What does Rich Rod have to do to succeed in your mind...in year 5, and beyond?
I've seen a lot of posts talking about how we underachieved during the Lloyd years, we were frauds at the end, had too many unacceptable losses, we were on the decline, not winning enough, etc., etc., etc.
So, I'm guessing most people don't want Rich to just equal what we already had, but surpass it. No matter what side you're on. If you're completely behind him, I'm sure you're anticipating a new era of Football greatness. If you are having doubts, you might want more from him, or less. If you're FIRE RICH NOW ARRRGGGHH, maybe he needs to do a lot to redeem himself in your eyes.
So, I'd like to hear from as many people as possible, from all different viewpoints, not will he succeed and be the coach after next year, but when/if he succeeds and is the coach for years and years, how much does he have to do to satisfy you?
How many National Championships does he have to win?
How often does he have to win a Big Ten title?
How often should he be in a BCS Bowl Game?
What should his median record/winning percentage be?
Record (number or percentage) vs. OSU?
Vs. MSU?
ND?
How many/how often does he get to have a Toledo/Illinois/The Horror -like substance game?
Or any other matrix you can think of. What do you expect of him to make you happy that it's enough, and will make you happy with Michigan Football, over the long term?
November 12th, 2009 at 1:14 PM ^
We have to be able to be competitive with everyone we play. That is, a legitimate chance to win. Not just look good losing, but a chance to win. If I can watch every game and not have an underlying feeling of despair before it even begins...thats good enough for me. I would love perfection, but I'll take competition.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:17 PM ^
while maintaining a respectable program.
And not kill a hooker.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:28 PM ^
Forgot the hooker metric.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:47 PM ^
Unless you kill the hooker, and frame Tressel.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:10 PM ^
Win-Win!
November 13th, 2009 at 11:50 AM ^
Then we beat OSU. Win-Win-Win! The Trifecta!
November 12th, 2009 at 1:17 PM ^
b10 titles, beat our rivals (especially tOSU), bcs bowls.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:21 PM ^
But we've done all those things before. How OFTEN do you expect it? Every year? Every other? 3 out of 10? 37 out of 124?
November 12th, 2009 at 1:26 PM ^
we need to be competing for b10 titles and bcs bowls every year. We may not win them every year, that'd be asking a lot. But we need to be capable of winning the b10 every year (okay, 9 out 10) and getting to bowl games after Jan 1.
924/937
November 12th, 2009 at 1:18 PM ^
not having a defensive sieve. But that's just me. You've got to walk before you run.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:23 PM ^
That's why I said in year 5. Let's assume his program is established to where he expects it (I'm sure every coach always wants more, assuming they're not winning every game by 100...even then they'll wonder...why couldn't we score 101?). So, not next year growth, but when it's rolling, what is going to be the level where posts of complaint seem ridiculous?
November 12th, 2009 at 1:59 PM ^
levity. I mean, I can barely look ahead to Wisconsin, let alone think about Year 5 of the RR era. In year five, I'd like to think Michigan wins the Big Ten and is mentioned as a serious candidate for the MNC. I'd also like to think that Heidi Klum and Giselle want to have a threesome with me. That's why I can only focus on defensive improvement at this point.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:10 PM ^
I don't think anyone is going to complain about the job he's doing.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:27 PM ^
if we can smell his fingers at the bar afterwards
November 12th, 2009 at 1:21 PM ^
0 by year 5, contending every other year, 1 NC in 10 years, 2 in 15
once every 3 years but never finish below 3rd
every other year (but nothing short of the Outback or Gator (aka Alamo equivalent) Bowl)
.75 - .8 I'd be content with .75, happy with .8
winning record against OSU
3/4 against MSU (prefer 4/5 but could probably accept 3/4)
2/3 against ND
Once every 4 - 5 years.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
Hoping to get enough to get a rough idea of what the average expectations are (no, I'm not going to total them, so you don't have to answer the questions completely directly...just a guide).
