You used to work in the ND Athletic Department when Touchdown Charlie was there.
to play football, not to play trumpet
You used to work in the ND Athletic Department when Touchdown Charlie was there.
Well it doesn't really matter does it? He has to win 7 games plus or he's gone either way, whether you consider year 2 or 3.
Could we all please stop the "RichRod needs to win 8 games this year, or 7 games and a win vs OSU, or 6 games but wins vs Purdue and the score of the OSU game has to be within 2 TDs, or...." What if every single person on the starting offense and defense goes down with injury? Then can he win 4 games and keep his job? I can take a lot on these boards, but the "do this or else" crowd really needs to quiet down until the season is under way. God the season can't get here quick enough.
Thank you. Not one of these "RR needs 11 wins or he will be fed to a hungry wolverine" statements are accurate. Brandon will assess the situation, and make a decision. He doesn't have a magic number in mind right now.
Agreed. I would say that all these "requirements" being put forth aren't what Brandon is thinking, but what the poster is thinking.
If RichRod doesn't get 8 wins or 7 with an OSU victory, would YOU want him fired?
That's a bit of a rhetorical question. I know those type of questions are getting old.
Personally, I'd like Rodriguez to stay for 2011, unless our team totally tanks this year or there's a major off-the-field incident. I just don't think he's had enough time to build a program, and firing him after this year would be a big mistake considering the potential for a great year in 2011.
Alright that's it. I know the last two years have been rough and I know the "We're Michigan" thing is played out, but the bottom line is that Rodriguez was brought in to compete for national championships. If he can't manage a winning season in 3 tries, it might be time to move in a different direction. Lots of coaches come in to situations and have success immediately. Maybe we hire a different spread guy and he uses the personnel more effectively. Maybe we hire a coach who doesn't have a set offensive strategy and he comes in and has immediate success, I don't know. But as incorrect as the "it's all RR's fault, top 10 recruiting classes" meme is, the whole "no matter what he deserves 2011" meme is equally stupid.
At the same time, do you really want to see him come in and compete with an entire team of his recruits who are at most true juniors? Hell, half of his recruits still have 3 years of eligibility left, so do you really want to bring a guy in and tell him that a large portion of your judgement comes from players who didn't even commit to you? What coach is going to look at a Michigan Athletic Department that is so impatient that they are willing to axe a coach after 3 years and say "hmmm, that seems like a great situation - hopefully I can succeed quickly"
A different spread guy? RR is the leading innovator in the spread offense. This is a proven system that WILL work. RR has the ability to taper his offense to what the defense gives him and what players he has-- we saw that in The Mathlete's diary a la Shaun King's v. Pat White's tendencies.
What are you going to do? Bring in another spread coach to reap all the benefits his first couple years here and then everything hits the fan(Charlie Weis had his best seasons with Tyron Willingham's recruits)? I think everyone would agree on this board that the defense has a lot more holes than the offense, and RR was brought in for the spread. Give the D some time to grow. People need to be calm and just quit all this damn speculation. Those who stay will be champions.
Well the defense if RR's responsibility as the head coach so if the defense is so terrible that he can't manage a winning season in 3 tries that's really his fault. I don't even know why I'm arguing this since I think we'll put up 35+ points a game and win 8 games this year, but this whole none of this is RR's fault and we need to give him 10 years to implement his system mentality is annoying.
So you are in the mindset that true freshmen and sophomores should be leading our defense? People forget that the 07 defense was just the start of the horrid defenses in 08 and 09. Yes, 08 and 09 were some of the worst defenses in the history of UM football....but 2007 was in the top 5 worst defenses also. We gave up at least 34 points 4 times in 07 - and this is the defense that RichRod inherited. Schaefer we all know was not the right hire and RichRod gets the blame for that. But you can't just say "defense has been horrible, has to be RichRod. He only cares about offense. Rabble rabble." It just isn't true. The guys that should have been leading the defense the last two years (juniors and seniors) were either gone before RichRod got there, didn't live up to the hype, or were so against RichRod that it was probably better they went pro early. I didn't even mention the secondary that Lloyd forgot to recruit his last 2 or 3 years. Does Rich get some blame? Yes. Did he take over one of the worst defenses (statistically) in the last 40 years? Yes.
Did I ever say RichRod only cares about offense? He is the head coach and I'm sorry he doesn't go blameless when he fields the two worst defenses in school history. Is Lloyd partly to blame for that? Sure, but it's been 3 years now. If Rodriguez can't find a way to field a winning team in 3 years, it's time to move on in my opinion. I feel most level-headed individuals would feel the same way(Brian for one)
You didn't read anything in my post other than a sarcastic remark about RichRod only caring about offense, did you? I would think most level-headed individuals would read Misopogon's decimated defense and then look at the defensive 2 deep last year that had 5 walk ons, 2 of whom started most of the year, and notice that had very little to do with RichRod and more to do with lack of talent due to transfers and poor defensive recruiting at the end of Lloyd's tenure. I will ask again, are you in the mindset that walk-ons and true freshmen/sophomores should make up a majority of your defense?
