At what point do you start putting some blame on the coaching staff?

Submitted by umjdg on

I am not advocating that we throw in the towel on RR and his staff just yet, but I don’t think it is very prudent for us to try and cover up, or make excuses for some of the mistakes this year by pointing all the fingers at the players or Uncle Lloyd, and giving  RR and his staff a free pass b/c we are going through a transition.  Under no circumstance should we have lost to Toledo, who was routed by a Brady Hoke coached Ball State team 31-0 (No I am not advocating for Hoke to be the head coach at Michigan). However I do think we need to open our eyes and realize that this is not just bad execution by the players, but also bad coaching and their inability to put in place the right schemes to compensate for some of our young, as well as veteran players, deficiencies.  Every week I feel like we are trying to force a square peg in a round hole while all I heard about before this year started was how RR’s system was adaptable to the personal. From what I have seen so far, that doesn’t appear to be case. We can try to blame Lloyd and Mallet and the Douchebag who transferred to that shit hole down south, but reality is we have had Top 15 recruiting classes over the last 4 years (see below), and our players are not getting better every week like we expected, in fact, they seem to be heading in the wrong direction. I think RR could potentially have great overall system once it is in place, but I question his ability to adapt and his ability to lead. If you watch the post game press conferences, he doesn’t appear to have the qualities I would normally associate with a good leader and motivator, and that worries me, no matter how good his system might be.  My only logical explanation for why this staff appears to be inflexible is they wrote off this season long ago and are trying to get the younger players into, and familiar with the system as quickly as possible.

Is it worth going 2-10 or 3-9 and at what point do you start putting some blame on the coaching staff?

Rivals 2004 - #5

Rivals 2005 - #6

Rivals 2006 - #13

Rivals 2007 - #12

 

Good Q&A Article by Michael Spath on Rivals.com…some pieces below.  

Q: Should fans maintain faith in this coaching staff?

A: For as many legitimate excuses as one could make to support why this program is down this season, regardless of coach, U-M never should have lost Saturday's game. Never. This offense has regressed, this defense at no point has been dominant this season and now Michigan's kicker is suffering confidence loss.

The coaches can talk about lack of execution all they want, but at some point they have to be held accountable for that lack of execution. Is that time now? Tough to say. The dearth of experience offensively, combined with below-average talent at key positions, is really hurting the Wolverines, but the adage 'wait until next year' doesn't fly after a loss like this.

Maybe Rodriguez isn't working with the right kind of players, but he's working with football players that have been recruited to U-M and they're not improving. In these final six games, the coaches' job is to prove they can get the most out of this talent. If they cannot, then there will be serious questions come December.

Q: Where can the coaches make immediate adjustments?

A: In play calling. Offensive coordinator Calvin Magee was pretty disgusted after the game, but he needs to begin asking himself, 'Why am I putting these kids in position to do something they cannot?' The perfect example is Michigan's commitment to call screens and passes to the flat in which a lineman must get outside the hash marks and put a block on a linebacker and/or cornerback. This offensive line simply does not have the athleticism to get it done and yet we have watched this play call fail over and over and over again. Why?

Why insist on running plays without a lead blocker when there is at least one defender in the offensive backfield within moments of the snap? I'm not advocating Michigan change its offense like so many are insisting but this team has strengths and a lot of weaknesses and the coaches must begin finding ways to compensate for those weaknesses. If that means employing tight ends on the line in blocking roles then so be it. If that means throwing to the sidelines instead of the middle of the field so be it. If that means abandoning their screens so be it.

No good will come from trying to run a pro-style offense – these coaches don't know it and this offensive line isn't good enough regardless of scheme – but the coaches can shore up their weaknesses with better play calling and that execution is on them.

goody

October 13th, 2008 at 8:45 AM ^

McGuffie went over 100 yards and Sheridan ran well at times in the second half.  It is the QB play which has hurt Michigan the most this year.  McGee and RR have been getting guys open in the pass game but the QB's just can't get them the ball.  Coaches can only go over mechanics and execution so much before the players need to start performing. 

alabluema

October 13th, 2008 at 10:13 AM ^

To me the basic problem with Michigan right now is they're inexperienced at quarterback, offensive line, and linebacker. You can't somehow coach your way out of that no matter what offense you run. Threet might get lots better in a year or two and let's hope some of these young lineman get stronger and more physical etc., but for now it's going to look pitiful -- except for occasional flashes of brilliance and light.

