fair point that
- Member for
- 6 years 10 weeks
|5 years 50 weeks ago||last I heard he was not on team or on practice squad||
anyone know what happened.
|5 years 50 weeks ago||awesome||
hope he sees a lot of time in the 2nd half.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Not sure||
seems to me Utah was a good team last year. which team did we beat this year that was a good team?
|5 years 51 weeks ago||so based on this post||
it seems based on you post you would agree that 1 less win in the big 10 in 09 means we didn't show improvement relative to the big 10.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||thinking||
I suspect 7-5 he keeps, 6-6 is a toss-up, and worse than that means he's likely gone.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||huh||
We are in the Big10. I wouldn't exactly call it a sample or cherry picking.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Charlie Weis should have hired you.||
Charlie should have hired you. Maybe you could have "looked deeper" and helped him keep his job. He could use your arguments when discussing with the AD:
"ignoring things such as field position, turnovers, and injuries is a simple minded way of evaluating things".
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Did you read the whole thing||
Doesn't appear you did. I never said the offense was worse because they didn't win as many games. I was comparing offense based on points scored against Conference opponents. Unless we are in the National Title hunt, the Big10 is what counts.
Our offense scored just as many points per game year to year and actually relative to the other big 10 schools we dropped to 9th place in points scored in the Big10.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Big 10||
You would argue we weren't worse in the Big10 this year than last?
I did watch the games. Everyone feeling better primarily comes from starting 4-0 and coming off a season where we went 3-9. It doesn't say anything about how we performed against the Big10 competition.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Thank you that is exactly my point||
I felt it to watching the games. It felt like we improved. It felt like we were better. But at the end of the day it really didn't translate into anything tangible. Backwards on wins, offense, and defense relative to the Big 10.
|5 years 51 weeks ago||Stats can be twisted||
I don't think you can cherry pick stats to try to prove someone improved and I think Brians points are very well balanced.
However, for me at least, if I was trying to measure improvement for college football in the big10 relative to peers my hierarchy would start with Wins, then Offensive Points scored to measure the offense relative to others and Defensive points allowed to measure the D.
As for Wins, none of the other stats, no matter how hard you look at them, get you to a bowl game and that is the goal.
For offensive points scored in the Big10 and measuring the offense, we were exactly the same as last season 22.1 points per game scored in the Big10(and that includes the 14 points the defense put on the board for us). Relative to the competition we went backwards. 8th in 2008 and 9th in 2009. So others improved at scoring points but we didn't move. Sure we felt more confidence in our offense, but it didn't translate to an improvement in points scored (which is the goal of the offense).
For defensive points allowed in the Big10 and measuring the Defense, we allowed 33.5 in 2008 and 33.2 in 2009. Actually, we improved purely on the basis of points allowed from 2008. However, relative to conference we went backwards here to from 10th in 2008 to 11th in 2009.
So, strictly speaking we went backwards on offense relative to Big10 and backwards on Defense relative to Big 10 from 2008 to 2009. Since my initial point was it is all about the wins, that is consistent with the story of offense and defense, We went from 2 wins in 2008 to 1 win in 2009.
No matter how we hard we try to explain that our offense improved and our defense did not, strictly speaking the improvement in offense really only shows up in the warm and fuzzy feelings we had from the 4-0 start. Relative to the competition in the Big10 we did not show improvement on either side of the ball.
|6 years 5 days ago||That and turnovers||
An extra turnover per game is no doubt part of the problem in the redzone and with the scoring as well.
|6 years 5 days ago||Last years Stats||
Link to 2008 stats
We finished 8th in Scoring Offense in 2008 and 9th in 2009 relative to the Big10.
We finished 10 in Scoring Defense in 2008 and 11th in 2009.
Relative to the rest of the Big10 we went backwards on both Offense and Defense. How crazy is that?
