CC: The MGoBubble

Submitted by dahblue on December 3rd, 2010 at 11:35 AM

The current uncertainty with the football program seems to have strengthened what I call "the MGoBubble".  This is a bubble whereby those who disagree with the opinions of the vast majority of Michigan fans (roughly 75% of whom want RR fired...if you can believe a highly unscientific poll in the News) and sports media (booooo MSM!  boooo!!!) angrily retreat to avoid hearing that which is not what they want to believe.

I know that I risk an epic negbomb, but I assume the risk in making the present post.  There are a number of great things about RichRod.  He is clearly doing everything he can to turn our program into a winner; he cares deeply about his players; his offense is innovative and explosive; he produced winning records at other programs; and, he is a Michigan Man.  I know...that last one is a touchy point, but to me, if you put your heart and soul into coaching our Wolverines, then you've earned the title.  Rich has.

There are also a number of things about RichRod's performance that indicate he might not be the guy for the job.  In posting this, I merely hope to pierce the MGoBubble.  To take the blinders off of those who would attack any messenger who dare note a problem with the team.  There is no problem with defending the coach, but please, can those in the bubble cease with the:

-My 13 year old gets it buy you don't
-Only an idiot would consider firing RR...he deserves an extension, douchebag!
-You're not a fan; you're an asshole!
-You're not "All In".
-Haters gonna hate images
-Kitten pictures
-Pictures of explosions

Then, there's the litany of excuses:

-"It's Carr's fault (one poster even blamed our current problems on the emotional damage that Carr did to the team in retiring)."
-"It's the media's fault" (and yes, we can still all agree the Freep was well out-of-bounds)
-"It's the fans fault."
-"It's Scott Schafer's fault"
-"It's Greg Robinson's fault"
-"It's Jamie Morris's fault"
-"Things are great now; I don't count the first year"
-"Things are great now; I don't count the first or second year"

Here's the bottom line...If you've raised an excuse (or perhaps, "explanation")...then you, somewhere, somehow understand that there is a problem that merits discussion.  Defending the performance of RR (explosive offense, good guy, etc.) is just as valid as arguing that he hasn't done enough to prove he can lead the program to the NC level (which is what he was hired to do).  If you're defending RR, however, maybe drop the angry attacks and take a peek outside of the bubble to understand that all of those people who disagree with you (there are a ton) might have some valid thoughts.

-It's fair to note that the young defense has no depth as 32% of defensive commits have left the program under RichRod (again, that doesn't mean he's a bag guy, or that there aren't reasons kids left, but it's a statistical reality).
-It's fair to note that we haven't beaten OSU or MSU under RR.
-It's fair to note that our potent offense has not been as potent against top half Big Ten competition. (or that RR hasn't beaten a Big Ten team with a winning conference record)
-It's fair to note that we weren't a garbage program before RR got here and that RR's improvement from 3-9 kinda ignores the lengthy history before that season.

This blog is great.  The bubble is not.  Go Blue!


Mr. Robot

December 3rd, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^

I don't care if people think RR should be fired, DB is dropping the ball, or whatever anymore. I just want to stop seeing a sea of threads about it and complaining about it, and trying to understand people's opinions about it.

He's still the coach, is going to be until at least late December, at which point he will still be and we rest our 2011 hopes in him, or he isn't and we rest our 2011 hopes in someone else. No questions, no debate, that's the way its going to happen. And before someone says "If you don't like it, why did you click on the thread?", the title is "MGoBubble", which tells me nothing about the content until I read it.


Edit: BTW, what does CC mean? I've noticed this on the front of a couple threads, and I must have missed what the tag means.


December 3rd, 2010 at 11:48 AM ^

I believe CC = Coaching Change.  If that's not exactly right, it's correct in spirit.  The idea was that anything labelled CC wouldn't be looked at by the people who are sick of hearing about the coaching change.  But, it hasn't really worked out so well in practice.


December 3rd, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^

If you have a milkshake and I have a milkshake and I have a straw and my straw reaches across the room and starts to drink your milkshake. I drink your milkshake! I drink it up! 

and by that i mean i downvoted this post

Desmonlon Edwoodson

December 3rd, 2010 at 11:43 AM ^

Is the mgoblog:

A. A propaganda board for recruiting/literal pep rally

B. A discussion board for all things Michigan sports

C, An aggrigator of knowledge for all things Michigan sports

B and C can co-exist quite well together, but there are going to be times when A is not going to be compatible with B and C.

