Maybe Casteel wasn't the answer?
"After giving up 111 points in their first two Pac-12 games of 2015, the Arizona Wildcats defense, and in particular, Jeff Casteel's 3-3-5 scheme, has come under a bit of fire."
October 6th, 2015 at 5:02 PM ^
I just want to bask in the glory of Harbaugh.
October 6th, 2015 at 5:08 PM ^
Their linkebacker corps has been decimated by injuries, and the linebackers are more crucial to the 3-3-5 than they are to other schemes.
Casteel is a good defensive coordinator. Arizona is just having a rough year.
October 6th, 2015 at 5:18 PM ^
Who ever said Casteel was the answer?
Rich Rodriguez? Those who wanted to scapegoat the non-existence of Defense and villify Bill Martin? Where exactly has Jeff Casteel ever been truly successful when it mattered?
Syracuse?
okay ....so the Pac-12 has much better offenses than those Syracuse faced or WVU faced when RR and Casteel were there ...?
What a stretch and what a dead horse. Is there anyone who sincerely feels that Jeff Casteel would have been the difference? If so, you need to raise me up on that.
October 6th, 2015 at 5:17 PM ^
1. It's now 8 years later. A once sturdy, excellent scheme isn't necessarily a great scheme (especially for an underdog program) a decade later. The things that made Casteel's 3-3-5 hellish to go against are now commonplace for defenses, so it's not exactly this wild changeup D on the schedule.
2. Arizona was and remains a low ceiling program in the grand scheme of college football. You've got to convince Texas/California kids to come to Tuscon, and while that doesn't SEEM so tough, nobody's really managed to do it consistently better than Rich has.
3. The Pac 12 is crazy harder than the Pac 10 was for the two decades before the revenue explosion and all the recent coaching hires were made.
So yeah, none of this is all that surprising. I don't think it sheds much light on the Michigan issues since this is all happening 5-8 years later and at a much, much lower end program than Michigan is.
But man, that whole Rich Rod disaster where a lot of us thought Michigan had hired a modern savior and ended up with a guy who just didn't fit and where nothing seemed to work and where former alumns seem to be sabotaging an already bad situation sure does look a lot like Texas under Charlie Strong.
October 6th, 2015 at 5:57 PM ^
I was going to post a joke answer that "Casteel is the answer but you haven't the right question" vein but your serious response is far better.
Michigan actually played a lot of hybrid defenses against BYU and had 5 or more DBs on the field at various times.
The era of a single base defense that is played on all three downs and all parts of the field outside of the goal line is probably long gone.
The Michigan experience from Rich Rod through Hoke to Harbaugh is indeed a lesson to the CFB world. If the Wolverines continue to improve over the next few years, it may affect HC recruiting around the country. People will start looking not just for the next "hot" guy for someone who "fits" well into the place.
Let's not forget that a less well recognized part of the current revitalization of the FB program is the support of the AD and his 'hands off'' approach.
October 6th, 2015 at 5:42 PM ^
...unless you're Saban or Meyer (and hopefully Harbaugh).
TCU has been a top 5 team these past two years. Does anyone remember they went 7-6 in 2012 and 4-8 in 2013? Did Gary Patterson suck then and not suck now? There are other examples.
Arizona won their division last year in a very tough conference; they went to the Fiesta Bowl. They beat a Top 5 Oregon team for the second year in a row, and also beat their archrival, ASU. This year, they've pooped the bed for two games in a row. Who knows how they will do when they get their starting QB and player of the year candidate LB back? Or maybe they'll still stink and go 6-6? I have no idea, but there is nothing defnitive after a couple of games, let alone one or two seasons (see Hoke, Brady -- first year as Michigan coach).
I'm just enjoying the fact we're winning games and people actually think UM has a chance at a national title(!) in year one of a coaching transitition. I hope that doesn't look stupid in two weeks.
October 6th, 2015 at 5:52 PM ^
There were a lot of reasons, valid ones, why Rich Rod was not successful at UofM. He was, and is, however, a very good coach. His D-1 record (ex-UofM) is 89-42. Lloyd Carr's was 112-40 at UofM. Not a huge difference. One can legitimately argue that LC was a better HC than RR. One can also argue that LC had an established program and resources available to him while RR had very little support and a lot of opposition during his tenure here, right from the get go. I still believe there was a lot of unwarranted prejudice for RR to try and overcome at an institution that should have shown a lot more acceptance of a self-made man. Fortunately, it seems like everyone is now behind JH and his program, and at this point in time, that's all that really matters.
October 6th, 2015 at 6:44 PM ^
And I think that was the problem...we were trying to hire a better and more innovative coach than Lloyd and that didn't happen.
October 6th, 2015 at 7:13 PM ^
Time will tell, but I think the answer will be 'yes'. In fact, it would not surprise me if JH might eventually be judged to be as good as or better than Bo.
I also continue to believe that RR's record at UofM could have been very good if he had been so strongly opposed and undercut so often and on so many levels.
The current problems at Arizona aren't surprising given the key personnel who are injured, their lack of roster depth, and the difficulty of recruiting quality players against the likes of Texas, Oklahoma, TCU, Baylor, USC, Arizona State, etc. at a school that has never been even close to being a football powerhouse.
