Rich Rodriguez "Some Michigan Players Felt Entitled"

Submitted by IvyLeague on January 30th, 2013 at 12:10 PM

Sporting news article on Rich Rodriguez.

Interesting Quote:

“The Chad Hennes and the Jake Longs put the work in and succeeded before us, and guys behind them thought they were entitled to the same status but hadn’t proved anything.”





January 30th, 2013 at 5:42 PM ^

there's a strong reservoir of sympathy out there for RichRod. Michigan came out of that one looking much worse than he did, in part due to Bacon's book, in part due to the undeniable fact that a lot of Michigan former players and others behaved VERY badly during the debacle. Better to be a little bit honest and gallant about it than chew the wormwood forever. Plus, he's a compulsive talker; if he's successful at AZ, we'll just have to live with the narrative. It fed into other unappealing things that people had said about M for a long time. 


January 30th, 2013 at 12:13 PM ^

You're telling me Alex Mitchell and Ryan Mallett felt entitled? I don't believe it.


Jokes aside, why is he still commenting about Michigan? Worry about Arizona and the awful defense. Please don't make the same mistake twice, because at Michigan he was never shy from answering WVU questions, when he should have just focused on the task at hand.


January 30th, 2013 at 12:21 PM ^

He keeps commenting because people keep asking. The first paragraph of the article:


So I had to remind Rodriguez of the day we spoke after his first season at Michigan four years ago looked like it took 10 years from his life.


Once people stop asking him, he'll probably stop commenting. And since that will probably be the most prominent thing people know about him for a while, who knows how long that will be. People still can't talk about a successful Michigan basketball program without referencing the Fab Five, and that was 20 years ago.

Mabel Pines

January 30th, 2013 at 12:28 PM ^

but it's the media.  It's what they do.  How about this for an answer...."I'm not going to comment on Michigan or their players.  Let's talk about Arizona."  Eventually they will get tired of asking. or not.  Regardless, he can not comment, or come off as a sour grapes guy.  Totally his choice, in my opinion.

The Baughz

January 30th, 2013 at 1:10 PM ^

Shouldnt he be worrying about his all-american running back who got kicked out of the UCLA-AZ hoops game last week for sneaking in without a ticket and telling the security guard "to get the fuck out of my face. Dont you know Im a fucking all-american" when confronted by him. This kid is the face of his program and has been in trouble on several occasions. I get RR was asked a question but he didnt have to answer it.

1989 UM GRAD

January 30th, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^

...the questions about Michigan is because RichRod has demonstrated a willingness to substantively respond to them.

It would be easy to shut down the questions.  "I'm focused on what's happening here in Arizona."  "I'm too busy running my current program."  Etc. 

If he responded in that manner, the questions would subside/stop.


January 30th, 2013 at 3:35 PM ^

This reporter is a giant douche, though. This whole article is a giant middle finger to us. He basically says Michigan, and the players, were wholly responsible for our lack of onfield success, and Rich Rod was a victim of Michigan. RR doesn't help the matter much by basically going along with it, but this article reads like a buckeye wrote it. 


January 30th, 2013 at 4:41 PM ^

You don't have to be a Buckeye to think Michigan's behavior during that time was awful and institutionally unprecedented.

As long as RR is in the game, the national media will be talking about those three years. I too would prefer he didn't entertain it but like someone below mentioned, he doesn't owe us that respect. We have no good karma on this.



Section 1

January 30th, 2013 at 12:48 PM ^

I'm not sure what you mean by "Hoke would know better than to even answer a question like that."  I think I might easily agree, that Hoke's now well-known style dictates that he would probably not answer "a question like that."  But is it a matter of "knowing better"?

Because I might then suggest that Rich Rodriguez would "know better" than to tell a national tv audience that Denard Robinson was fine and would be back in the second half of the Nebraska game.

With Rich Rodriguez, I rather liked the idea that as a fan, I could expect a bit more information, more candor, and more openness than the previous regime.


January 30th, 2013 at 12:59 PM ^

Yes, it's a matter of knowing better.

To butcher an old Chinese proverb, it is better to stay quiet and let people assume you're an idiot rather than open your mouth and confirm it.  Rich confirmed his idiocy far too many times for my liking, as a Michigan alum. 

As to Hoke's comments on Denard at the half of the Nebraska game - did you really expect the truth?  Coaches have long delayed quarterback decisions, misrepresented injuries, and flat out lied about personnel in an attempt to gain an edge on an opponent, to have them prepare for something that won't happen. 



January 30th, 2013 at 1:11 PM ^

I believe Rich started this shit by opening his yap again.  If he would shut up we wouldn't even be here.  But since he has, there is no harm in pointing out how terrible of a representative he was for the University. 


January 30th, 2013 at 2:07 PM ^

I'm neither displeased with my behavior nor am I blaming anyone for it.  But it's hard to deny that if Rich didn't open his mouth, there wouldn't be a 140+ post thread that is making RR supporters cry "No Fair".   

If he does it again, it will just be another opportunity to reiterate how terrible he was for Michigan. 


January 30th, 2013 at 5:10 PM ^

Everyone was a terrible representative for the university during that time.