ShockFX

October 13th, 2008 at 10:17 AM ^

Rivals 2004 - #5

Rivals 2005 - #6

Rivals 2006 - #13

Rivals 2007 - #12

 

That's correct, but now account for the massive attrition at Oline and QB.  Then couple in dodgy LB recruiting.  Oops.

Orion

October 13th, 2008 at 10:47 AM ^

Most of the kids from the '04 class who contributed anything whatsoever are gone or are now on D. Every single O-lineman from that class never amounted to anything.

As for the '05 class, that class is one of the most overrated/star-crossed classes in recent memory. 10 out of the 23 kids aren't even on the team. The OL's are just now getting their first significant minutes. How anyone could look at this class and say it is a Top 10 class is just beyond me.

mvp

October 13th, 2008 at 10:38 AM ^

...that recruiting rankings ultimately are speculation and don't really matter.

It is just like your degree.  If you went to Michigan and got a diploma, that might have opened up a door or two for you, but we all know that if you never studied, or if you don't deliver once you're in your new job, you won't go anywhere.

The recruiting class ranking speaks about likely potential; it is not a guarantee of anything.

Hannibal.

October 13th, 2008 at 10:44 AM ^

Why do people criticize the playcalling as if anything we call would actually work?  Does anyone think that our offensive line could block against an 8-man front or that Threet could make some of the strongarm throws that Lloyd's offenses required the quarterback to make? 

imafreak1

October 13th, 2008 at 11:25 AM ^

Regarding the play calling, until someone comes up with a better offensive plan I can't say much at this point. Essentially, M needs to run plays that don't involve the offensive line or consistency from the QB. What offense is that? I see an offense that sets the QB up repeatedly to hit big plays and he misses.

Regarding the Oline, they've sucked for a while. Last year we had one decent player and we ran most of our plays behind him. This season we lost Long and most of the other guys left early. Now, we've got the guys who weren't good enough to beat out the sucky guys stepping in early. When some of those guys got hurt, we were hoping to start a Dline player at Oline. It's bad. The fact that this Oline is significantly out performing ND's line from last season is some kind of miracle. The problem with recruiting stars is many of those guys don't pan out. Michigan is left largely with ones that didn't pan out and others that have been forced into starting too soon. Veteran units or players can make up for younger weaker players and units. The Michigan offense lacks a veteran presence.

The spread offense is a red herring. Michigan would be hideous offensively running any offense. The spread just gives those who never supported RR a convenient refrain to criticize him.

IBleedMaizeNBlue

October 13th, 2008 at 12:03 PM ^

You can try and blame whomever you like for this series of losses. The facts are that we have:

1) A team chock full of freshman
2) A coaching change (all but one)
3) A complete regime change
4) An offensive philosophy change
5) Players ill-suited to run this new offense
6) Inexperience at the most crucial positions
7) Lack of depth at crucial positions

The coaches want to win, the players want to win. Next year or the year after when most (if not all) of these factors are eliminated, you will see a much more successful Michigan team. Don't blame anybody, just hope that we'll look better next game.

Blue Durham

October 13th, 2008 at 3:27 PM ^

If you were given command of the Titanic minutes before it striking the iceberg, how much of it was your fault?

Once inaugurated, how long before a president is fully responsible for the economy?  

A football program, like a massive oceanliner or the economy, does not turn on dime.  The trajectory for this season was already mostly set by previous recruiting classes and attrition; things beyod RR's control. 

RR is not blameless for this season, but is less responsible than the past staff.  Fair or not, like presidents, this goes on his record, and he is going to get the blame (or credit) because it "happened on his watch."

