again, that's irrelevant to today.
I'd like to see Michigan succeed, regardless of the coach and coaching staff.
Winning games will mean "support" for Hoke. Anything less than 500 over the next 3 years? He won't get support from many.
Myself, I'm firmly on the fence for now. I don't care what talking heads or prevailing winds suggest. I want to see how Hoke does against OSU, MSU, Penn State, ND and Nebraska. If he splits those games over the next 3 years, with at least one or two wins against OSU, and wins most of the rest, he'll have my support. If he doesn't, he won't. It's as simple as that.