For all the RRod haters: how you like him now?

Submitted by MGoLiteral on November 6th, 2010 at 3:50 PM

Quality win for Michigan against a good conference team. Bowl game here we come. Enjoy.

Comments

Mr. McBlue and…

November 6th, 2010 at 4:18 PM ^

MileHigh I agree. We needed this win and we got it. I was in the wait and see camp, I'll admit it, but after this week and listening to the announcers it is patently obvious. Our offense is there. There is no need to even question RR's status anymore. He WILL be our coach and Dave Brandon will pimp slap any negative nancies out there to oblivion.

My guess is we should start opining on who will take over for our embattled D-Coordinator.

Good Win Guys. I might even have sex with the Mrs. tonight...

wolverine1987

November 6th, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^

based off of beating Illinois? Sorry, but if you were against him this doesn't change a thing. If you were for him this should not change a thing either. This is not OSU. You are way premature. I LOVE this win and literally had tears in my eyes, but it changes nothing either way. I still want him back for next year.

UMdad

November 6th, 2010 at 3:54 PM ^

You had this posted seconds after the game.  Amazing.  I was still thinking how embarassing it is to have to win 67 - 65, but still happy to win.  But, hey, if you want to hang your hat on this, go ahead.  I am guessing Robinson doesn't make it to the end of the season, and possibly not to the end of the week. 

UMdad

November 6th, 2010 at 5:08 PM ^

Way to twist it.  Of course I am not embarassed by the players or the effort.  I am firmly in hte camp of clean house on the defensive staff.  The offense looked good, and seemed to adapt well to whatever was thrown at them.  The players didn't fold shop after last weeks loss and I put that in hte positive column for RR.  Overall, I think he deserves more time, but there is no excuse for allowing 65 freaking points. 

MileHighWolverine

November 6th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^

but take 2 of those turnovers and turn them into points and I think we turn them into a 1 dimensional team which is always easier to defend vs. a spread option team.  I think if we could've opened up a 2 TD lead....the game ends in regulation and is more like a 42/38 type game.

I still think Gerg (and the rest of the staff) should be gone but it wasn't based on what I saw today.  We didn't look lost out there which was a surprising change of pace.  

Vasav

November 6th, 2010 at 4:22 PM ^

Remember - we were playing a pretty good defense, and scored 45 points in regulation, with the last quarter playing our backup QB.

Yes, 5 turnovers, two punts, one turnover on downs. Which makes me thing that these QBs have not hit their ceiling yet. I'm hoping we look like Oregon next season.

 

GO BLUE!

 

EDIT: I replied to the wrong coment.

maximus_spaniard

November 6th, 2010 at 4:18 PM ^

... because we are in a different situation that we never had when the standards were high. Standards for next year will be higher for sure, and even higher the year after that with hopefully a veteran, big, fast and explosive team. This young team has shown that with a mediocre defense it would be probably 8-1 now. To me RR stays even if we don't win another game. Would be great if we do win the bowl game though.

BigCat14

November 6th, 2010 at 7:39 PM ^

a comment of total baffoonery!  seriously!  what where you drinking when you typed this?  we scored 67 points!  twice as much as our season average!  yes turnovers cost us greatly in the field position battle (as well as poor kicks again and poor kick coverage).  to  blame the 'O' is almost laughable!  speculate all you want that is a definite right in this blog but wow, really, the 'O'.  the 'O' is what will help keep RR's job!  Go Blue beat Purdue!

Edit: Not sure why when i hit reply to milehighwolverine that this did not post there?

MileHighWolverine

November 6th, 2010 at 9:14 PM ^

of 5 turnovers, a turnover on downs and a missed FG has on the performance of the D?

Seriously, you wouldn't have blamed the O at all if we lost?  Not even for putting the D in terrible field position all game long?  Or for killing momentum with a soul crushing turnover....again and again all game long?  The O had plenty of opportunities to build a two score lead only to crap the bed....repeatedly.  Hard to be critical of a unit that put up 67 points but still, if the O plays mistake free ball we win going away....it wouldn't have been close.

 

umich1

November 6th, 2010 at 4:02 PM ^

Wow - go spend some time with your kid on campus and stop being a shithead.  I've never seen somebody look at the glass so half-empty after a positive thing.

Michigan had 5 turnovers, at least 3 of them were odd and unusual.  The defense played their hearts out and made tremendous strides. 

And when did Michigan score 67 points and 650+ yards last?

UMdad

November 6th, 2010 at 5:27 PM ^

Give me a break.  I am happy we won, too, but the OP came out with a "How do you like me now," after a triple overtime game where the defense was a debacle.  I was just responding because I was shocked the first post wasn't about a gutsy effort by a couple of the freshman on defense, or Tate off of the bench.  Instaead, it was a shot at 'RR haters.'  But, hey, you must be right.  We won a game, all of our troubles are over. 

umich1

November 7th, 2010 at 7:38 AM ^

The defense was not terrible.  They seriously were okay.  Go back and look.  They gave up 14 points in the second half.  In the first half, they were put in a bad position continuously and gave up field goals instead of touchdowns.  They forced their first turnover in a few games.

It was the special teams that sucked. 

The OP was highlighting the offensive game planning that Rich Rodriguez is capable of.  67 points despite 5 turnovers - you aren't going to see that too often.  Everybody knows the defense needs to improve, and the special teams too...

mtzlblk

November 7th, 2010 at 12:52 PM ^

Go cheer for another team, really, go away.....

If you look at that offense next year returning nearly every starter with progress in execution, an expanded bag of tricks and cutting down mistakes.....it is scary

The defense can only get better, in 1-2 years they will be returning almost all their starters and every player will have 2-3 (in some cases 4) years of starting experience, the only ones that don't will be recruits that displaces experienced starters. Nowhere to go but up. 

This program could very well be unstoppable in 2-3 years, you and your ilk will just need to eat it then, swallow all your negative nellie BS and eat it.......seriously, eat it now.

You are an embarrassment as a fan, no doubt you will hop right back on the bandwagon when we start winning all the time....right when the weather is fair again

Kvothe

November 6th, 2010 at 3:54 PM ^

I cannot believe we just won a game 67 to 65!!!  Our bball team may not score that much.  The doubters don't doubt the offense though.  I can't believe how good Tate played there!  GO BLUE!!!!

SFBayAreaBlue

November 6th, 2010 at 3:57 PM ^

not to hate, but he had 2 bad turnovers, several bad decisions, including the lucky bounce that would have ended the game if stonum hadn't caught the TD.  I just figure karma is starting to swing back our way to even things out a bit.  god knows we've built up quite the credit.

teldar

November 6th, 2010 at 4:04 PM ^

that I would go that far, but wow. Don't know what to think of the illini, but I did actually think the d looked... better? Avery looked good. Talbott the smaller had a good stop on special teams, Vinopal had a few good plays. Noticed Cam had a couple good plays.
Without 5 t.o.'s and a little better consistency (first year starter, can't knock denard for that too much), this game wouldn't have been close.