Turnover Margin number 11 in B10 -.62 in 2008 and number 11 in 2009 -1.62. Worse in 2009, the next closest in Big10 is Michigan State at -.88.
We averaged an extra turnover per game this year.
|6 years 5 days ago||couple points||
Our scoring was 2009 - 22.125 on average against Big10 and 20.375 if you take out the 2 defensive TDs. In 2008 our scoring was 22.125 on average and we also had two defensive scores so same.
It looks like in the Big10 we are exactly the same place as we were last year 177 points scored.
Link to Conf stats:
|6 years 6 days ago||Not that there has been no signs of improvement||
But look at the results. Worse record in the Big10 this year than last. Lower points scored in Big10 this year than last. And a defense that up until OSU looked worse than last year.
I've seen all the arguments about lack of talent and I believe there is more to it than that. First we never go back in history and look at it this way primarily because it usually comes down to performance on the field. You would have to also compare our defense to other schools and if you look at Stanford, Cincinnati... others; their talent level is certainly below that rated coming into Michigan.
I also went to a highschool with a terrible football team. We then got a new coach and everything has been different. In fact Lowell (my school) now will play another game at Ford field against Inkster (Devin Gardner) next week. My point is the talent at our highschool didn't change, but the coaching developed that talent. I agree we have a lack of depth, but talent development is on the coaches and I just don't see it yet. Football is about execution not just strategy and our execution is inconsistent at best under RR.
It would be interesting to poll the football team and see if they agree that they lack talent.
|6 years 6 days ago||perspective||
You don't take a program that was the winniest in history and turn in two of the worst years in its history without criticism. I haven't seen anything yet that tells me RR is a great coach.
That said, he will get a chance next year to turn it around and I really hope we see some progress.
Having gone to Michigan I meant that 90 plus % would not revert to "Go Fuck a Goat" response.
|6 years 6 days ago||So your another of the||
RR can do no wrong crowd...
Very clever response. Maybe if you actually went to Michigan you would have a different perspective.
|6 years 6 days ago||fyi check the stats||
I believe and I haven't looked into it myself yet, but I heard we were 21.something points per game in the Big10 versus last years 21.somthing. Virtually identical going into the game against OSU. With 10 points it's likely we finished with lower points in the B10 than last year. From a perspective of confidence I felt better about our offense but for points and wins in the Big10 we went backwards.
Second year with no bowl game sucks.
If we don't go to a bowl again next year my money says RR gets fired. And at that point this year might be called "The year Michigan should've fired RR". That is if Harbaugh, Kelly, etc move on to bigger and better things. Don't get me wrong I'm not advocating firing him now (he needs next year to prove himself) and I'm not sure how good Harbaugh really is, but a good coach is a good coach and we should be seeing more improvement, less mistakes, etc. and I haven't seen that yet.
|6 years 1 week ago||wow||
I don't think you read my response. I don't think you did misunderstand as it was meant to be related to the underlying debate you are referring to.
|6 years 1 week ago||Note||
It seems some, not necessarily you, don't think this even has a place on the blog. I would point to two things. 1) This is Ohio State week so what they are saying, I feel is relevant and worthy of a link. and 2) The board already links to other Big 10 blogs, including Ohio State. It's not like it was linked to the Detroit Free Press website.
And in fact you are correct; it is somewhat of a continuation of the discussion you don't like. I understand how you don't want to participate and continue the "who's at fault for the current predicament". This does fire a shot in that debate and also from an OSU perspective. I don't like to place blame in the debate and I won't but I do think that Lloyd is getting shortchanged in the debate. And, I tend to agree with the writer's satire in that 1) Lloyd Carr doesn't get enough credit for what he did at Michigan; 2) Lloyd Carr didn't purposely leave a horrible defense to RR, and 3)it is kind of ridiculous to believe that Lloyd Carr wanted to sabotage the Michigan Program.
