CC: "Maybe he misspoke" - JH on Stanford AD

Submitted by Abe Froman on December 25th, 2010 at 12:31 AM

Happy holidays fellow Wolverines.

Just read this and found it interesting.  MANY apologies if someone has beat me to it and this is a repost; I tried searching and didn't see that it has already come up.

Summarizing the DetNews:

Harbaugh has yet to sign with Stanford, and when asked about his supposedly pending contract extension he stated:

"I haven't even discussed it."

Perhaps more interesting, when asked to respond to remarks from the Stanford AD implying that Harbaugh will sign the contract, "Maybe he misspoke."

From The Detroit News:



December 25th, 2010 at 1:22 AM ^

earlier tonight but decided not to post it on here. I didn't think that posting a "new" CC thread was going to enlighten anyone. It would be the equivalent to getting coals in your Christmas stocking. 


December 25th, 2010 at 1:51 AM ^

I'm sneaking down to play Santa for the young kids in the family and I think "Hmmm, just a moment on the laptop while I eat these cookies, what could possibly...."

Next thing I know I'm choking on a cookie.  Thanks for the present Jim.

To be honest though I'm not convinced this sheds any light on CC.  Jim's name has been floated for the NFL as well (49ers).  It could mean he has a pro gig locked up or it could mean he has the Michigan gig locked up.  I guess it's more likely Michigan would hire him than the pros.  At the same time though it's not like Stanford is going to fire him so he can discuss that extension at his leisure (and possibly after a BCS Bowl win gives him even more leverage in discussing it).  

Edward Khil

December 25th, 2010 at 4:35 AM ^

(And it's not his ego.)

I read this, too, but most people who read mgoblog will also wander over to detnews, so I didn't post.

But OP is right that this sheds a few photons.  JH is not making kissy-face with his AD, that's for sure.


December 25th, 2010 at 3:22 AM ^

or regular contributor at one of the paid sites that basically said that JH spoke these words directly to him.   But, there was nothing beyond that. 

Could mean several things..  I'm going to the NFL with Luck.  I'm waiting to go to Michigan.  Or I'm to busy preping my team, dealing with my newest child and family to deal with this now. Or I;m making the Stanford AD wait and negotiate a better deal.  Anyway none of what I just wrote makes any difference it's just more speculation.  


December 25th, 2010 at 12:32 PM ^

I think if the NFL thing is happening for Harbaugh, that he'll wait at least one year. With a decent chance of their being a lockout I don't think he would leave to spend his time sitting around doing nothing. There has also been a lot of speculation from NFL guys (I'm thinking Peter King here) that NFL teams are not going to throw alot of money around on new coaches that are likely to not actually be spending the time coaching. It's going to be more of a promoting coordinator types. Also lockout would mean little or no training camp, and teams are more likely to hire from within because it might be too difficult for someone from outside to come up to speed.


December 25th, 2010 at 7:22 AM ^

Happy holidays, folks.

I may be dead wrong, but I have thought for a few weeks now that  DB's complete lack of affirmation of RichRod as coach next year combined with no movement  toward a new contract on the Harbaugh/Stanford front is sending a message.  Same old song, but not for much longer.

As for the impact on recruiting, should the change occur, Stanford is ranked 10 on Rivals...wouldn't you think some of those kids might just come to Michigan? 


December 25th, 2010 at 9:14 AM ^

I have come to the conclusion that the only guy on the planet who could truly understand what's going on with CC right now would've been M.C. Escher.  Every clue can be read two ways.  Silence is's bad.    Recruits are they're not.  JH signed an he didn't.....but he he won't....he's going to NFL.


December 25th, 2010 at 9:35 AM ^

To answer your question: Yes. Or maybe even better. How many guys are there from his prospects list could he not get admitted to Stanford, whom he could make a run at to come to Michigan? No one knows.

I am more uneasy about our recruiting if we stay the course to be honest. We have no idea how many really good defensive recruits Rich isn't pursuing because he is mistargeting towards undersized players like he has the first 3 years. Nor do we know how many good defensive recruits are not including us on their list because our defense has been so poor the last couple years.

A Harbaugh hiring would likely firm us up with defensive guys that we want to keep or get a verbal from. Jim also might open up a whole new world of possibilities with players we never heard of. 


December 25th, 2010 at 11:48 AM ^

I don't know that anyone felt our recruiting would improve under RR.  He wasn't exactly pulling top 10 classes at WVU.  Maybe some people did think, "...with the Michigan name behind him, he'll really be able to do damage...".   Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "damage".