MSC was when she didn't tell the Regents that the school agreed to pay the majority of the buyout and instructed Rodriguez to keep it a secret while the media buried him for it. Carr was when he collected almost 400k annually from an athletic department he didn't think was worth sticking up for when it really needed it (Freep story).

There are people here who were morally wrong but also PR savvy. Then there is RR who is not a bad guy but also has a major problem filtering his thoughts in an appropriate way when talking to the media. What is the bigger crime? I would think most decent,  decent, ddconscientious people would say the former.





Section 1

January 30th, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^

You're telling me to let it go?!?!

I didn't start this thread.  I didn't initiate any insults at anybody; certainly not the subjects of the thread; not any coaches or other MGoBoard members.

You've never read me, making comments about what a great coach so-and-so is, or what a lousy coach so-and-so is.

If I understand you, you'd like me to stop defending Rodriguez.  Is that what you want me to give up?

Given what Michigan has to answer for, in the treatment of Rodriguez by a considerable number of Michigan grads during three years in Ann Arbor, I'd have thought that just a little introspection might have been in order.



January 31st, 2013 at 12:40 AM ^

"This blog." Speak for yourself and not others. I was pumped when RR came, I bought the "In Rod We Trust shirt" and then he shat the bed, simple as that. I hate him (as a coach, not a person) as much if not more than anyone because I was sold on him and he failed miserably as a coach and a representative of the program (getting us our first ever NCAA violation, for instance). I don't owe RR shit, and will continue to bash his coaching abilities with a clear conscience, thank you very much.


/rant over

Section 1

January 31st, 2013 at 3:52 PM ^

I'm not a part of the sort of Michigan fandom you represent.  I'd rather be smart, and careful, about things I write.

You can criticize Rodriguez as a coach if you wish.  I think that's stupid on your part, unless you are a current elite-level NCAA coach, as Rodriguez clearly is.  I don't criticize Rodriguez, or Hoke, or Tressel, or Meyer as coaches on technical grounds.  I know better.  I know that they all know much more than I ever will about their profession.  That's one reason why I am smarter than you are.

A second reason that I am smarter than you are is that I don't say stupid things like, "[Rodriguez got] us our first ever NCAA violation..."  Because Michigan had major violations in basketball before Rodriguez ever thought about coaching at Michigan, and Michigan football had previous secondary violations in football just like all major programs have had.  And FWIW, Michigan's "violations" in the 2009 case really ought to have been secondary violations and likely would have, if instead of deliberately blindsiding the Michigan Athletic Department with his manufactured story, Michael Rosenberg had asked the Department about what he was looking into.  We are pretty much assured that they could have been dealt with as secondary violations because Maryland was subsequently alerted to similar practice time issues and it was treated as a secondary violation.

When Michigan responded to the NCAA Notice of Allegations in Case Number M 324, the University and Rodriguez toegether contested the single count that alleged a Failure to Monitor on the part of Rodriguez.  After investigation and a hearing, the count relating specifically to Rodriguez was voluntarily dropped by the NCAA.  Michigan essentially pled guilty to the rest of the stuff, all of which was institutional (not alleged against Rodriguez personally, and was all so minor that the only sanctions were the loss of practice time (due to a hypertechnical violation) and the loss of graduate assistant numbers (due to one GA's having lied, and others having been confused about their job descriptions, doing hourly work for the football team).

So no, I'm not with Michigan fans like you, and I am definitely not with Michigan alums like Michael Rosenberg, Mark Snyder, Braylon Edwards, Mike Boren and Eric Mayes.  There are Michigan people, like those just mentioned, that I want to condemn.

But when you try to separate me from this blog, it really is a bit funny, since my core complaints against the many anti-Rodriguez forces outlined in John U. Bacon's Three and Out are the same core complaints made by this blog's host and proprietor, Brian Cook.  Brian knows it, and so do I.

You clearly "don't owe RR shit."

And you clearly don't know shit either.


January 30th, 2013 at 1:39 PM ^

Why should RR know better? He owes Michigan nothing at this point, we pretty much treated him like shit, particularly on his way out the door (no Gator Bowl ring, fired him too late for his staff to get jobs).

He came here, did poorly, and got fired. We left on less than good terms. Why is he obligated to play nice about former players at Michigan?

It's no worse than what Harbaugh said, and we just had a blog come-to-Jesus moment about how Harbaugh is still "one of us". Why should we hold a guy we never let into the "Michigan Man" club to a higher standard?

The Pope

January 30th, 2013 at 2:35 PM ^

He may not "owe Michigan", but common sense says stop commenting about it. It makes him look petty and bitter. Also it's generally not great behavior for grown man to criticize guys who were still pretty young at the time. His job was to teach them to go beyond their entitlement, not criticize them for it years later.


January 30th, 2013 at 3:33 PM ^

Perhaps Lloyd should've instilled some of that selfless attitude in those guys before he retired.  We're quick to question Rodriguez's leadership qualities in handling the the guys he inherited from Carr, but unwilling to attribute him any credit for the guys he passed onto Hoke, guys who put the team ahead of themselves in another time of uncertainty.