This is on the front of every mind that follows Michigan sports.  People are going to want to talk about it.


December 3rd, 2010 at 11:47 AM ^

when every person needs to create their own threat, the intelligence and information is diluted across 8-10 threads. if someone makes a great point about why a coach deserves four years, it's only in one thread of 10. so if you're going through the first five and think 'aw screw it, i don't care anymore,' the potential of learning is removed. as a result of each person's LOOKATMYPOSTI'MIMPORTANT, no discourse is possible because it's spread across too many threads. and people who would normally have the patience to engage in discussion find that they can't keep up with 8 different convos and just leave. this repeated meme that "people are going to want to talk about it" is asinine. talking about the possibility of a coaching change does need to be talked about. it isn't being talked about in a proper manner because of overposting. 


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:20 PM ^

I wouldn't say that's truly ironic.  That would be more along the lines of girl meets man of her dreams but he's married, so they have an affair.  By having the affair, the man realizes how much he loves his wife and leaves to reconcile.

The man on the plane is also ironic, but only because he says "Isn't this  nice".  The waiting his whole damn life part is ambiguous.  If he waited his whole damn life because he was afraid of dying because of a plane crash, but suddenly got over his fear and realized planes were actually pretty safe, but then he ends up dying on the first flight he takes, that is ironic.  But only if he thinks its safe and got over his fear.

I realize that doesn't fit well into song form.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^

It is never said in the song that he has an affair with said woman. That is a hypothetical. Even is said hypothetical played out, she would still want more than a bang every once in a while. Then proceeds a messy divorce that leaves the man broke. The man falls into a deep depression because of the lost of his life savings and possible children visitation. This would drive the woman who once thought he was the man of her dreams to drinking. Can you see where this is going? I say still ironic.

If none of the examples in her song are ironic and she sings about irony, doesn't that make the song ironic still?


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:45 PM ^

The situation is unfortunate.  Just like rain on your wedding day.  If I meet a smart, charming, witty, beautiful woman who happens to be a University of Michigan graduate of roughly the same age, taller but not too tall, and she's married, that is not irony.  That is merely unfortunate.

If I were remarking to my best friend that all girls of said type were married, and then happen to run into one, but instead of liking me she ends up falling in love with the best friend and they get married, that would be ironic.

And yes, if all of the situations are not ironic in a song about irony titled Ironic, that is also Ironic.  That leads back to the point I made originally.  Alanis trolled everybody.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:18 PM ^

i didn't call you dumb. this is a theme a lot of people don't get. you can say someone made a bitchy comment without calling them a bitch. etc.  i called the meme asinine - that you used it is not my concern.

people keep excusing 90 posts about one topic with the strawman argument that people not in favor of 90 are in favor of 0. yes, it's going to be discussed. discuss it in one of the threads already created

Red is Blue

December 3rd, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^

I don't know the mechanics -- but wouldn't one solution to the whole problem be the creation of a second forum dedicated to the CC.  That is the CC converstation take place in the MGoCC forum and other topics get discussed in the MGoBoard forum.  Under such a construct it would be just plain silly to have complaints in the CC forum about the number of CC threads (not that it won't happen).  That alone would eliminate a lot of comments.


December 3rd, 2010 at 11:47 AM ^

Bottom line: Offense is getting there...(people who refute that...well, i'm not going to change their mind.  Defense... atrocious...everyone agrees.

People who want to hold onto the "RR's system won't work" should really stop talking, because that's absolutely ludicrous.  If you support firing him, don't base it off opinions like those. 

If you think he's done a crappy job developing players.. fine.  But damnit, we have a BT Offensive POY. 

Just stop to think about what has gone right for M football, and what's gone wrong.  In my opinion the good is starting to outweigh the bad.  I think people just can't forgive/forget 3-9, 5-7.

That's all I care to say about this topic at this point.

skunk bear

December 3rd, 2010 at 12:16 PM ^

Why then, don't you make a coaching change "sticky", keep it at the top of the board and have everybody who wants to talk about it, use that ?