Alright let's get this clear. I'm not saying that RR is totally at fault for the past two years because "ZOMG Top 10 Recruiting classes". I am saying that as the Head Coach he bears some responsibility for the past two years(probably not a large amount but still he bears some). From this point out(now that it's his 3rd year in the program), it's all his responsibility from this point on. If he does have a winning season in his THIRD year with the program, I (and almost all level headed fans) think it might be time to move on.
I agree, you cant do a complete 180 and expect to start winning lots of games in 3 years. RichRod deserves 4 years. But can we stop talking about this, its getting old.
I am completely fine knowing that this team is still extremely young on both sides of the ball.
If a bowl game wasn't attached to a certain number of wins, I think this would be right. However, if we miss a bowl game for a 3rd straight year, Brandon is going to have to do something or else they are going to start losing donations and ticket holders.
In a reasonable world where entire teams don't get injured at the same time, Dave Brandon's assessment is going to lead to RR getting fired if he doesn't win 8 games or so. I don't think he has that number in his head right now, but if you look at the schedule, any lower than that and you are losing to teams that you shouldn't be losing to in your 3rd year. Going 2-6 in the Big 10 or 4-4 with losses against UConn and ND isn't going to get him a 4th year.
Our athletic department has been notoriously slow in firing underachieving coaches (eh hem, Tommy Amaker), and I really doubt Rodriguez will be fired if we win 7 games in the regular season. You're totally entitled to your opinion though.
I'm just looking at who we would have to lose to. OSU, Wisconsin, (LOL lucky) Iowa, (a bad) PSU, and one more. MSU? Purdue? ND? UConn? If we win the bowl game we get 8 wins, which I think makes up for the bad loss. If we lose, we just lost to another middle of the pack team and people aren't going to be happy.
couldn't have said it better myself. David Cone says what? "haters gunna hate"
It is true that he still has to win to keep his job, but if the bar is set at 7 games that would suggest that he is being viewed as in his "2nd year", or else the bar would be at 9+ wins.
Yes it counts.
No excuses this year, git r dun.
Well, the question would be whether the team RR had in his first year here comparable in terms of its inadequacy to run the spread to the teams he had in his first year at WVU or Glenville State?
I'd guess no, that the teams at WVU and Glenville State were probably at least slightly more suited to him, but I'm not sure. I know people have looked it up and posted it before, but I'm too lazy to search for it right now.
I also wonder if WVU faced the additional challenge of "buy-in" attrition. Most of the guys who came to Michigan before Rich Rod had a specific style of play in mind and multiple options available to them (Boren, Mallet, Clemons, etc.). I don't think that is/was the case a WVU.
Regardless, I agree with the point above. It doesn't matter. He needs to win.
I don't know a lot about that team, but it seems to me they probably had similar problems. I mean, I personally think it should count. If it doesn't then when his record gets better you can't say that he improved from the year 1 record of 3-8. Also, he had that entire year to start installing his system and recruiting for it. Its not like he did absolutely nothing productive that year and just started in 2009. I don't necessarily hold the record "against" him, but I think it should count towards his legacy.
It's not like all the teams he was coaching before were spread teams. And the programs were coming off worse runs than Michigan was. Some little factors may differ in his favor (WV at least, had someone who could be a QB for him on the roster), but there are probably just as many that worked against him. For all the "Michigan was so bad" stuff...most jobs you take over were in a lot worse shape than Michigan. That's why the job was open.
Let's be honest...the offense was going to suck no matter who was the coach, but the defense could have been decent (not great, but not historically bad...well, at least till last year), but we had the most screwed up defensive coaching situation I've ever seen. And that hire was on Rich. And as Brian has said, if something deep sixes him at Michigan, it'll probably be due to not having a good enough defense, and having to switch DCs after one year.
In our case, it is hard to say the entire team is in year this or that, having so many young guys contribute last year. Our QBs are in year 2, but the bulk of the guys in the trenches are in year 3 of the system and more importantly the S&C program.
RR went from having no quarterback in his first season to having 2 true freshmen QBs in his second. I don't see how anybody can win with that.
As far as I'm concerned, this is RR's first season (where I'm holding him accountable, at least).
Just how accountable is accountable. If he were to go 5-7 again, would he still be here next year?
If I were Brandon, I'd probably keep him on for 1 more year if we go 5-7 this fall; it'd be a tough call, though.
But I'm not Brandon and he will surely get booted if he goes 5-7.