Your expectations seem to be somewhere between upper Lloyd, maybe even Sweatervest-sh. Interesting.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:36 PM ^
Those were Lloyd numbers - if it weren't for the sweatervest we'd have gone to the NC game in 06 for certain so I guess I just want him to be what Lloyd was before the 'vest came in.
Prior to the Horror how many Horror-esque games did Lloyd have? (I honestly can't remember)
November 12th, 2009 at 1:39 PM ^
Eh, I love Lloyd, but that was just my catch all for "bad losses" worse than say, MSU. App St and Toledo are in a category all by themselves. But there were the odd Northwestern game, Purdue here and there, and so forth. You know, the games that people scream UNACCEPTABLE after. Heck, the last Oregon game gets mentioned a lot...and that ended up being a really good team.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
First up, a 75% winning percetage is a mark to shoot for. Second, it pobably means you have to give him time--and let's say he stays for 15 years.
At Michigan, in 15 years, using the last three coaches as bnchmarks, I'd say the average wins per year should be a solid 9.5 to 10. 12 regular season games plus a bowl, and an average of around 10-3 is attainable IMO.
Next: consistent Big Ten contenda. Solidly challenging for the title four of every five years (you give a year due to graduation/injuries/other teams besides PSU and OSU might be good sometimes).
Nationally: I'd say if Rodriguez wins two NC's and really challenges for it about a half-dozen other times (undefeated deep into the schedule, multiple BCS bow games), he will be legend at Michigan. I mean, come on, UM has won one NC since 1948.
The thing that makes all this attainable is the belief that UM did pretty damn well over the last 40 years, but only once could get over the hump; Rodriguez should get there, especially in the Big Ten. Also, we'd hope Rodriguez could avoid some of the avoidable upsets that have always plaged Michigan, while creating a few victories that we might not expect as well. If you look at the last 13 years, that could be about 10-game swing, and Lloyd's record could have been 132-30 instead of 122-40 (IMO easily) with another challenge or two for an NC, and certainly less bowl shenanigans.
Perception: That UM is not out of it by halloween, which all too often has been the case. The decade of dominance over OSU was nice, but really, most of those wins were of the "spoiler" fashion. I want The Game to mean ALOT every time it's played.
Here's something I always find amazing, even for the time period: from 1970 to 1975, Bo took an undefeated UM team into the OSU game every year (1975's team had two ties going in), and only once beat OSU. THAT is a real "hump"--and the one time he beat OU during that streak, UM of course lost the Rose Bowl--allowing NEBRASKA AGAIN DAMMIT to win an NC--
I think those are reasonable expectations, because if they aren't, then we have ZERO to complain about with regard to one Lloyd Jonathan Carr.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:27 PM ^
If he's still here in 2012, he's probably already achieved at least one or two of those things.
Not gonna set a number on it though. What I want to get back to is the feeling I used to have every Saturday morning and before every bowl game: "We're Michigan, so we should win this game." We should expect to win every game we play, whether it's EMU or USC. That idea was on life support from 2005 and died post-Oregon, 2007. '07 is when I went from expecting to win to hoping to win. Bring that back and I will declare RR a success.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:30 PM ^
...in a sport played by human beings, but I will play very loosely with a couple here.
Basically, I think RR has to have the program in better shape than Lloyd Carr did to be a success. That, to me, would involve meeting Bill Martin's expectation for the program, which he stated often. To paraphrase, the team should compete for the National Championship most years and win it every five or so.
For too long, the mentality at UM was to win the Big Ten and let other things take care of themselves. It was as if they were afraid to even consider the possibility of a National Championship. I believe that this produced an attitude that the NC was something that was pretty much unattainable.
Most business and motivational gurus now believe that any team or individual should set their goals high; I am in total agreement with Martin's stated goals. RR, like many coaches, is also very good at the "one game at a time" mentality.
So, basically, you have an overall goal of the National Championship with the understanding that you can only attain it by focusing on every game as if it were the only game. And really, the game you are playing at the moment IS the only game. It is the only one that you can win or lose in the moment.
