U of M in Fox Sports' decade's best of CF
The good
First Team--OG: Steve Hutchinson, G, Michigan, 1997-2000: A four-year starter at Michigan, Hutchinson was a consensus All-American and the Big Ten Offensive Lineman of the year in 2000. He didn’t allow a sack in his junior or senior seasons.
2ND Team--Jake Long
and the not so good
Worst Coaching Hire of the Decade: Rich Rodriguez, Michigan, 2008: Too soon to judge? Perhaps. But in two years at Michigan, the man Michigan men feared wasn’t a “Michigan Man” has gone 8-16, hasn’t played in a bowl game, finished in last place in the Big 10, and has gone 1-5 against rivals Ohio State, Notre Dame, and Michigan State.
http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/schrager%27s-all-aught-teams
December 21st, 2009 at 3:43 PM ^
I do not agree on the RR part. Off the top of my head I would say Charlie Weis is by far worse.
December 21st, 2009 at 3:54 PM ^
He did coach them to 2 BCS Bowl games...just sayin
December 21st, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^
He did take top tier recruiting classes and coach them up to .500 seasons and lost to Navy twice... just sayin
December 21st, 2009 at 4:03 PM ^
Weis underachieved, but nowhere near what Rodriguez has done so far. There shouldn't be any denying that
December 21st, 2009 at 4:08 PM ^
but worst coaching hire of the decade...come on
December 21st, 2009 at 4:11 PM ^
yeah i don't agree with that part either, way too early to tell anyways
December 21st, 2009 at 6:37 PM ^
You agree that "Weis underachieved, but nowhere near what Rodriguez has done so far," yet you also "would say Charlie Weis is by far worse" (than Rodriguez, in terms of hirings). Huh? Rodriguez has underachieved significantly more than Weis (got less out of the talent he had, as I understand the concept), yet Weis was by far a worse hire?
December 21st, 2009 at 7:39 PM ^
I don't believe that you can say that RichRod has under-achieved as much as Weis. RichRod: a walk-on trying to run an offense he physically cannot run and a true freshman. Weis: number one QB recruit and two NFL caliber receivers. The Weis experiment is over and he failed, RichRod is going into his third season (second season with a QB that can run his offense). By this logic, I would say that Weis is more a failure than RichRod as this point in time, whether or not history will agree in 10 years, is anyone's guess.
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:03 AM ^
RR had far less talented personel to begin with. Look what Weis did with willingham's personel. Additionally RR was installing a new system..Weis was not.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:39 PM ^
Wait, Weiss is hasn't underachieved "anywhere near" what Rodriguez has done so far? How so?
December 21st, 2009 at 5:25 PM ^
1st it's "Weis". Not that hard to remember.
2nd, I agree 100%.
Weis also had a 3-9 ND team (and this was with players that fit the system).
He's also responsible for a 6-6 season with a top 3 NFL-ready QB and WR. That's got to count for something.
And he only won one bowl game (and it was a shitty one in Hawaii at that).
RR >>>>>> Weis.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:47 PM ^
3-9 and 6-6(x2) looks a lot like 3-9 and 5-7... not to mention the circumstances. RR hasn't done well here, but you can't compare him to Weis unfavorably.
December 21st, 2009 at 6:13 PM ^
And you just did. 5-7 6-6.
December 21st, 2009 at 6:56 PM ^
Okay. He said Weis has underachieved by far (nowhere near were the key words) less than RR has. I would argue that 5-7 >= 6-6(x2). I even left out that those were Weis's 3rd, 4th and 5th years, instead of his first 3. Why do I have to explain this to you?
December 21st, 2009 at 7:14 PM ^
I know what you meant. But you shouldn't compare Rodriguez unfavorably to Weis, and then say it can't be done. Doesn't make any sense. And since I'm a semi-anonymous Internet commenter and you would have a tough time finding my mom's basement, I'm going to act all tough and make fun of you. This should not surprise you.
December 21st, 2009 at 7:20 PM ^
Weis used talent given to him that actually moderately fit his system. With that he proceeds to do well in his first couple of seasons. After that he proceeds to coach like ape shit. RR has inherited good talent that doesn't fit his system at all and has not done very well with these players that don't fit. Don't judge until after they have the same number of years.
December 21st, 2009 at 7:29 PM ^
If Weis had to play a Big Ten schedule instead of the joke schedule ND plays now, he would have "underachieved" every bit as badly as RR.
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:46 AM ^
Tell me how many All-American QB's RichRod had at UM so far?
Tell me how many times Charlie Weis beat USC or a good UM team?
Tell me how many times Charlie Weis beat MSU?
Tell me how many BCS games Charlie Weis won?
Now tell me how many times USC and Michigan handed it to him?
Charlie loaded up on wins against middle of the pack teams and could not hang with the big boys at their best. LSU, OSU, USC and Michigan (twice) demolished him.
If Brady Quinn transfers when Weis arrives in South Bend, Charlie's gone in three years.
If RichRod had a defense that only gave up 20-25 points a game, we would be sitting here talking about how many snaps Denard would get at QB in our bowl game.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:04 PM ^
With all the teams that ND usually plays... is that really an achievement?
December 21st, 2009 at 4:08 PM ^
Tyrone Willingham.....