His first full class of recruits will not even be upperclassmen until next year and, due to self imposed sanctions, he is operating at a significant disadvantage with fewer coaching assistants than everyone else this year and reduced practice time both this year and next. Clearly, the first year we should count is 2012 (unless, of course, we win big this year and/or next, in which case RR should have the option of counting either or both of those years if he feels doing so would be the fair thing to do).
"...due to self imposed sanctions, he is operating at a significant disadvantage with fewer coaching assistants than everyone else this year and reduced practice time both this year and next."
He shit the bed; he can lay in it.
I'm pretty sure Mr. Woodson was being sarcastic in his reply. At least I hope he was...
I thought I had stretched the logic to such an absurd point that the sarcasm couldn't be missed. I guess I need to try even harder next time.
I thought you were serious too. And it's not really your fault. It's just that such an argument doesn't seem that out of bounds on this Board. I've seen more out there defenses than "well, not that we've gotten ourselves on probation, he needs more time." Sigh.
It's kind of depressing how the "breakout year" seems to get pushed back a year every once in awhile. We're on to 2012 now huh? I'm certainly an RR supporter, but 2011 has to be the double digit win type year, not 2012. We lose alot more between '11 and '12, than between '10 and '11.
It is not depressing. It is exactly the opposite of depressing. By pushing back the first year to count until RR wins enough games, we absolutely guarantee that he will succeed. How can guaranteed success be depressing? It is pure and blind optimism. It is perfect!
We need a sarcasm tag around here just for you Woodson...........
Good thing I can play football!
I actually think it's less that you suck at sarcasm, and more that some of the attempts to defend RR or paint him as some mad genius have reached almost Weisian proportions. So no matter how ridiculous the sarcasm, it's getting a little tough to tell the difference. I don't think RR needs nor wants knee jerk defenses or excuses. Let the man stand or fall on his own merits.
A small percentage of the posters must expect him to coach for Paterno like years. Because if you're hoping to be good in say year 5 (which really, may not be the popular opinion...but HAS been said here...) well, if he coaches a Lloyd like time span, a third of his career is a loss....or even a Bo range, a quarter. Hard to imagine him having that great an overall standing, if he doesn't win multiple national championships.
I think being respectable this year, winning bigger next year (Big Ten title type stuff), and rolling after that isn't that harsh a timeline.
No offense to the OP, but any statement along the lines of "QBs suited for his system" opens up RichRod to the ridiculous (if never-ending) charge of "He should have adapted his offense to the available talent!" This, of course, blatantly ignores the level of *any* talent at that position in '08. (As always, no personal attack on Threet/Sheridan is intended here.)
I'm not sure how saying, "I find it highly unfair to hold a guy accountable for coaching a team completely inadequate for his system (see the quarterback situation)" opens up RR to the charge you suggest. My comments defend his from such a, as you note, "ridiculous" charge.
Sorry, it's year three. There's a reason that EVERY team Rod has coached has had a terrible first season. Did he have QB's here that were worse fits for the system than his previous stops? Yes. But if he has one is the team any better? Maybe, and I stress maybe, by one game at best. Give him time and I think we'll have a juggernaut going here. But this is definately the third year in the system.
: to a sickening or excessive degree
But I also think he's gotta win more games. (I'm a full RR supporter and I see lots of wins this year, and even more next year... but we need some now as well)
Year One's Offense == I give him a "pass" because of the horrific lack of talent on the Oline and at QB, plus it being a completely new system.
Year One's Defense == He takes this one right on the chin. While we were lacking in some depth, we had enough talent to at LEAST make some noise. There is no reason we should have gone away from having 4 dlinemen on the field at any given point, given the talent that was there (TT, BG, Will Johnson, MM). Not saying that we should have been all world, but we should have had some better numbers on the field then we did.
Either way, it IS in the record books. However, I would expect to see a "Year 2" style jump, equal to that of the other programs he has been a part of coaching, as we finally have the same QBsfor a second year, and they have talent to the run the system... be it in different ways.
No. No free passes in CFB. Year 1 counts.
Secondly, I would like to point out that Martin did NOT intentionally set about to make some grand thematic change in the culture/play style of UM. Ferentz and Schiano were both offered the job before RRod but turned the job down. They were much closer to "old UM" in philosophy and we would have probably had far fewer "growing pains" during the transition from Carr to Ferentz/Schiano.
...we would have probably had far fewer "growing pains" during the transition from Carr to Ferentz/Schiano.
Maybe. The cupboard was really bare. We'll never know.
... except maybe for Cubs fans.
I've shed many tears this year for the Cubbies. We are just terrible.
... has been shockingly bad, even for the Cubs. Every time I thought it couldn't get any worse, it did. And not by a little.
I am starting to really believe in the billy goat curse. If I were Ricketts, I would seriously consider getting a billy goat or two and have them attend all future games at Wrigley as offical guests of the Cubs at least until they win a World Series. Yes, I know I sound absolutely nuts, but it really is the only thing left to do.