Creedence Tapes

January 30th, 2013 at 2:37 PM ^

Rich Rod has been throwing Michigan players under the bus for a long time now, this is nothing new. He has previously said that our defense was terrible because our players were no good, and even Vince Lombardi couldn't turn our defense around. Funny how well Greg Matisson and Brady Hoke turned that same unit around in one season, but I'm sure Rich Rod doesn't want to talk about that. 


January 30th, 2013 at 3:31 PM ^

Rich Rod cared deeply about every player on the roster, starter or star or no.  The defense quote went along the lines of "You could get Vince Lombardi in here and it wouldn't fix some of the problems we have on defense," referring to the lack of experience and leadership on that side of the ball, compounded by the fact that the defensive coordinator was being asked to run a scheme he'd never run before.  The RR era may not have ended well at Michigan, but don't spread falsehoods about the man.

Mitch Cumstein

January 30th, 2013 at 7:34 PM ^

"fired him too late for his staff to get jobs"


The RR defenders always say this, but if he had been fired before the bowl all we would hear is "DB didn't give RR a chance to prove himself in the bowlgame."   Can we just all agree that he did prove himself in the bowl game and that is why we should all move on?


January 30th, 2013 at 1:02 PM ^

Also you'd think after the issues RR had with elements of the media that covered Michigan, he'd have made a point to master dodging questions or dropping the no comment.

There is the Carr school of glowering angrily at the reporter until they leave.  There is the Hoke school of going "Well.... (insert touching story about high school football and learning something from his coach/something about touching the kids/something about tremendous and leadership)".  By the time Hoke is done with his heart warming story or platitudes no one even remembers the question and he goes on to the next one.  You definitely don't have to answer the question.  

El Jeffe

January 30th, 2013 at 1:15 PM ^

Yeah, but by answering the reporter's question all he did was make a bunch of MGoBloggers apoplectic (srs., guys, get a thicker skin). So why exactly should he "master dodging questions?" The only people he's angering are people who don't matter at all.

And in fact, I'm sure that the answer he gave totally endeared him to U of A fans, which is what everyone accused him of not doing at U of M. I mean, read the whole quote:

"We got total buy-in from the get-go here,” Rodriguez said. “From the players to the support staff to everybody that was touching the program. We had some guys committed at Michigan, but we had others that weren’t. Some guys felt a sense of entitlement. The name on the chest, and 'I’ve already arrived."

It wasn't an unsolicited dig at M, it was a compliment to U of A followed by a comparison to his last job. The reason M fans get all mad is that we interpret everything as though we're the center of the universe. For Davids like U of A, sticking it to Goliath is about the best way to ensure allegiance. Dumb like a fox, I say.


January 30th, 2013 at 1:40 PM ^

I see the first part of his response as enough of an answer.  "We got total buy in from the get-go here.  From the players...the program.  Everyone was excited to run the spread offense."  You don't need to take shots at college kids you coached at Michigan in the process of answering that question.  Most people will be smart enough to pick up the implication that you didn't get full buyin at Michigan and you don't have to push anyone under the bus in the process.  

El Jeffe

January 30th, 2013 at 2:25 PM ^

"Because it's not right to throw former players under the bus" is a reason I can get behind for him to shut his yap. "Because you will anger M supporters" is not. To the extent you were making the latter point I disagree, but I do agree with the former.


January 30th, 2013 at 3:16 PM ^

I never attempted to make the latter point.  My only comment was about watching what you say to the media in that they'll often try to blow it up into some controversy or attention getting headline.  So when you are asked a question that could set something like that up, standard practice is "no comment" or a dodge.


January 30th, 2013 at 1:51 PM ^

I wish he would stop saying, "he forgot how to coach when he got to Michigan"   I think he should say, " I got to Ann Arbor and I suddenly forgot how to coach defense".  The guy I hired is now the head coach of Syracuse.  I hired the ex-head coach of Syracuse and he was terrible as well.   This time I brought my DC from WVU to  Arizona and these guys can't tackle either.


January 30th, 2013 at 1:16 PM ^

People want public figures to speak to the media, not give canned answers and speak openly. When they do, other people get pissed.

My take is that's just RR's personality and he is 100% correct. 

I'll add Boren to the growing list. 


January 30th, 2013 at 3:09 PM ^

But do "people" really want that?  Or just the media who has to write what they say and is looking for clicks? I think most fans don't care if their coach is really colorful or says interesting things. They want to win, not make the team look bad, and in a few cases like Michigan, don't get into trouble. But I don't think the average fan gives a hoot that Saban has the personality of a dead fish. Because he wins a lot. 

Bo once said he had no use for the media because if he was winning he didn't need them, and if he was losing they couldn't save him. I think there's a few who like the "keeping it real" athletes and such, but most don't care. Most of the whining is from media types.


January 30th, 2013 at 12:14 PM ^

Will this not be finished until the following three things come to pass:  (1) RR passes away, decades from now, (2) every UM fan currently living passes away, and (3) Congress declares football illegal and anyone who mentions the sport gets the death penalty (by lethan nanobot injection, probably).