December 21st, 2009 at 4:21 PM ^
Weis had a winning record at the end of his tenure, so no, currently Rich Rodriguez is worse, no matter what we'd like to believe.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:48 PM ^
In Kirk Ferentz's first 2 years at Iowa, he was 4-19. Looks like Weiss is head and shoulders better than Ferentz also.
December 21st, 2009 at 6:30 PM ^
Until Rich Rodriguez leads us to an Orange Bowl with Banks and a bunch of two stars against USC, then I don't think we can really compare what he's done at Michigan to what Ferentz has done at Iowa. They are not parallel situations.
December 21st, 2009 at 9:59 PM ^
And until RichRod coaches at Michigan for as long as Charlie coached at Notre Dame, it is equally ridiculous to use overall record to decide who is the better coach. These are not parallel situations either.
December 22nd, 2009 at 3:03 PM ^
We'll see in a few years whether Rich Rod will be more successful than Weis. I don't want to be so quick to blindly follow and believe the skies will just clear up when there's a chance things won't work out.
RichRod could have great success in the end, or it just might not work out, those are both very real possibilities, all I'm trying to do is stay objective about it so that there's no disappointment if things don't quite work out (don't get me wrong, I really, really hope they do!)
December 21st, 2009 at 7:21 PM ^
But RR isn't the one looking for a job. The point is that he is more recent to his job than Weis was and the jury is still out on RR. Just wait
December 22nd, 2009 at 10:04 AM ^
You are judging a decade on two seasons. Weis had a lot more time to prove his mediocrety, and did in fine fashion. He proved he can win with other peoples players, but not his own. Once his coaching ability was entrenched in his players, they floundered. I doubt we will see the same in the case of RR.
To say he was a worse hire than Weis is a very big stretch IME, and borders on delusional.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:10 PM ^
Bill Callahan has to be up there for worst coaching hires. It's way too early to say that Rodriguez was the worst of the decade.
December 21st, 2009 at 6:18 PM ^
Callahan went 8-4 in his second season and won an Alamo Bowl that you might remember.
December 21st, 2009 at 7:23 PM ^
With his supposedly "best team"?
Alamo Bowl?
Not very good...
December 21st, 2009 at 4:10 PM ^
John L. Smith....and its not even close.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:18 PM ^
Runner Up: Zooker at Florida
Honorable Mention: Dennis Franchione at Texas A&M
December 21st, 2009 at 4:30 PM ^
Zook at Florida, Zook at Illinois, or Zook at (insert the next school to hire Zook)?
December 21st, 2009 at 4:17 PM ^
the decade isn't over for another year.
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
FWIW, Alabama's interaction with Mike Price was a much worse hire (and fire).
December 21st, 2009 at 4:19 PM ^
The decade ends in 10 days...
December 21st, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^
Was there a year 0?
December 21st, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^
This debate has to go down here too? Is it really that big of a deal?
December 21st, 2009 at 4:45 PM ^
OK I'll play this game.
1) Why are all of these sites / shows running all decade teams then?
2) Do you consider 1990 part of the 80s? 1980 as part of the 70s?
December 21st, 2009 at 5:44 PM ^
The subject is "...of the Decade" meaning years that include 200?. It's not the "All-Exactly-2000-2009-Years-Since-the-Start-of-the-Modern-Calender...Team."
December 21st, 2009 at 5:09 PM ^
1) Herd mentality?
2) Interesting question. From my perspective, 1970 was much more like 61-69 than 71-79; 1980 was slightly less like 71-79 than 81-89; 1990 was less like 81-89 than 91-99; 2000 was much more like 91-99 than the bubble busting economy and war on terror-filled 2001-2009.
Bottom line is decade delineation is somewhat arbitrary; conventional wisdom says that the decade ends in 10 days. But, technically, the decade has another year and 10 days to go. Thanks for playing, you get +1 from me.
Bottom line is decade delineation is somewhat arbitrary; conventional wisdom says that the decade ends in 10 days. But, technically, the decade has another year and 10 days to go. Thanks for playing, you get +1 from me.
December 21st, 2009 at 6:55 PM ^
Really? Glad to see that there is such a broad consensus supporting your claim.
Shouldn't we be discussing... uhh... football?
December 21st, 2009 at 5:27 PM ^
Sure, right before year 1. Whether you call it year 0 or not is irrelevant.
December 22nd, 2009 at 11:18 AM ^
it was called the year 2000
December 21st, 2009 at 4:15 PM ^
Does George O'Leary count too? Dan Hawkins has been a disaster as well.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:16 PM ^
Notre Dame coach for 5 days in 2001.
Padded resume.
Has to be the worst hire.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:20 PM ^
"Padded Resume" vs "Strip Club incident".
5 days vs. 5 months
same overall record: 0-0
Tough call, but I'm sticking with Mike Price at Alabama.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:16 PM ^
1. George O'Leary (could it be anybody else?)
2. Dan Hawkins
3. Dennis Franchione
4. Bill Callahan
5. Gary Barnett
December 21st, 2009 at 4:20 PM ^
No Question:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_O%27Leary#Notre_Dame
But yes, RR's 2 year record obviously is not good.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:22 PM ^
Those are all good choices, O'Leary, and Franchione crack me up.
December 21st, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^
He's been here since 2008.
How do two years constitute 'worst of the decade'?
I'll reserve judgement for now, thanks.