CC: Brett McMurphy says Mullen, RR not being considered for FL job

Submitted by LJ on November 17th, 2014 at 3:07 PM

Link here

Surprised this hasn't made the board yet.  Just based on one guy's "sources," but this has been picked up by the major media, and obviously could have implications on our ability to get Mullen should we go after him.



November 17th, 2014 at 4:52 PM ^

He's been at Arizona for 3 years and has them in the Top 15. WVU was blowing people's socks off. There's a reason why his name was instantly brought up for the Florida job. Look at his career. He's coached a team for more than three years twice, Glenville and WVU. In 8 seasons he won the team's conference title 7 times. 


So yeah, his career speaks for itself: when he his allowed to build a program and have guys who've been in his system for 3 years, they tend to win the conference. 


November 17th, 2014 at 5:40 PM ^

Blowing the doors off of UConn, Rutgers, and Pitt is not the same as blowing the doors off of SC, UCLA, Oregon, and Arizona State. 

What we have is a success and a flop. Arizona is ongoing. They are 8-2, but it is a fortunate 8-2. Let's see how they finish the season.

They play @Utah and at home to Arizona State. Win those and Zona has a lot of momentum heading into next season. 

The history of college football is littered with guys who won big at smaller schools, but you struggled or failed to meet expectations at bigger programs. Let his program acheive something before pronouncing his greatness.That is the point I am trying to make.



November 17th, 2014 at 4:44 PM ^

When we barely beat Akron and UConn...we were all (rightfully) distraught.  It was a sign of problems...that Hoke might not be the answer.  Barely beating a team that no one's ever heard of is also a red flag.  He also almost lost to Nevada and Cal.  Those are not signs of good things to come; which is why I wouldn't jump on his bandwagon.

As for your "improved at Michigan" line.  Ummm...hard to get worse when you start at 3-9.  But, if he started 9-3, he could've become loved.


November 17th, 2014 at 5:12 PM ^

doesn't mean that no one has. They're coached by Larry Coker and it was basically they're bowl game to start the season.


As for your comment on improving. Why wouldn't it count that they were improving every year just because he started at 3-9? Every time he's been allowed to coach year four he's shown that he wins. He's coached 8 seasons with kids that have been in his program for 3 years or more: he won his conference 7 times in 8 seasons. 


November 17th, 2014 at 5:18 PM ^

Akron and UConn...shitty programs that people have heard of.  UTSA...what the hell is that?  Is it next to Incarnate Word?

Improvement over 3-9 doesn't count when your best season (3 years in) is worse than what came before you.  Also, a 3-9 start buys you absolutely zero wiggle room.  Zero.  

Funny that you'd talk about kids in his program for 3 or more many of those did he have in A2?  He lost 23 of 27 kids from one class alone!  You might love the guy, but at least be realistic.


November 17th, 2014 at 5:27 PM ^

The team he had in year 4, filled almost entirely with his guys, went to the Sugar Bowl. Denard in year 3 would have almost certainly been a Heisman candidate. I don't love or hate the guy, but he's got a track record of building a really good program when he's been allowed to do so. Like I said, he wasn't a good fit for Michigan because of cultural reasons, but he's an excellent coach.


November 17th, 2014 at 8:01 PM ^

Yes, he would have had Denard in year 4...and how many linemen?  You're ignoring the fact that he lost a ton of players and didn't recruit essential positions.  More time would've made him look silly; the best thing (for his "woe is more" tour) is that he'll never have to field a team without linemen.

Durham Blue

November 17th, 2014 at 5:23 PM ^

Cal has a mediocre record but they have actually been a tough out all season long.  They have gone neck and neck with tough competition.  Nevada is 6-4 and not bad either.  They beat BYU on the road.  Sure, Arizona didn't destroy those teams but remember they still have a RS Fr at QB.


November 17th, 2014 at 4:32 PM ^

alums would be open to the possibilites of a coach like RR.  Seems to me, this openess and acceptance of differences symbolized (OR used to ),  the Michigan experience. 

Maybe there are too many factions that should have zero input in the matter.  Just saying.  Whatever the decision, get on board and act like the united faces of Michigan for once.


November 17th, 2014 at 5:07 PM ^

Three of his victories have been tight. Two were of the miracle variety and  in another he barely held on to beat a low rung team.(Think Akron)

I question whether Rodriguez would  win at a lot of places because his defenses and special teams still are subpar.

To think that his failure here was due to Michigan 'rigidly adhering to the past"  requires one to ignore everything that happened on the field during his time at Michigan. 

There is no need to bash or apotheosize the man. It didn't work out. Get over it. 


November 17th, 2014 at 3:47 PM ^

There's a "Bring Back RR" possee?  I mean, I really liked the guy and thought we should have given him a fourth year, but I've never seen even a single post on here suggest we should bring him back, aside from posts that are obviosuly joking.


November 17th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^

He's one of the best coaches in the country.  He has a better, more impressive track record than Dan Mullen.  Hire Rich Rod.


The only joke in there is that Rodriguez would laugh at whoever called to offer him the job.