I jumped the gun a little bit, but have adjusted my expectations to agree with most others who believe that the 2011 season is when they should start competing for the NC. However, I don't think it will be impossible in 2010; it would just take a lot of breaks and other teams would have to sustain the kinds of injuries that UM has this year while UM remains healthy.
To, me, though, the bottom line is that the program needs to be back to being "leaders and best" instead of temporal anomalies. Having RR as coach is a giant step in that direction.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:35 PM ^
i tried to resist, but I'll bite.
All this is dependent on him having a 13 year career like Lloyd for comparison's sake.
1.5+ NCs
6 B11 Wins/ties
6 BCS bowl berths is what Lloyd had and I feel like that's tremendous. If only we had won a few more. That's the caveat..
Winning bowl record.
I would prefer him to NOT lose 3 games a year on average.
.500 or better versus OSU (Lloyd was 5-8).
.500 or better versus MSU
.500 or better versus ND
(I set this as a baseline for all coaches, at least go .500 against your rivals and win the majority of the other games and you'll be in a good place).
Every fan hopes that "The Horror" or similiar games never happen. Unfortunately they do. to every coach. I don't count Illnois/Toledo in the same sphere as The Horror and the likes because they're vastly different circumstance. The Horror-type games should only happen 2-3 times in a 13 year tenure (a-la Lloyd).
I don't think that Lloyd was a particularly bad coach but I would expect better than Lloyd because he was incredibly frustrating. Maybe this is spoiled fan syndrome. I just hated starting the season with a top 10-15 ranking and ending up in the bottom 5 of the top 25 at the end. And I hated just inexplicably not showing up some games. And the bowl fiasco. Lloyd was tremendous but his bowl record was a point of contention with me and so was his record versus OSU. Everything else was almost gravy with him. Truth be told change the end of the 06 season and maybe add another bowl win or two to his record and I'd have zero complaints about Lloyd that weren't Mike DeBord related.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:47 PM ^
Lloyd was 6-7 vs OSU.
For "quick researchie things" like this, go to stassen.com where you can look up recrods vs other teams, winning percentage, and all kinds of fun stuff for posts.
/Not Being a Dick. This stuff is just a lot of fun.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:03 PM ^
no, absolutely good call. I used the TRUTH of the internet (read: wikipedia) and simply counted so I probably had an arithmetic fail.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:52 PM ^
5+ NC's in 13 years is a bit unrealistic, don't you think?
November 12th, 2009 at 1:57 PM ^
its 1.5...
November 12th, 2009 at 2:33 PM ^
I think Michigan should be above .500 against MSU if we are going to be considered the elite program in the state. I'd say that something in the order of .600-.700 is a better long term expectation.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:36 PM ^
you're correct. .500 is baseline against rivals IME...and with the caveats of "not averaging 3 losses, 6+ BCS bowls" etc etc I'd say it would HAVE to be above that if the rest are going to come true...
November 12th, 2009 at 1:59 PM ^
By RR's 5th season, here is what I will be expecting for the rest of his tenure:
*Finishing in the top three of the Big Ten every season
*2 Big Ten titles every 5 years
*Averaging 9.5 wins per season
*Winning record vs. OSU (even 6-4 over ten years is fine, remember OSU is no slouch of a program)
*Winning 4 of every 5 vs. ND and MSU
*At least 1 NC during his career (with the way college football is today its just too hard to expect any more)
*All this needs to be done while running a clean program that upholds Michigan's current reputation
This is what I am hoping for over the next 10 to 20 years of Michigan football. The first step is to just get back to the baseline of what Lloyd was able to maintain. Then it will be up to RR to take it to the next level. Let's face it, regardless of all the clamoring at the end of Carr's career, he was gone soon anyway. He simply didn't want to coach anymore. Even if he had been here the last two years, I'm not convinced that our record would be that much better. I think the most important thing about the RR era is that it is bringing Michigan into the 21st century of NCAA football. Its something every program with a rich tradition must go through. I'd much rather be in our position than the one that ND, FSU, etc are in right now. What's going on at Michigan right now was inevitable. We're just getting it over with sooner rather than later.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:08 PM ^
about 9 starters on offense and 9 starters on defense.