October 6th, 2015 at 7:33 PM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 8:04 PM ^
I would say yes Harbaugh is an innovator...because he wants to win and he works with what he has. He isn't hellbent on using only one type of offense or defense...which is what both Lloyd and Rich Rod are pretty well known for here.
October 7th, 2015 at 12:18 AM ^
From USD to the 49'ers he has shown he can adapt to the skill set of the players he's coaching. The notion that Rich Rod never had 'his guys' always seemed a bit contrived to me and if you believe what has been rumored about Carr telling players to transfer, it still doesn't answer the questions about coaching ability. And besides, Ryan Mallett was *never* going to stay to play in a read option - Pat White offense. I love Denard as much as any M player ever and think he's a great person and ambassador and after what I expect will be an abbrebviated career in the NFL, I hope he comes back to A2 and finds a place within the program.
I don't think Rich Rod has been "innovative" since being part of creating the read option and you only have to look at his buddy in Columbus to see how a coach can apply the system more successfully. Argue about the 'cupboard' being bare, but I think both Herb and Harbaugh have shown that they are simply better coaches (with better staffs) than Rodriguez. That said, he could be in Tucson the next 20yrs and be very successful if he manages to win the Pac-12 South every so often, compete for Tier-1 Bowls and upset the USC's and Oregon's as he has.
Things happen for a reason - maybe Casteel not joining RR in A2 was so that, in the end, Jim Harbaugh would come home. It has been painful for a few years, but I don't think Jeff Casteel and his 3-3-5 would have been the difference.
Remember GERG was a "SuperBowl winning" DC in Denver and had some success elsewhere as a coordinator. As a Broncos fan I knew what we were getting and that the SB wins were a function of the offense and enough talent on D to perform well enough.
Neither Casteel nor GERG could hold DJ's jock..
October 6th, 2015 at 8:07 PM ^
Actually Carr's record is 122-40.
As for RichRod, his record is heavily inflated by that 32-5 stretch from 2005-07, which I suspect is not replicable. Over the rest of his Division I career he's 72-59 and has lost at least four games in each season.
When we hired Rich, I thought he was a difference-maker. But now I think he capitalized on the weakness of the Big East and the newness of his spread offense to have that brief run of glory, and that he's very unlikely to pull that off again.
October 6th, 2015 at 7:57 PM ^
The difference between 89-42 and 122-40 is HUGE. That's 33 wins in a row, or basically going undefeated for 3 straight seasons.
October 6th, 2015 at 8:07 PM ^
I can't believe no one else noticed that
October 6th, 2015 at 9:17 PM ^
That it is as easy to win at West Virginia and Arizona as it at Michigan. This is a foolish thing to think.
October 6th, 2015 at 6:33 PM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 9:11 PM ^
There's something quite bizarre about this, isn't there? How often do you see something like this out in the world?
I'll say this: if I interviewed someone and he told me if I hired him I'd better open up the checkbook and do whatever it takes to bring his assistant in too, my first thought would be to wonder if I was interviewing the right guy. If he's that important, maybe I should just hire the assistant?
October 7th, 2015 at 2:18 AM ^
October 7th, 2015 at 4:05 AM ^
It's not remotely limited to the coaching profession.
Look at other industries where a new Manager or even CEO will surround themselves with folks that they are comfortable with. Sometimes this is a new Sales Manager who raids his former employer to bring over 'his guys' or someone hired in who doesn't want to deal with constant, "well before, we did it this way so that's how I do it."
Sure if you're hiring for a specific role or position, those candidates don't have the bargaining power or position to do more than compete for the position themselves. But I think many of us have worked for "YesMen" reporting to a boss who do nothing but validate that person's opinions. From my experience, it is better to have capable and qualified people who don't necessarily have legacy ties to interfere with that.
What I like a lot about the Harbaugh staff is that while many are tied by the commonality of Harbaugh, most, if not all, coached on their own elsewhere and are not "Yes Men." Greg Mattison is a great example of incorporating areas of strength into the new group versus rejecting him based on being on the outside of the inner circle.
And wait ...in the coming years the Harbaugh staff will be raided by other programs and the staff will change. It's how you deal with change that matters. If RR truly couldn't coach wihout Casteel, that says more about Rodriguez than anything else.
When and if that happens, is when the hiring decision is based on ..."well, why not just hire the assistant?" Ask how that worked out for all the coaches who were under Belichick and coaching Brady.
Charlie Weis, Josh McDaniels, Romeo Crennel, GM Scott Pioli ...Todd Haley ...Lane Kiffin (everyone thinks he's Monte, part II but isnt) and the litany of assistants and coordinators who are not The factor that matters.
October 6th, 2015 at 6:37 PM ^
This is still like the aftermath of the Civil War with all these digs and attempts to argue that the course of history has vindicated your position.
The difference is that we have two Lost Causes because both RR and the direct repudiation of RR failed. Both sides of our Civil War lost in a way. The radical RichRodites and their spread ideology lost and then the Carrite conservatives got their man and he lost as well. Today, we still find RichRodites looking to redeem their cause, just like we find Carrites trying to redeem theirs.