December 25th, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^

He has pulled in 2 classes that were ranked fairly well considering everything surronding the program.  I wonder how good recruiting would be if his job wasn't constantly in question. 


December 25th, 2010 at 12:27 PM ^

And how good would those classes have been if he had put a better product on the field?  Nothing hurt recruiting nearly as much as his losing.  Maybe people offer so many excuses for the coach because he leads the parade.  Here's one of his latest doozies:

"The first year, we didn't have much time," he said. "The second year, there was drama. Then, there was the NCAA thing. Now, there's another obstacle."

All he had to do was win games.  "Another obstacle"?  Does he mean being on the hot seat because he hasn't done well as the coach?  Record aside, I think a coach so unwilling to accept the blame for his own failures sets a terrible example.  Contrast RR with DB who accepted responsibility for the NCAA sanctions before he even began the new job.  Oh well, "At least we're fun to watch"...right?


December 25th, 2010 at 12:34 PM ^

I knew you were going to say that.  Check my post.  His record is his record.  But, give me a break.  People were calling for him to be fired after the first year.  Most first year coaches don't have to deal with job insecurity.  And he has had to deal with it from the get go. 

Just imagine what his recruiting class could have looked like for the first 2 years if he did not have to deal with job insecurity.  If people were behind him from the start, not sure all that negative recruiting would have had a bigger impact.  I can't say anything for this year, because RR needs to take ownership. 


December 25th, 2010 at 12:44 PM ^

That's the thing...why always the passive voice?  RR, as we both agree, is responsible for his record.  It didn't happen to him.  He had the job insecurity because he lost 9 games at Michigan, broke all the worst records, etc.  If he won games (which would have been easier if he weren't so stubbornly in love with his system instead of his potential players), he would have been in a better situation.  He made the bed.


December 25th, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^

I agree. When he calls Ryan Mallett a couple times and doesn't hear back from him and he transfers leaving a mediocre to bad redshirt freshmen and a walk-on QB, I can't believe he lost all those games. He should have run an offense that would have won games. How silly.

Also, you missed the point as usual. People wanted him gone before he coached his first game and nothing is going to change that. That normally doesn't happen. He could win 8 games this year and it doesn't matter because Jim Harbaugh has proved he is the best coach in America. I mean, he went to a BCS bowl game at a place like Stanford. That is like doing it at a smaller Big East school, which we all know would ensure victories at Michigan.

And if you are going to cherry pick quotes with no context, I guess you can be as uneducated as you want. In that stellar quote you wrote, he wasn't blaming anyone or making excuses, he was saying how he thought it would be easier to recruit if there wasn't so much negativity around the program. Those three things were all in reference to recruiting, not winning games. But go on, misuse his quotes. You are as bad as the freep misquoting our freshmen.


December 25th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^

Cherry pick quotes?  Then you say... "He wasn't making excuses, he was saying how he thought it would be easier to recruit if there wasn't..."   That's an excuse.  My quote came from the following piece where RR says he won't lobby for the job (even though that's exactly what he did during the sing-a-long banquet.

It's so tiring to hear about how "people wanted him gone before he coached his first game".  You know what he could have done to change their opinion?  Win.  Not lose to Toledo.  Not lose every game he played to MSU and OSU.  He could win 8 games this year and it "won't matter" (as you say) because he hasn't beaten a winning (in-conference) Big Ten team, MSU or OSU.  He needed multiple-OT's to beat a bad Illinois team.  He barely beat other sucks like UMass, Indiana and Purdue.   It will be his best year and he's stuck in the muck of middle-low Big Ten.  If you see a solid team in Michigan; your homerism has overtaken your brain.

I'm as bad as the freep?  Get out of the MGoBubble.   In the real world, folks realize that RR is a not a poor, misunderstood martyr for the spread-option...he's a millionaire who tried his best but might not be the right guy for Michigan.


December 25th, 2010 at 2:57 PM ^

It is easy to argue something when you change your argument all the time. You originally stated that RichRod blames everything on everyone else and it sets a bad example. Then, you used that quote as if RichRod were complaining about something. Usually when people say he blames everyone for everything, they are talking about wins and losses. That is what you were originally talking about, no? You keep pointing to all of his wins and losses but then use a quote about recruiting to make your point about him "blaming everyone else and setting a bad example?" That doesn't really make sense. Why didn't you use the quote from that same article where RichRod decilines to comment on what he would say to Dave Brandon to keep his job because "It would sound like I'm lobbying for my job.......I've got a great job and we're looking forward to finishing it." I know why you didn't use it...because then you couldn't vilify RichRod like you do in every post.