It'll be year three in the off. and def. systems. With what's happening at Notre Dame, another fast 5-0 start is not out of the question in 2010. The offense should be good next year, and my irrational exuberance meter points me to 500+ yards per game total offense in 2010.
But the Michigan defense next year? Ho'God.
Michigan will win a Big Ten title when it fields the best defense in the league. It's pretty simple.
The Michigan defense is not good today and deductive logic points to it being only nominally better in 2010 from an experience standpoint. GERG has coached defensive lines and defensive coaching staffs at UCLA, Texas and the NFL. He learned his trade from arguably one of the least recognized and best defensive minds in college football history: UCLA DC Bob Field (now the AD at UCLA). I think the GERG recognizes when he has good position coaches and when he doesn't.
The question is IME, will RR let GERG build his own staff of coaches to recruit players and execute the "GERG defensive strategy", or must GERG move RR's appointed coaches around the board as best he can and just hope for the best? I'm hoping for the former, because 22 games of evidence more than just suggests that Michigan's position coaches are either unproven, not up to the task, or notably inferior to what is available on the open market.
To me, RR will be back in the fans good graces by beating Notre Dame, Michigan State and the less talented teams like Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Purdue next fall. Wisconsin, PSU and OSU are always tough opponents and Big Ten contenders. Michigan needs to start leveling 2 out of the 3, or all three on a more regular basis. But I don't see that happening until 2011 mainly due to the defensive struggles.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:12 PM ^
nitpick: it will be year 2 in the defensive system next year. Shafer's system != GERG's system.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:26 PM ^
overall 80% winning pct for career
beat rivals 75% of the time(combines) (ND, MSU, PSU, OSU)
Winning B10 title 50% time
Beat OSU 6-7 out of 10
BCS game every third year (not counting rose bowl)
1 NC every four years
This is more like ultimate success, but simple success is:
beat every MAC/1AA team
75% winning pct
beat OSU at least half the time.
NEVER get shutout
November 12th, 2009 at 2:34 PM ^
In year 5:
Compete for NC, win the Big 10, beat all our rivals. NO off the field issues at all.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:38 PM ^
NO off the field issues at all.
so they're shutting the freep down?
November 12th, 2009 at 2:40 PM ^
...to God's ears.
More seriously, since we're talking 3+ years down the road...that's not such an unrealistic proposition.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:39 PM ^
I said year 5 and beyond...just to eliminate expectations in the growing pain years. And you were right that percentages were better for a lot of them. But you can't put a percentage on number of National titles you expect him to win, or what percentage of the games vs. sucky teams he can biff...so it's a mixture. Not trying to do a mathematical calculation here...just get a feel for people's views.
Because you read the hyperbole, and sometimes I wonder if we're setting him up to fail with completely unrealistic expectation. But not so far on MGoBlog.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:42 PM ^
NO off the field issues at all.This is a college football team we're talking about. Three straight NC's would be a more realistic goal.
November 12th, 2009 at 2:52 PM ^
First, I'll let RR slide on years 1-3 as he builds the program. Besides, we can't really do anything about 3-9 and 5-7 at this point anyway.
Overall Winning Percentage > .750 (looking for .780)
Winning Percentage - OSU .500
Winning Percentage - ND .600
Winning Percentage - PSU .600
Winning Percentage - MSU .750
Winning Percenctage - MAC 1.000
Big Ten Titles - Every other year. They may share some titles along the way but there's no reason for not being in the mix half the time.
BCS Games - Half the time but I'd settle for 4 out of 10.
NC Titles - I know that I'm in the minority here but I don't really care about the MNC. If he can win one in 10 years, I'd be satisfied. I'm MUCH more concerned about Big Ten titles and holding up against OSU and PSU.