Nobody wants to post what they consider a fresh idea at the  bottom of a post with 100+ reponses on page 3 of the MGoBoard.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:17 PM ^

in the meantime, i don't see why a fresh idea can't be posted at the bottom. does it need that much attention?

also, fwiw, if you change your viewing preferences to allow 300 (i think) comments per page, this stuff gets way easier

Mitch Cumstein

December 3rd, 2010 at 11:48 AM ^

You realize that this blog is "the bubble" right?  You writing this post isn't going to bring anyone to "reality".  The information is out there, and people interpret it how they want. The majority on this site buy into the excuses or explanations. Bringing this up here isn't going to do anything.  I'm actually starting to understand the legislative efforts of "profitgoblue".


December 3rd, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^

My apologies to those that this will annoy but I simply must do it, if only because I do not like to be told how to proceed in a thread about a topic that has been discussed ad nauseum:

Please be advised that you have violated the Prohibition on Coaching Change Opinions Act of 2010 (hereafter, the "Act"), profligated by Profitgoblue on November 30, 2010.  In particular, you have violated Articles 2(d) and 2(e) of the Act. 

(See )

Please be further advised that, pursuant to Article 3 of the Act, the minimum fine for this violation is the loss of one (1) MGoPoint, with the maximum to be determined by the MGoCommunity.

Please be further advised that, pursuant to Article 5 of the Act, if you dispute the application of the Act to your thread/post, you have twenty-four (24) hours to "file" a formal written appeal by replying to this post.  All appeals will be considered on their merits as soon as practical, unless deemed to be frivolous by Profitgoblue in his sole discretion.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:01 PM ^

So here's where I'm confused (and thus, more bubble-think)...You have this ban on coaching change talk (understandable) but it's ok when folks post thread after thread about defensive coaching changes (which assumes RR keeps his job)?   Actually, it looks like your "Act" is a codification of the bubble:


Article 2- Infractions, Defined

(a) Thou shalt not, under any circumstances, discuss Jim Harbaugh in connection with the Michigan head coaching job unless and until Rich Rodriguez has officially been relieved of his current contractual obligations.

(b)  Thou shalt not, under any circumstances, lobby for or otherwise argue in support of the firing of Rich Rodriguez until at least the end of 2011.'s ok to argue that RR is a genius, but forbidden to point out potential flaws which might merit firing until "at least the end of 2011"?  Bubble.  Defined.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:11 PM ^

You make a very good and well-reasoned argument.  However, I think there there are a few problems in the thinking.  First, I cannot police all threads about Greg Robinson in addition to the head coach discussions.  Second, in my opinion, the head coach discussions were much more vindictive and polarizing to the fan base.  As such, multiple posts on the topic, day after day, serves no purpose other than to further polarize the fanbase.  This was the public policy behind the creation of the Act. 

Although I recognize that the Act is now out of favor, the policy behind it still applies.  You may present the discussion differently but the MGoBubble post is no different than all of the other threads on the head coaching job in that it includes all kinds of personal opinion on a subject that has already been hashed and re-hashed. 

Geaux_Blue has it right and may have stated it more succinctly.  For all those that want a piece of unsolicited advice . . . Before starting a thread, first consider whether any good can come of it.  If there is any doubt, don't bother.  Why post something that is just going to piss something off for absolutely no reason other than the OP's desire to get something off his/her chest?


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:13 PM ^

First, I appreciate the reasoned and civil discussion.  Second, I think that every "GERG must go" thread is, in essence, a "RR must stay" thread.  As you have decided to take the role of legislator and policeman, it seems that you can't turn a blind eye to all such "crime".  As for "personal opinion" seems only problematic when disagreed with by the Bubble.

Anyway, I kinda like the "CC" thing.  It lets folks know to just stay away if it bothers you.  It's a simple method that saves you much hassle.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:50 PM ^

I'm glad to have a discussion like this, especially about a topic that many people are unable to discuss in a civil and intelligent manner.  Instead of making each other more intelligent and learned, reading posts on this topic has actually made me a very angry person.

I'll be honest - I never even thought about the fact that a "fire GERG" thread might be akin to a "keep Rodriguez" thread.

I agree about the "CC" preface to threads.  My problem is that I still cannot avoid them.  Yes, I do have mental issues.