Ferentz and Schiano weren't hired, Rodriguez was. Martin knew what hiring Rodriguez meant; if he didn't, he should have.
I'm a RR supporter, but some of the logic in this thread is contorted.
Just when people were beginning to suggest some really creative ideas, you have to bring up that whole logic thing. If everyone on here starts using logic, it will totally suck all the fun out of posting crazy shit with no factual support and flawed reasoning. People might even have to stop and think for a few moments before they post to make sure they are not just clogging up the board with inane half thoughts that will waste everyone's time. It will ruin everything. I hope you're happy.
..why do they keep track of points?
But a good point that there was not a grand scheme to change styles. Martin (for better or worse on vision) was looking for the best available coach, not one who fit any style.
I was responding to Logan88's assertion that Bill Martin didn't set out to change the culture at Michigan citing the fact that Ferentz (allegedly) and Schiano were higher on the list. My "it doesn't matter" response is to that thought, Plan A doesn't matter if Plan B was executed. Of course winning matters.
I personally think Plan B was the best plan for the long term, but obviously the pudding sucks so far. I think we start to see some payoff this year.
I think it might have been no boxes around the posts makes it hard to tell who we were responding to fail. Because I too was responding to Logan88. And your next post hadn't come up yet (which makes a good point that even if there was not a plan to change things up, once Rich was targeted they/he should have KNOWN things would be changed up).
And while we haven't seen the results yet, even though we were flirting with those guys (and Miles too), I thought, at the time, we had gotten the best of the bunch. We just didn't know he was available till just about the time we hired him. Now I just want him to live up to my expectations. I mean, if we all agree he's a great coach, can't we agree (baring disastrous injuries and such...meteors...) that a great coach should be able to get any program to "pretty good" by year 3? Sometimes I think the people who defend Rich Rod for anything (not you, MCalibur) seem to have the least faith that he is, in fact, a really good coach.
I hope we win all of our games this year.
That's deep, bro.
Wow, what a concept. Most fans of other teams want to lose one or two but you went right to undefeated. Count me in on this train!
I can't believe the OP thought that Threet and Sheridan weren't fit for RR's offense. News to me.
I saw Threet rip of that 58 yard run against Wisconsin. I don't know how anyone could thing he wasn't able to run that offense to its full potential.
"He chose to run the system that he ran"
He had a choice? What was he going to do...install a pro-style system for the first time in his life? please...give the guy a one year break.
please...give the guy a one year break.
We already gave RR a one-year break (two actually). We gave him a total pass on a 3-9 season in 2008 and another total pass on a 5-7 season last year. In year three, he does not need (nor will he get) another total pass. Rather, in year three, RR needs to show sufficient measurable progress to prove to Dave Brandon that hiring him was not a mistake and that he is the right guy to lead the UM football program for the next 10-20 years.
I am not saying RR needs to reach a minimum number of wins or needs to beat specific teams in 2010 to survive, but I also do not believe that Dave Brandon (or most other longstanding UM supporters) will give RR another pass if the football team underperforms again for a third straight year. Moreover, while the team absolutely will be expected to win more games in 2010 than it won in 2009, winning one or two additional games in and of itself will not save RR's job. Rather, the team must show substantial measurable improvement in most if not all of the offensive and defensive statistics commonly used to track football performance (e.g., PPG, run yardage per game, passing yardage per game, turnover margin, 3rd down conversion rate, red zone performance, etc). An extra win or two due to luck or because a close loss in 2009 became a close win in 2010 simply will not be enough unless the team is improving measurably across the board.
To answer your question, you're being soft. I know I'm in the significant minority here, but I think (and have said many times before) that Rodriguez really did a terrible job his first season, and that has to count toward determining his future.
Your job as coach is to put the players you have in the best position to win and I don't believe he did that. If you're paid millions of dollars to coach football, you better know more than one way to win or have the perspective to hire someone on your staff that does. Threet could have been RS-freshmen Navarresque, and the defense should have been better.
If people don't buy in, you have to find ways to reach them. Not take a holier than thou, my way or the highway approach. I have a tiny group of five people to motivate and steer every day, and they don't all respond to the same type of leadership.
There's no way to know for sure if doing it differently would have helped, but the way he chose was a complete failure. When you're paid that well to be in charge, you are responsible for the results.
I've pretty much felt this way, and I do expect the Rodriguez Leap this season.
I don't think some of you realize how bad 5-7 would be.
5-7 means either 2-2 in non confence and 3-5 in big ten
or 3-1 in non conference and 2-6 in the big ten, that shit ain't gonna fly in AA it's just not.
5-7 means RR is LONG GONE.
I'm so convinced that we are gonna run out of that tunnel & lay the wood to UConn....