I'll add another caveat......he should never lose any individual game by more than 14 points. OK, maybe "never" is too strong but it should be very, very rare.
November 12th, 2009 at 3:02 PM ^
National Championship Contender
November 12th, 2009 at 3:34 PM ^
If by year 5 we've clawed our way back into winning at least 9 or 10 games, I think most would consider that a big success.
Beyond year 5, I hope to see UM either a) clinch the B10 title in week 11, or b) have it all come down to UM and OSU in the final game, winner = B10 champ. One or the other of these scenarios needs to happen 4 out of every 5 years.
As for winning rivalry games, I'd be happy* with:
ND: .500+ winning percentage
MSU: .700+ winning percentage
OSU: .500+ winning percentage
*Of course, I'd be happy to beat all 3 every year! Just trying to be reasonable here with my expecations.
As for the National Championship... this is a curious one to think about, especially since the BCS system is a joke. Regardless of that, how will we feel if we do what OSU has been known for of late? If we go on a multi-year streak of making it to the NC game (or other BCS game) but don't actually win it, what then? There are many that think OSU's appearance in big bowl games recently has been undeserved. I really don't want UM to be in that position.
But more to the point.... if that happens, how long before people start calling for RR's head for not being able to win the big one? 58-7 over a 5 year period looks absolutely fantastic. 0-5 in BCS games during the same period does not.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:04 PM ^
My "requirements" have increased from what they were when he was hired because of TWO disastrous years.
Initially, I only expected the same kind of performance that UM had under Carr, but for the team to cause fewer "Malox moments" by blowing teams out instead of letting them hang around like LC did.
However, now that we have had so many good streaks at UM end under RR's guidance, I now "require" greater performance than the LC years to compensate for the sh*t we UM fans have had to endure these past two seasons.
My new "requirements":
1) win 10 games or more 4 out of 5 years
2) win (at least tie for) Big 10 championships at least half the time
3) win bowl games at least at a 3 out of 5 ratio
4) win one MNC and appear in at least one other MNC game in the next 10 years
Anything less than this and I will consider all the pain we have endured to have been inadequately rewarded.
November 12th, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^
I thought this might be a possibility. Beyond even having to go at a really high percentage to get back up after losing records and 0-2 starts, would some say it wasn't worth the losing seasons if "all" we do is what Lloyd did? Do we have to do much better to make the crash worthwhile?
November 12th, 2009 at 5:00 PM ^
in mine own humble opinion...
year three, a decent bowl game, maybe strive to be the third best team in the big10 behind osu, psu, ahead of or even with iowa, msu.
year four, a serious contender for the big 10 title. right up there with osu and psu.
year five, i would like to see us win a big 10 championship and surpass at least psu, maybe at least draw even with osu.
year six and beyond, pull away as THE premiere team in the big 10.
November 12th, 2009 at 5:03 PM ^
How often do they have to win? And what? As bad as the Big Ten is right now, that might not be a leap to any real heights...
November 12th, 2009 at 5:47 PM ^
I want the '10s for us to be like the '00s for OSU, but with less embarrassing bowl losses.
November 12th, 2009 at 7:45 PM ^
Honestly, if Michigan continues to be a mainstay on BTN that says all that needs to be said about the state of our program.
November 12th, 2009 at 8:11 PM ^
What with people wanting him gone already and everything.... which I am not one, BTW. Anyway...
2010 : 7-5 and a bowl game
2011 : 8-4 and a bowl game
not necessarily bowl wins, but I'll settle for bowl games period.
2012 12-0 and NC! Woo!! Heisman for TATE!
but seriously 2012 should be a good year what with TF being a senior by that point. Hopefully the rest of the team will be primed for a run at the B10 title, at least.
Actually now that I think about it 2011 and 2012 should be very good years, at least for the offense. Our current, relatively large group of FR and RS FR o-linemen will be upper classmen by then and should be in top form to block for TF.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:49 AM ^
We also lost PSU and Purdue off our schedule, which will help immensely. Not to mention that Devin Gardner will be out of redshirt.