November 17th, 2014 at 3:50 PM ^

Anybody can get a traditional power like Arizona to be a legit top 25 team after almost 3 seasons at the helm. It's not like that's hard.  And his defense still isn't THAT much better defense than Greg Mattison's Michigan team in year 4 WTF.  Plus the guy has only been able to beat Oregon twice!  Oregon! - I mean their mascot is a duck. C'mon.

Maybe when he wins a national title we can admit that DJ Rodriguez was fired too soon.  But never before that.


November 17th, 2014 at 4:11 PM ^

His "desert swarm" defenses are considered among the best in Pac-12 history. He also had a 12-1 season as well as a 10 win season.Arizona finished #4 in 1998. 

Rodriguez defenses are still horrendous, the last 5 seasons RR has coached(before this one) have seen five losses or more,  and he hasn't won a conference title since 2007. This season is his first winning conference record since 2007.

The man was treated poorly here and he has had a good amount of success. But it isn't a great track record. Not yet anyways. Three ten win seasons in 13 years as a HC is not outstanding. 

In comparison Carr had five 10 win seasons in 13 years with a national title. Carr also never had a losing record(RR has three).

Let the man earn the reverence you give him. If he is as great of a coach as you suppose than  he will soon make repay your faith and make all who doubt him look like fools.


November 17th, 2014 at 4:36 PM ^

Michigan also finished in the top 5 in 1997, so we have something in common with Arizona.

Arizona's D is ranked above Michigan's and Michigan State's.

Dan Mullen has never won a conference title at all.

It is far easier to maintain momentum (as we saw with Hoke in 2011) than to rebuild a loser.  Rodriguez's misfit at Michigan had a lot to do with the fact that he is good at rebuilding, but utterly inexperienced at maintaining an established power.  Lucky for us, we're no longer that!  So, now, the Michigan job is a great fit!


November 17th, 2014 at 4:48 PM ^

The first comment is nonsensical.

Michigan and MSU are ranked 9th and 10th. Arizona's is ranked 101st. How exactly is that ahead of UM and MSU?

Oh, you meant FEI. Well, I have seen all three defenses in action and Zona's defense is appreciably worse than either UM or MSU's. I'd much rather have UM/MSU's players and schemes than Arizona's.

Again, he has not won a conference title in 7 years. You boost of his greatness, but the facts do not support you.You can sputter on about he is builds programs, but to be considered great you must  first achieve it. He has not done that.

Saban took a flailing Bama program and won a national title in year three and then sustained it. That is greatness. 


November 17th, 2014 at 5:09 PM ^

Which takes into account pace and opponents. Arizona is 29, Michigan 35, MSU 53.

The most obvious comparisons are head to head.

Arizona gave up 24 to Oregon while MSU gave up 46. 

Michigan gave up 10 to Indiana while MSU gave up 17. 

We could go on down the line and approach it methodically and eventually we'd come up with something not quite as objectively accurate as FEI.

Again, RR has been trying to rebuild programs over the last 7 years.  It's been years since Harbaugh won a conference title too.  If we're going to play the ignore-context game....



November 17th, 2014 at 5:31 PM ^

and a Super Bowl in that time span. He took a team that was a loser and overnight made them a winner.

Conversely, Rich Rodriguez took over a WVU that went 7-5 the year before and went 3-8 with it. He took over a 9-4 UM team and went 3-9 with it. He reversed that trend with Zona and he deserves credit for that. However, it must be noted that Zona went 8-5 in the two seasons prior to Stoops final year. RR took them back to where they were before in his first three seasons. Let's see where he goes from here.

Statistics are misused  and often skewed to fit an agenda all the time regardless of the type used. The best data is empirical.

I have seen all three teams play. Zona is better than UM offensively, but worse defensively. MSU is superior to both UM and Zona in all three phrases of the game. 



November 17th, 2014 at 7:27 PM ^

I find it ironic that you're talking about statistics being misused when you bring up records without any regard for context.

I think we can agree the personnel matters a great deal in college, and that coaches are responsible for personnel.  So, while Rodriguez deserves some 'credit' for going 3-8, Carr played a big part in that.  Likewise, the 2011 team has to be credited in part to Rodriguez.

Nobody steps into a vacuum (expect maybe expansion teams or new programs).

As for your argument and the implication that FEI is just theoretical. I can't really argue with an opinion, because it's just an opinion. I've seen all those teams play too.  I've seen Arizona keep Oregon in check while MSU got destroyed. I've seen Purdue move the ball pretty easily on MSU. 

I'm betting you haven't seen every meaningful snap for all 3, which is where FEI is superior to your opinion.  They have more information.  It's not about being theoretical it's about your limited, inconsistent, and easily biased information vs an objective and consistent methodology.


November 17th, 2014 at 7:39 PM ^

It's not a matter of reverence. Nor is it a matter of faith. It's just conjecture.

We will never know what RR could have done in a 4th year at Michigan; conjecture isn't worth arguing about or worrying over.

Rich Rod is a very good coach. It remains to be seen if he can repeat his WV success anywhere else. I think we can all agree on that.