Also please note for Tags on this, I labeled as: O-How I Hate-Ohio State.
|6 years 1 week ago||hey its Ohio State||
They are going to blame RR for that class if we are doing poorly and credit LC if we were doing well.
|6 years 1 week ago||Wow apparently this was really confusing||
I guess I should have explained further in the post instead of just saying "Nice Satire".
Normally I wouldn't post links to OSU websites, but I actually do read Michigan Monday weekly to give me at least a little perspective on what the enemy thinks. This article caught my eye, and I thought it was well done for Satire.
Just to be clear: It is satire and the writer is praising Lloyd Carr in a back handed sort of way that is either a shot at RR or the fans who still don't give Carr much credit. Either way it is a good counterpoint to what we see on this board regularly as long as you know it is Satire or realize it.
Although clearly it is confusing that an Ohio State blogger is actually praising Carr is some fashion.
|6 years 1 week ago||fyi||
you may not have noticed, but at the left side there is a section permanently on this site which links to OSU website blogs.
|6 years 1 week ago||Sorry Maybe It should have been more clear||
This is a post on an Ohio State website. If you dont' care what they are saying then don't click it. If it makes you angry then all the better for the game. Or are you so beat down at this point that you want to bury your head in the sand so be it.
|6 years 1 week ago||just look at the results||
We had the same talent in both the first and second half. It was 17 - 21 at the half. In the second half we scored 7 and they scored 24. It is a combination of problems for us on D... both talent and coaching. coaching can't completely make up for lack of talent and talent can't completely make up for coaching problems, but certainly they feed off eachother. We look horrible on D and it is the coaching that should have our guys ready to play and be in the right space. Our guys rarely look like they know what they are doing.
If you disagree why don't you start by telling me the coaching and scheme moves that Michigan made in the second half to prove that it is obviously about talent and not coaching. I eagerly await your response.
|6 years 1 week ago||Looks like a mental and physical 180||
Given our record over the last two years, we surely have done a 180. Not sure I would agree that we needed it.
|6 years 1 week ago||any body talking about lack of depth||
Isn't really reading the whole post. At least I think the point was that we wouldn't have had as much attrition and we would have developed our players more consistently. No one can say we wouldn't have been in a much better postion keeping English, just like no one can say we wouldn't be worse, but I suspect all the factors that the post discuss would have made us at least better.
Great point about last year, the expectation was we were going to be strong defensively last year, but that was not the case and yet the talent was basically the same as the previous year.
I do have to say the one problem with having kept English is that he was discussed as a potential head coach... I think RR had no choice but to clear house if he really wanted to make this his team. Hopefully he at least spoke to English to see whether he was interested.
|6 years 1 week ago||Not a good Post||
I would say this proves the opposite again. We played reasonable first half and the second half we were outcoached as well as outplayed.
|6 years 2 weeks ago||Improved Record means Progress||
Thanks Troy. I guess that is in the eye of the beholder. If we finish with a worse record in the Big 10 than we did last year, I don't see this as progress. With 1 win in the Big 10, I would say we have regressed based solely on win/loss record alone. Of course it looks like we have made progress on offense, but until that translates to lots more wins in the Big 10, I can't imagaine it is true that Troy Woolfolk is "not [too] disappointed" because they have a better overall record than last year.
|6 years 2 weeks ago||Strangely||
I just posted the article from the detroit news:
U-M's lack of success under Rich Rodriguez is mystifying
The post was removed after a number of people statrted negging it. It seems strange to me that anyone who is not happy with how things have developed under RR are immediately attacked by RR Fanboys.
I don't advocate getting rid of him at this point, though next year is really my personal limit. Just like in politics having fanatic fanboys who defend you and blaming the previous coaching administration will only get you so far, and next year is as far as I think it will get him. I hope we can somehow turn things around, I just don't yet see how there is hope for our defense and it is difficult to win games when your defense can give up 30 plus to any team on any given Saturday. That's more pressure than the offense should have.