Why was the offense so bad? Just blame Lloyd Carr!!

Submitted by Chrisgocomment on

Chris Burke at Mlive takes a shot at Lloyd for some reason:

http://blog.mlive.com/thediag/2008/08/want_a_scapegoat_blame_the_las.ht…

Of course he prefaces his criticism with this:

Look, I don't want to rehash all the criticism of the previous coaching staff. I certainly don't want to take a bunch of cheap shots at a coach after he retired - especially a coach that did wonderful things at Michigan while running a clean program.

And then he goes right ahead with the pot shots:

Imagine Carr had stuck around for this season. I can't envision that things would have been that much better. All those question marks I pointed out before would still have been around and, if you believe the Barwis hype, Michigan would have still been underconditioned and slow.

He does point out that Mallett and Boren would still be around.  But he mentions that Arrington would have been gone.  I disagree with that.  I think Arrington would have stuck around for another year.  Also, he fails to mention that we lost 2 other O-Linemen because of the coaching change.  Not that the guys we lost were great (Mitchell and whoever the other guy was) but they would have been great to keep around due to their experience.  In this scenario Michigan has 4 O-Linemen with experience, instead of just one.  Plus you have a QB with experience (Mallett - or, you have a QB - Threet - who was highly recruited and tailor made for Carr's offense) and two experienced RB's with plenty of time in Lloyd's running scheme.

OK - in conclusion - if Lloyd had stuck around, I absolutely think this year would be better record wise.  I think this dude is just trying to kick Lloyd in the ass on the way out the door.  Lloyd would have retired sooner, rather than later, and growing pains were bound to take place, no matter who the successor was.  Nor does he mention that Lloyd had great recruiting classes all the way up until this end, the cupboard was hardly bear.

MGoBoard
Lloyd Carr
MLive
Chris Burke

mgobleu

September 1st, 2008 at 12:55 PM ^

Not that I wish Carr would stay forever and things carried on as always, but I can agree somewhat. Although I do think Mallett was on his way out even if Carr stayed. Which I'm okay with, considering I feel alot better about Threet today than I did about Mallett after the Oregon game. Seriously, something about him rubbed me the wrong way from day one, and I think Threet's a much smarter and more coachable player. Some snaps and an O-line and He'll do fine. However, if Carr did stick around, so would Loeffler, who I'm sorry to say will be increasingly missed.

Joined: 07/02/2008

MGoPoints: 38428

formerlyanonymous

September 1st, 2008 at 1:10 PM ^

I think you probably feel better about Threet because of the expectations of this season.  Last year we were in contention for a national title.  Then it was, ok, lets just go for regaining respectablility, our team is loaded.  If Threet would have been in Mallett's position, we would have been just as down on him when he struggled.  This year we expect to struggle.  If Mallett would have stuck around for this year, I think I would have been a little more skeptical about him as he has a year of experience, but honestly I can't expect anyone to really succeed with that o-line.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 38964

Tacopants

September 1st, 2008 at 2:25 PM ^

Acutually, I blame Tyrone Willingham.  If he had never left Notre Dame they would have never gotten Charlie Weis while still never beating Michigan.  While having Ty Willingham, they would have only brought in 2* recruits leaving all their 4*+ guys to fall to Michigan.  With those players we would have won.

Don't turn into ND fans.

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 3579

Other Chris

September 1st, 2008 at 7:42 PM ^

The odds are better than fifty-fifty that Mallett would be gone regardless.  He also left with a bunch of family-orchestrated bs about the program not being right for him instead of just shutting up.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 1219