But I guess if you think beating a ranked SEC team at a nuetral site doesn't mean anything, go for it. You are also the same person who says stupid shit like "RichRod doesn't get our rivalries or else he would win them more" while forgetting about our rivalry with ND because you think it doesn't matter. The funny thing about Illinois....I bet you were one of the ones saying we had no chance to beat them and that they were really good. Now it is a negative that we came away with a W? Interesting logic. And if you use the logic that they were good, but they weren't good by the end of the year, then how does that stick with your "MSU isn't a very good team" theory? They are ranked at the end of the year, but in your mind that is just a glorified exhibition game? Like I have said before, I am glad you aren't our AD. In the real world, I never said he was poor misunderstood martyr. If you would have read what I wrote, I said people wanted him fired before he set foot on the football field as a coach and nothing will change those people's minds. That does not equal him being accepted if he wins. He isn't going to be accepted because he isn't a Michigan Man rabble rabble. People, like yourself, still justify their opinions by saying he doesn't get our rivalries, which is completely false and pretty fucking stupid, so do you think winning would have changed that? No. If he were 2-1 against OSU and 0-3 against ND, you would bitch about him losing to bad ND teams and say he needs to be fired. Like I originally said that you chose not to listen doesn't matter what he does, people who don't like him are not going to like him until he wins a national title.


December 25th, 2010 at 4:18 PM ^

You didn't actually counter one thing he said in his argument. "mgobubble" was a great way of describing your (and many others on this blog's) disillusionment, hilarious.

If you think that there is so much talk about his job security because "he's not a michigan man rabble rabble", and not because he is 0-13 against B10 teams with a winning record, or got blown out by double digits in 5 games in his third year, then you should honestly stop following football.

The hell with whether he "gets our rivalries" or not, just stop getting blown out in them. All you did in your post was 1) make up your own reasons for why people want RR to be fired (reasons that aren't even the true issues that people are complaining about) and then 2) disprove your own made up reasoning and fail to address anything the fire-RR advocator said. 

I assure you it is not because he isn't a michigan man, or how he feels about the rivalries, it is because he has turned the program into a national laughing stock for the past 3 years. You just don't realize it because the only football talk you are ever exposed to is the mgobubble.


EDIT: Dahblue mentioned wins and losses as an issue, then addressed recruiting also, and you tried to call  him out for it. Do you realize that RR has been awful in both? Just because dahblue is addressing multiple issues that RR has, doesn't mean that he is contradicting himself. Your argument comprehension skills are incredibly awful... yikes.


December 25th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^

It's really hard to read whatever it is you wrote since you never seem to take a breathe.  From what I did read...dude...stop making things up and pretending I said them.  You've ignored every point I made and seem unable to separate a critique of RR's performance with a critique of RR.  

I never said he wasn't a "Michigan Man" (actually, I've said the opposite here...he's a Michigan Man, just not a successful one).  I never said he "doesn't get our rivalries"...he just doesn't win them.).  Most of all, because you're so sadly lost in the MGoBubble, you can't even allow yourself to look at objective criteria and understand it to be 100% rational for people to want RR fired. 


December 25th, 2010 at 5:53 PM ^

Actually, yes you did say he didn't get the rivalries. You even questioned whether him getting these rivalries was the reason he wasn't winning them. But feel free to say you didn't. I guess you are going to say ND isn't a real rivalry now, right? Because he has won 2 out of 3 in that one, right? You and the guy above you can go on saying that the reasons I mentioned aren't why you want him fired....and then bring them up in all of your posts.


December 25th, 2010 at 11:02 PM ^

Is beating ND (19-17 record in the past 3 years) 2 out of 3 times supposed to come anywhere near making up for going 0-6 vs OSU and MSU? Especially considering we lost those 6 games by a total of 110 points...

I don't care about him beating notre dame when we have been losing to msu and osu every game by an average of 3 touchdowns for the past 3 years. Since you don't seem to get it... that (among other things) is why I want him fired.


December 26th, 2010 at 2:18 AM ^

Did you even read my post or did you have that response already made up? What you are talking about has to do with RR getting our rivalries. Dahblue said he didn't "get" them and then asked if that was possibly the reason he was losing them. When Notre Dame was pointed out, Dahblue decided that ND wasn't that important of a rivalry and that MSU and OSU were way more important, sort of like your stance. Why would we care about ND when we can point to MSU and OSU as a reason to fire him? Oh, I know, because he has a winning record against them and that doens't go well with your "RR doesn't get rivalries" stance.