In reality we got 3 years marked both by offensive progress and intolerable chaos otherwise under Rich Rod and 3 years of restored defensive solidity and startling incompetence otherwise under Hoke. Both had their upsides but in the end both set Michigan back.
In ruins and looking for the restoration of hope and glory, we now have embraced Neo-Schembechlerianism under the autocratic leadership of a charismatic prodigal son. It should be law under this new regime that we do not revive the quarrels of the past.
October 7th, 2015 at 12:59 AM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 8:02 PM ^
Before RR, if RR ever does! Harbaugh is a complete coach who hires solid assistant coach. RR only strong point is his spread offense. You need a solid defense to win a NC!
October 6th, 2015 at 8:08 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 6th, 2015 at 8:47 PM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 9:06 PM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 9:26 PM ^
I really like Rich Rod and hoped he would've done well at Michigan. I watch most Arizona games now that he is HC there. But I am now convinced more than ever that you need at least an above average defense to get to the 9+ win level consistently. I just don't understand why poor defenses tend to follow him around. Or why RR would allow that side of the ball to seemingly languish. I think his teams would really be great if he put more energy and focus into his defenses.
October 6th, 2015 at 9:30 PM ^
and I also agree with the previous comments about him having a ceiling as a successful coach. Casteel might have helped some had he come to Michigan but there's no way it would have been enough to overcome all of the other problems. RR was ONE home win over a poor Pitt team from making the NC game at WVU and laid an egg. His record indicates that he can improve historically underperforming programs to a point, but that's all. My prediction: whether or not Arizona turns it around this season he will be hired away by a misguided AD--like the guy at UCLA after Mora returns to the NFL?--and fail just as badly as he did in Ann Arbor. I wish him well but he is definitely NOT a great coach!
October 6th, 2015 at 9:41 PM ^
They've played his Arizona teams four times and won them all, by an average score of 42-18.
Before Rodriguez got there, UCLA had lost five straight to Arizona.
RR may not be the relevant variable, but fans aren't always rational. He will not be the next coach at UCLA.
October 6th, 2015 at 9:46 PM ^
and while I see your point, I would have said exactly what you said AND MORE about Steve Alford getting hired at UCLA by the same idiot who is still their AD. Now that I think about it, the comparison between Alford (big name, clear ceiling, overrated track record mostly focused on raising up midling programs) and RR is a pretty good one.
October 6th, 2015 at 9:57 PM ^
That's not the same. Alford had never coached in the PAC; in fact, I don't think UCLA had ever played one of his teams.
Fans pay a lot more attention to their own team's games, and nothing gives a bad impression of a coach quite like watching your team beat his like a drum year after year. How would Michigan fans have felt about a John Cooper hiring?
October 6th, 2015 at 10:03 PM ^
When you have a bad AD (like UCLA does, and like the guy we just fired a year ago) then it doesn't actually matter what the fans think or want. UCLA's basketball fans have been in a frothy uproar ever since Alford was hired. They hate him there and it doesn't matter. He got a big extension after his his first year and now they are stuck with him.
Thankfully Brandon was such a massive screwball that the students were able to force him out after the MN game last year--and now we're happy. Many fanbases are not so lucky.
October 6th, 2015 at 9:53 PM ^
thanks, after seeing 3yrs of obvious improvement, for chasing RR away and giving us instead nice ol Brady. you guys didn't go to UM did you? no, I didn't think so. notice he beat O last two years (and others, usc, stanford, asu...). yeah 3 3 5 sucks so bad . hey? why don't you all go play some actual foot fucking ball and see what shit is all about? ya know... pejorative (what does that mean? I'm an engr major)? gak , blork
October 6th, 2015 at 10:18 PM ^
Who gives a rat's ass if he beat Oregon two years in a row? Oregon beat his team even worse the 2nd time last year...in the game that actually mattered.
''3 years of obvious improvement'' *cue Jennifer Lawrence okay .gif*
I'm sure as shit glad we fired his ass and endured 4 years of Hoke in order to get Harbaugh. Harbaugh is a much better coach.
October 6th, 2015 at 10:32 PM ^
"obvious improvement" - we got outscored in our last three games that season 137-49. Our defense was ranked in the 100s. Our special teams were atrocious. Our offense turned over the ball like it was their job. But ok.
October 6th, 2015 at 10:54 PM ^
October 6th, 2015 at 11:31 PM ^
Rodriguez's conference winning percentage at Michigan was .250. Casteel or not, that is pathetic.
October 6th, 2015 at 11:43 PM ^
Yep.
Not counting bowls, he's won his last 20 non-conference games. The last loss was Toledo.
During that 20-0 non-conference stretch he's gone 20-32 in conference games (including the championship game last year).
That's amazing. Or his ADs have done him some scheduling favors. Or both. Arizona hasn't had a P5 nonconference opponent since 2012 but still there's an OK State and two ND wins in that 20-0.
October 7th, 2015 at 1:05 AM ^
October 7th, 2015 at 9:19 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad