Brian on WTKA this morning
This one had it all...anger...denial....Brian fed up....Brian asking for apologies....Stand Edwards asking for apologies...even 45 seconds of basketball talk....and probably more opinion than we've gotten from Brian since at least Monday. I won't go so far as to say it's juicy, but you can tell there's a lot of emotions out there this week.
10a - Brian Cook and Craig Ross on Michigan football
http://www.wtka.com/index.php?fuseaction=home.podcasts_sel&id=9403
10b - Brian Cook and Craig Ross on Michigan football
http://www.wtka.com/index.php?fuseaction=home.podcasts_sel&id=9404
11a - Brian Cook and Craig Ross Seg 2
http://www.wtka.com/index.php?fuseaction=home.podcasts_sel&id=9405
11b - Brian Cook and Craig Ross Seg 2
http://www.wtka.com/index.php?fuseaction=home.podcasts_sel&id=9406
12 - Brian Cook and Craig Ross Seg 3
http://www.wtka.com/index.php?fuseaction=home.podcasts_sel&id=9407
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:01 AM ^
...but if you keep getting bad press it becomes harder to recruit, when you can't recruit your talent suffers, when your talent suffers, your record suffers.
If he had gotten better support from day 1 and the Freep wasn't ona witch hunt we would have goteen better players sooner and we'd be in better shape.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:09 AM ^
I cannot agree with your assessment. UM's on-the-field problems stem from poor coaching, not lack of talent.
<br>
<br>Even RR said that these guys can play. They don't recruit chumps at UM.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^
I look forward to the day you eclipse the minimum point threshold and can post new threads so everyone can enjoy your well thought out assessments of the team.
That will be fun.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^
that you post well thoughts as well.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:32 AM ^
Or because that talent is extremely young. These stud players don't come pre-assembled from their high school programs, they need to be broke down and put back together. Coaching is part of it regarding technique and mental mistakes but there's a massive physical overhaul that takes place too.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:01 PM ^
UM has not been young for three years-/ not defensively at least.
<br>
<br>It is odd that RR struggles so, but Urban Meyer did not nor Saban past year one or Dantonio, Tressel, or Carroll.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^
December 2nd, 2010 at 7:23 PM ^
RR should have 30 players arrested in his tenure, sign 10 extra players a year, be a major douche that cheers against your own team to spite a rival/have a non effective zero tolerence pollicy, and get caught paying players/and then jump ship to the NFL to cover your ass?
Theres alot of reasons to not like RR, but to compare him to the scum of the NCAA is laughable.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:35 AM ^
Ziff, while I have been in the RR-should-go camp, I think that you raise a very good and fair argument. From Day 1, RR's hire at UM was met with derision by much of the fanbase and a negative media campaign the likes of which are usually only seen in political races.
It would be naive to think that this did not hurt recruiting, which in turn hurt on-field results. And it would also be naive to think that this did not cause unnecessary pressure for a young team, possibly contributing to the 2009 second half collapse.
But, given that this has happened, how can this problem be reversed? The negative media campaign, the angst amongst at least a large portion of the fanbase and the "hot seat" talk continues. It would be unrealistic to think that this will not affect this year's recruiting class. And it would be unrealistic to assume that this problem will go away next year, unless and until we complete a successful season and have some big wins against some of our rivals. Even next year, if we start 6-0, the negativity will continue because many will be expecting another B-10 collapse.
I agree with you that this really has not been fair to RR. It is possible that the Michigan media and fanbase has cheated themselves at what could have been a damn successful, long-term hire. But, the reality of it is that this happened.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:51 AM ^
You are right. But, if RR is fired after this year, the fanbase will be spilt even more.
There will be those that are upset that any coach at M was only given 3 years and was villanized from day 1. There will be some that will villanize the new coach (yes, even Harbaugh -- remember his negative statements about U-M?).
Wait one more year, if RR wins then even the A-holes will support him.
If RR doesn't win, then everyone (well, almost) will support the change.
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:18 PM ^
I agree completely with this line of thinking Enjoy Life. To me the University of Michigan is a high class institution. If they fire RR before he has a chance at reaping the rewards of the foundation he has been building then that is a big knock against the university I love.
I support Rich Rodriguez but more than anything I support what our university stands for. Firing a coach before he has a senior of his own is the height of unfairness. I'd like to be known as a university and an athletic department that gives coaches and players the best chance to succeed.
By firing RR after year 3 and giving the coach that takes over all of the benefits of the depth that RR has been building, the university is throwing RR under the bus. The next coach would succeed with all of the work that RR had to put in to rebuild this program. It would be classless and something I believed U of M was above.
A 4th year gives RR a chance to work with a full group of his own players. It is then fair to judge his performance on the field after he has at least a little experience and depth on the team.
December 3rd, 2010 at 2:03 AM ^
You are right. But, if RR is fired after this year, the fanbase will be spilt even more.
I doubt it. I suspect that a lot of the people who are in his corner right now are the kind of people who simply support whomever's in charge. If he's fired, they'll conclude that Brandon made the right call. The really hardcore RR supporters are a distinct minority these days (not here, but in the overall fanbase).
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:02 AM ^
How do you actually download the podcasts? I can only get them to play in the browser now.
EDIT: Nevermind. search for WTKA on iTunes.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:04 AM ^
More excuses. Can we enact a statute about those, with an injunction as one of the remedies?
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^
the bit where Brian demanded an apology was kind of out of line, IMO.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^
I appreciate your work, Brian, but IME, It was a little out of line to bring up an unsubstantiated rumor on the radio.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^
"Solid sourcing" is always a good idea. And if Brian had a source, it would have been a good idea to make that clearer.
If I understand Stan Edwards correctly, it was his position that Braylon never ever said that he was the Chairman of the Fire Rodriguez Committee. What we got from Stan was that he supports Rich Rodriguez, and went to RR's office recently to say so personally. For that, Stan Edwards gets high marks.
But I didn't really hear Stan say, "The rumor about Braylon's 'Committee is a false rumor. Braylon never said that, and Braylon doesn't belive that." Stan angrily hung up before that part got fleshed out. Just maybe, Stan was justifiably angry because the rumor that Brian repeated was indeed a false one. If so, it would be nice, with cooler heads prevailing, to make that clear.
Because there is another possibility. And that is that while Stan Edwards is personally a good Wolverine veteran, and has offered his support to RR, that Braylon Edwards nonetheless popped off and really did say something stupid. A-g-a-i-n. And that once again, Stan is left to clean up the mess. It wouldn't be the first time. And in that event, Brian Cook would have been correct, Braylon would have been, for the umpteenth time, a jerk, and alas, Stan would be caught in the middle. Based only on recent history, it is the least surprising of the possibilities.
In any event, I am going to cut some slack for Stan Edwards, who has almost never let down the good name of Michigan, even when Braylon has.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:29 PM ^
Stan got pissed off bc Brian substantiated that email by claiming such an act "fit into Braylon's character." Stan was assailing the fact assumptions on what players think and are rely heavily upon conjecture and rumor. the errors in the comment were that it couldn't be substantiated if it happened, that it was described and tied to a high profile name and then it was deemed 'in line with what he was about.' Stan was more pissed about the character comment than what Brian tied to Braylon. if it was such a necessary example, the sentence could have been "A high profile player who played under Carr was recently running his mouth about wanting RR gone at the club, which shows this is a public and private issue." it didn't have to be a Braylon smash.
the problem is when the bar's been set of how you handle rumors or feedback from the anonymous internet, you need to maintain it.
my question to you is why in the hell does Stan require 'slack'? he carried himself extremely professionally and got off the phone before he got into a debate. he made his point, didn't get personal and made a profound point. why does he 'deserve slack'?
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:01 PM ^
with Braylon's past behavior.
I'd leave "character" out of it, myself, but I understood exactly what Brian Cook was saying. With a history to back himself up.
The question remains: Is it true that Braylon declared himself as the Chairman of a fictional Fire Rodriguez Committee? It ought to have been a fact that was witnessed by many, and could be substanitated, or denied, with some finality. If the whole thing is indeed untrue, then Stan and Braylon have been wronged by the rumor mill, and are right to be publicly angry. But if it was a true story, then what is Stan so worked up about?
Personally, I don't require some kind of State Police investigation. I am perfectly good with Braylon saying, "It isn't true, I didn't say it, I support Head Coach Rodriguez, and there should be no talk about any 'Fire Rodriguez' committees."
I really don't want to hear about Braylon's "character." I don't care.
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:14 PM ^
you're allowed that opinion as an anecdote. this made an assertion on the radio that targeted his personality with an unsubstantiated element. unless someone can substantiate it, Stan has every right to be worked up until it is proven. Braylon, and his father, shouldn't have to sit by idly while they are besmirched.
fact remains very few legends regarding Braylon have been substantiated and are instead passed on through word of mouth. this is a perfect example of it and why Stan called in. again, Stan isn't the one in the least who deserves to be 'cut a break' as he had every right to call in and slam the comment.
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:44 PM ^
Speaking only for myself, I am not prejudging any Braylon "legends."
I am going only on Braylon's public record.
What we know is that Braylon has been prone to examples of really bad judgment and behavior with regard to the Rodriguez regime.
There was the needless public kerfuffle over the Number 1 jersey. Should have been resolved with a simple quiet phone call.
There was the "Lloyd Carr's University of Michigan" line. Which Braylon, with Stan's help, "walked backwards" after he said it.
There was Braylon's dumb and gratuitous comment that Coach Rodriguez was "past the hot seat."
Then, there are the more general variety of bad-personal-judgment flailings by Braylon, unrelated to Rich Rodriguez. The list, from courthouse records, is too long to repeat.
That's not legend. Those are the facts. It would be a simple matter for Braylon to disown the rumored statements. And if he could do so credibly, I would, as I say, cut Braylon and Stan some slack for being angry about it if it had been a completely false rumor. But really...
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:59 PM ^
I think Brian said he had just received that email -- if that's the case, he wouldn't have had time to verify it and was probably just trying to make a point about the division among former players, fans, etc., surrounding Rodriguez.
In hindsight, Brian probably should not have used Braylon's name -- it seems like it came out as a stream-of-consciousness thing about a guy who has made it fairly clear where he stands on the current situation, but he would have been wise to avoid that email (or be generic about it) until he could verify it.
December 2nd, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^
Either Braylon said it, or he didn't. As I understood the story, Braylon is supposed to have made the 'Fire Rodriguez Committee' statement in front of a bunch of people.
It is perhaps unfortunate that together, Brian and Stan have elevated this story to the extent we now see. And as usual, (see, e.g., Boren, Justin; Mallett, Ryan; Wermers, Kurt; Herron, Alex; Rosenberg, Michael; Dorsey, Demar) Rich Rodriguez gets caught in the crossfire as though he were the bad guy.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:29 AM ^
As if we need further evidence of how fractured this fanbase has become. Brian is fired up, I spend more time typing this crap than working on my IP cases, and you could practically feel Stan Edwards anger through the phone...Regardless of outcome, I cannot wait for this to be over so we can move on and look forward to 2011.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
looks like Brian won't be getting a holiday card from Stan this year
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:35 PM ^
What is Stan doing these days. Get him in here, maybe DC. Stan has an interesting point.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:40 PM ^
People say were not improving but at the beginning of the year everyone was saying we had a 6 and 6 team and guess what we have a 6 and 6 team. I think alot of people who really don't like coach Rod want him out now because they see he will soon be successful and after that happens there screwed. I live in Lexington Ky and I thought UK hoops was political but I think we now have taken the cake.
December 2nd, 2010 at 3:04 PM ^
Aren't we 7-5?
December 2nd, 2010 at 10:34 PM ^
Where they scored enough to win twice, but Michigan won by two points, so, yeah.
If that's not what the guy meant, then check him for crystal meth.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:45 PM ^
really demand an on air apology from a emailer???? sensitive much? i think ira's constant whining and complaining are rubbing off on brian.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
You can't really blame Brian. I just listened to the podcast during lunch. Only thing I had a problem with was the Braylon email. Stan had a right to be upset. Brian said it was an email, fwiw, but still. For someone of Brian's status, you don't do that and Stan was listening.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^
about the braylon thing. brian was way out of line and i'm glad stan put him in his place. it was a complete d-bag move on brian's part.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:09 PM ^
the modus operandi on this site, i thought, has been to wait on things until you can confirm so as to be a consistent resource people can rely upon. throwing that out seemed completely contrary to what is put up on the front page and i think Stan had every right not only to be upset but to blame Brian. just my opinion.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:54 PM ^
I haven't been able to listen yet, so I am a bit confused on the Stan Edwards part. Were Stan and Brian arguing back and forth, or Stand with another caller, or what?
Thanks.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:05 PM ^
No arguing. I think Brian was a little suprised that Stan called in. But, Stan said what he said and hung up. Brian did apologize after the call. You have to listen to it. Stan can still bring it.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:14 PM ^
to the OP:
Brian threw out the fact, early in the show, that he had received an email that Braylon was pronouncing himself leader of the Fire RR Committee and said he couldn't verify it but didn't really doubt it given Braylon's character.
Stan called in 20 mins later, no doubt having been given a heads up by somebody, and said speculation is the root of the chaos currently surrounding the program and that "people" shouldn't throw out assumptions of character or comments without knowing and that they should also include in their narrative the fact Stan was in Rod's office giving him his full support. He got extremely pissed off towards the end of the call (which was only a minute monologue) and hung up. Brian laughed and said he had noted it was an unconfirmed email but "Sorry Stan"
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:02 PM ^
He's been pretty consistant with it, at least since I've been reading. The "DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM!?" interaction at the airport is a pretty good example.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:06 PM ^
I didn't know about that one. I guess I haven't been on the blog long enough.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:14 PM ^
I vaguely remember this. Was it the post about Spirit Airlines and how much they suck?
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:29 PM ^
The interaction at the counter. I do understand the stresses of travel, but come on now.
December 2nd, 2010 at 5:44 PM ^
With all due respect to Brian, if a college football blogger tried to pull the "Do you know who I am?" thing on me, I'd probably just laugh.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:20 PM ^
Brian/Stan was a nice example of a bug in our media environment. Brian throws out some rumor that goes right at someone ("hard-hitting"), then at the first sign of blowback -- the first time he has to defend what he said against an actual human being -- Brian doesn't even bother trying.
If your defense against opposition is that weak (whether in fact, or whether you have the stomach for it), shouldn't you ... you know ... maybe think twice about saying something in the first place?
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^
It is mind-boggling that you're still allowed to post here.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:34 PM ^
But I've always found his voice soothing. And smooth like butter.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
When I first started reading this site, I realized I had a lot in common with Brian when it comes to age, time actually at UM, and passion for UM athletics. My first thought was, damn, I should have thought to do something like mgoblog. I'm sure I wouldn't have done it as well, but wouldn't that be the life?
A couple of years later, I'm thinking that it's probably not as awesome as it seems. Michigan sports are my escape, my passion. I read this to get away from everything and just enjoy something. If I get sick of it, I just think about something else for a while. I once read that sports writers end up not even liking sports after a while. I don't pretend to know anything about Brian personally, but I hope he's able to get some space for himself and not have to live UM so much that he ends up bitter and hating it.