WolvinLA

October 13th, 2008 at 4:26 PM ^

I would totally love it if we would have won the Toledo game, or any of the other games that we lost.  But BD is totally right: the biggest reasons that we are bad this year occurred well before RR had anything to do with this team.  That being said, I think what RR is doing will benefit us in the future.  We were never going to be a Rose Bowl team this year, realistically.  I love the fact that a lot of our young players are getting an opportunity to acclimate themselve to Big Ten football, because those are the guys who will be leading the team in a couple years.  I would love for us to with a few more games this year, but I'd much rather see a national championship or even a BCS bowl victory 2 years from now. 

WolvinLA

October 13th, 2008 at 6:44 PM ^

I don't know if you read my post, but it doesn't look like I even mentioned Lloyd's name.  I loved Lloyd, but he knew when the right time was to leave.  The bulk of our contributors last year were either seniors or NFL-ready juniors, and I can never blame a guy who leaves early for the draft, that's what these guys work toward.  Lloyd did a great job recruiting guys for his offense.  Unfortunately for us, Lloyd did a poor job of recruiting for RR's offense.  It's going to take a little time, but sometimes you need to take a step back to take two forward, to be terribly cliche.

chitownblue (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 4:47 PM ^

As a diarist just posted, the problem this team has is not RR, and it's not Lloyd's recruiting. It's attrition. Going into this season, we should have had a starting o-line of:

Mark Ortmann, Corey Zirbel, Justin Boren, Alex Mitchell, and Steve Schilling. We have 2 of those. In addition, a primary backup (Ciulla) left.

Both our projected WR's, and our projected starting QB left as well.

chitownblue (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 6:02 PM ^

A, B, and C.

Mallett left because RR came (didn't want to play in the offense)

Schifano left because he injured himself.

Mitchell quit before ever meeting RR, after Carr retired.

Ciulla quit before ever meeting RR, after Carr retired.

Boren quit because he didn't like RR.

Manningham went pro.

Arrington when pro.

Zirbel got hurt.

Forcier left because he was concerned about his spot on the depth chart.

So, if Carr stayed, we'd probably have Boren and Mallett. The others? Gone no matter how you slice it.

Blue Durham

October 13th, 2008 at 6:55 PM ^

safeties? And what about depth? Fine, we would have had a few more offensive linemen, and a QB that loves to fumble. A couple of injuries to the linemen mentioned, and we are right here where we are (I think Manningham was gone prior to last year - and good for him).

I am not trying to place the season at Carr's feet (my point is that is has been a joint effort, and a confluence of circumstances), but we have approximately 85 scholarships, 25 taken by the joint Carr/RR class (and that includes Carr's recruit, the long snapper Morales), and roughly 60 that are exclusively Carr's. And we have 1 WR, 1 DB, an entire DL, a punter and maybe a K, maybe 1 LB, a bunch of TE's, the best of which just loves to block, and little depth (except a K where we have Jason Gingell, yee ha).

Even without the attrition (and leave Manningham out, he was gone), I do not think this team would be termed "loaded." Do you?

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 7:23 PM ^

Wow, you guys sure sound like the ND fans of the last few years. Let's hope for the sake of the conference, the results are not similar. As an outside observer (OSU fan) whose opinion is not wanted, allow me to type at you:

- it is not RR's fault the team is bad, and any talk of making a change is a waste of time. If you didn't agree with the hire, fine, but at least have the sense to realize he is going to get some rope to hang himself with. Do you really think the egos in the AD's office and elsewhere at UM will admit to such a mistake at this point? I know my ego would't admit I screwed this up yet, especially when the potential upside is huge.

- However, it is RR's fault the team is this bad and not improving. Clearly, he made some mistakes along the way. I don't care about your attrition, that doesn't turn you into a bad MAC team.

I'll be honest, I was worried earlier in the year (especially after the ND game, believe it or not) that you guys would suck early and steadily improve and maybe knock us off. However, you guys have not improved at all, and that is inarguably on the coach, no?