Hoke is a very nice man who may or may not wind up being a good coach somewhere else. We can all probably agree on that, too.

These guys get paid millions of dollars to put up with the heat. So they do. Or they get out of the heat, and go into broadcasting. Simple stuff.

Meantime, Brady Hoke and Rich Rod are both making more per year than I do, so I don't feel the least friggin' bit sorry for them. They will be fine.


November 17th, 2014 at 9:20 PM ^

Yeah but they aren't saying that Hoke has done a great job, only that they think he will if given more time.

Which is exactly what the Coach Rod supporters are saying.


November 17th, 2014 at 3:41 PM ^

On a side note, all of the hypothetical coaching candidates between the Michigan job and others could lead to an interesting coaching carousel with schools like UM, LSU, Florida, Oklahoma, Arizona, Miss. State, etc. possibly involved or looking for coaches.


November 17th, 2014 at 3:44 PM ^

As the Chief RR Supporter of this fanbase and probably country,  I hope Coach doesn't even think about going to Florida. They're crazy there--he'll never receive the institutional support (ie patience) in Gainesville that he's getting in Tucson. Gainesville is too much like Ann Arbor in that regard. As a friend of mine said today, if Coach goes 9-3 and gets to a Rose Bowl, they'll build a statute for him at Arizona. And for those who think that money could be a factor, Coach stands to get a hefty sum if he stays in Tucson for eight years:…

PS, can we please stop diminshing his wins? I'll never understand why Michigan fans continue to go out of their way to put him down. Leave him alone.

True Blue Grit

November 17th, 2014 at 3:53 PM ^

I wish RR nothing but success at Arizona or wherever he goes - unless he's playing Michigan.  His coaching tenure here got off on the wrong track at the start and never got itself righted.  And I've never liked how he didn't receive the 100% support he deserved by the school and part of the alumni and ex-player base.  Yes, he definitely had some shortcomings that cost him and the program.  But, I believe he always wanted to win here and become part of the Michigan tradition.  It didn't work out and both sides have moved on. 


November 17th, 2014 at 4:56 PM ^

You can pick at the holes in any coach's resume.  Saban is the only untouchable.  Even people like Stoops are getting questioned.  Sumlin was hot shit a year ago and now he's struggling.  Mullen was on the hot seat.  Peterson, Franklin and Strong have had their transition issues. Last go round at UM we were talking about Jeff Tedford.  The shine is off Schiano.  Bielema is 1-5 in his conference. etc.

One can look at even Harbaugh and ask where he'd be without Luck. Pete Carrol couldn't avoid NCAA sanctions and fled to the NFL.

Rodriguez's resume, just what he did at WVU makes him one of the best coaches in the country.  The evidence for his turnaround at Arizona says it was no fluke.  All signs point to his run at Michigan being a case of instituational impatience. 

Is he the best coach in the country? probobly not, but neither is every other coach (there can only be one).  Michigan exposed that he needs strong leadership on the defensive end and isn't the Program Director some schools need.  But he is a damn good football coach and that's obvious to everyone. He surely learned from his time at Michigan.  Similarly, Muschamp will learn from his time at Florida, and probably bounce back soon.


November 17th, 2014 at 5:08 PM ^

It always gives me a chuckle when folks bring up the "impatience" (or, "if only he was given more time") thing.  Can you imagine what we would have looked like with 2 linemen?  And how would we have filled all those open roster positions?  IM call-up's?  Say what you will about Rich, but the guy was not building a long-term program in A2.


November 17th, 2014 at 5:16 PM ^

I laugh when people knock Rodriguez for this. OL was the one position he absolutely knocked out of the park.  His success rate was staggering. He brought in an absolute stud in Lewan, an NFL starter in Omameh, another high NFL pick in Schofield and a few other quality starters.  People act like it's his fault Hoke couldn't hang on to Jake Fisher (who looks fantastic at Oregon BTW).

Rodriguez skimped on OL recruiting because he could. He was sitting on a bunch of stud sophomores and had other issues to address (read: defense). He proved he could turn RS Freshman into quality starters, so unlike Hoke (who apparently needs 4 years to do it) he knew he could wait for the '12 class to fill in some gaps.

Funny that you are knocking walk-ons, when our best OLmen and best DLmen are currently walk-ons.  Not to mention Kovacs (who Rodriguez signed up).

Rodriguez won more games every year he was here, and Hoke managed to win 11 games with Rodriguez's guys in 2011 despite a significant decline in the offense (even though everyone was back).  It's been downhill every year since.



November 17th, 2014 at 8:06 PM ^

Dude, I'm not saying Hoke has done a great's the opposite.  He's done poorly and that's why he'll be fired.  RR also did poorly and his firing was also deserved.  

Frankly, I think our team would've been better off without Lewan.  
And...the idea that open tryouts would solve the roster issues is laughable.  Of course RR won more games each year - he set the bar on the floor.  That's like cheering a toddler for crawling.

Like I said, RR is in a good place in AZ.  He's got much less pressure; he can create his own "tradition" and life will be good.