December 3rd, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^

I get what you're trying to say, but your blatent disregard for the second bubble has me worried. What about the littany of fans who want him fired NOW, and talk about how great Harbaugh would be etc. etc. etc.? They can't possibly be swayed by the other side either. They already assume RR's gone, and badmouth the guy at will, most especially calling him "not a Michigan Man". Why can't we try and pierce that bubble too?

Is it because, shockingly, you are a diehard Harbaugh guy?

There are many of us somewhere in the this point I'm mostly a "wait and see what DB does" guy, though hearing RR's comments at the Bust may have solidified my stance that RR should be retained. And what you call "excuses"...many of those are valid reasons, not one single one which absolves RR of any blame but taken together help to show why RR has struggled so far here. They're not excuses. They're reasons. Carr deserves some blame. So does Gerg. So does RR. Let's not sit here and pretend RR is 100% guilty for where the program is at.


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:08 PM ^

Your comments are interesting.  Is there a second (and opposite bubble)?  I really don't think so.  By reading MGoBlog and posting here one is, by that very act, exposing oneself to an opposing viewpoint.  Those in the MGoBubble are like vampires in the sun when exposed to concerns with the program.

Am I a "diehard Harbaugh guy"?  No.  I think he's a very good coach who has demonstrated an ability to turn a terrible program into a good one with far less resources available than in A2.  I would prefer him to RR, but I think there are many good coaches in the nation.  Of course, RR is not 100% at fault for the state of the program, but as the captain of the ship, he must carry the burden. 


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:32 PM ^

Yes there are two bubbles, and you are so far burried in the "other one" that you fail to see the hypocracy of your whole post.

While some important people here on MGoBlog have argued for the retention of RR.  The average poster is about split.  They both act similarly when confronted with the other view point and refuse to acknowledge that there are any merits in it.  They noth accuse the other side of being in denial blah blah blah.

Funny thing is, after you did just what you accuse the bubble people of doing, you turn around and tell a rather level headed poster that he is wrong,  that your side does not reside in a bubble. Yourside is 100% correct and the other is 100% wrong (in the bubble)  Its classic stuff really.


December 3rd, 2010 at 1:02 PM ^

Agreeing/disagreeing is fine.  That wasn't my point at all.  Those "in the MGoBubble" seem to drop heavy negs/rant/insult opposing viewpoints.  Being "in the bubble" means that you don't tolerate and/or avoid exposure to opposing viewpoints.  This MGoBlog is, essentially, a pro-RR lobby at this point.  Someone who takes issue with RR's performance while following/posting here shows a complete willingness to expose oneself to those opposing viewpoints.  


December 3rd, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^

Certainly not as big of a bubble on this blog here, but it's certainly there in my mind. There are many people who are posting opposing viewpoints with no intention at finding a middle ground...and that's the other side here. Now, many of them are trolls who get negged into "Bolivian" anyway...but there is a contingent on here who have nothing good to say and repeat that they want RR gone over and over again. Like I said, not as big as the bubble you mention, but it's there.

Also, you should distinguish something...the bubbles might not necessarily be pro vs anti RR, but rather the bubble is people who are sick of seeing the same topic discussed ad nauseum over and over again on this here blog vs those that feel the need to post a CC topic with titles that include words like "GHGSHGFCGCAGCG" and want to talk about this topic all day long with posts like "I'm being overly vague here and making no sense, but my conclusion from this story you don't understand is that RR is gone after the bowl game"


December 3rd, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^

If people would be sick of just the whole CC discussion in general then you would expect to see both pro-RR and anti-RR comments on this issue to be negged to death. That's not what's happening--hence supporting the OPs statement.

The one issue i have seen regarding this topic is that those who are bashing individuals who have come to the conclusion that RR might not be the right fit here are lumping them all into one basket. Some have hated RR indeed since day 1, others came to the conclusion he was not a good fit after year 1, others arrived at it after this season ended (myself included). My reasons are purely performance based. For others, they may be more emotional (not a Michigan Man, what's this hick from WV doing coaching here, you name it).

This goes to what the OP is saying - everyone is just resolving to name calling when there have been three years for people to analyze and make their own judgments about the future of this team. Some continue to stick by him and think he will take us where we need to go--that's great. It doesnt make contrary opinions less credible. They are just opinions after all.