CC: Rivals mods seem to be expecting some changes

Submitted by Magnus on December 24th, 2010 at 12:58 PM

The mods over at Rivals posted an Inside the Fort (super-premium info) article today.  And while I won't quote any exact information because of its premium nature, it seemed to be hinting at some big things going on in Ann Arbor:

- It sounds like an NFL coach plans to be in Ann Arbor next year (they wouldn't say whether it's a head coach or a coordinator)

- It sounds like there might be some academic ineligibility for the bowl game

- From my interpretation, it sounds like they believe Rodriguez will be here next year.

As you might expect, there's a lot of reading between the lines to be done.  So take this for what it's worth.

Have a good holiday, everyone!



December 25th, 2010 at 9:33 PM ^

What’s being floated today is that there’s more than one potential outcome here, but that would mean plenty of work to do following the bowl game (starting with Rodriguez’s evaluation) - and we’re not seeing it based on what we’ve heard from everyone who knows how Brandon operates.

I took this to mean that there would be plenty of work to change regimes, and that behind-the-scenes work does not seem to be happening.  In other words, the groundwork isn't being laid to start things over again with a new coach.  I can maybe see how people would interpret that line otherwise, but that's my take on it.


December 24th, 2010 at 1:10 PM ^

.. that there were academic issues, but just that the grades weren't in for a lot of players because Michigan has school almost up until Christmas day*.

*If I had 1 complaint about the university, it would be that my Christmas break is shorter than my brother's and he's in high school.

OMG Shirtless

December 24th, 2010 at 1:15 PM ^

At least the school year ends early.  The real complaint is having Spring Break at a time that only coincides about two schools including the Central Wackalaka State University School for the Ugly.  (They may have actually moved Spring Break by now, it was always one of the student government campaign promises)


December 24th, 2010 at 1:14 PM ^

I heard that Buddy Ryan is going to be our defensive coordinator and turn this defense into the '85 Bears defense.
In all seriousness, with this news I'm very intrigued to see who this said coach is


December 24th, 2010 at 1:51 PM ^

Buddy Ryan mention led me to Jets site-- Bob Sutton is their LB coach, grad. ass't under Bo (no wonder they drafted Hobson & Harris).  [Was moved back to LB coach after 3 years as DC when Ryan came over.  Since Ryan's a defensive guru, keeping him says something about his ability.  But could make someone look elsewhere...] 

And look at his hair!

 Even more rampant speculation/daydreaming from that website alone:

Jets' "defensive line/defense coach" is Mark Carrier, whose previous job was as Baltimore's DB coach after a few years coaching high school and college.... And I hear he played pretty well himself... Hmm.  Knows defensive line and secondary....

And if we could afford a special teams coach...

Okay.  Back to reality. 


December 24th, 2010 at 4:40 PM ^

is straight out of central casting for seemingly helpful neighbor who turns out to be a total pychopath!! Look at those eyes...

" he's got lifeless eyes. Like a doll's eyes. When he comes at ya, doesn't seem to be living... until he bites ya, and those eyes roll over white and then... ah then you hear that terrible high-pitched screamin'. The ocean turns red, and despite all the poundin' and the hollerin', they all come in and they... rip you to pieces."


December 24th, 2010 at 1:16 PM ^

Anyone who claims they know something doesn't. I think I read that before

 How good is this situation for Rivalas and Scout.  Absolutely no information out there, fans desperate for info.  They have a license to make up as much crap as they want with no real consequences.   Yeah throw in a NFL in there that will keep people excited.  Only 8 more days left.


December 24th, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^

The Rivals mods don't know sh!t.  They're just trying to sell subscriptions.  I talked to a guy (and you're just going to have to take our words here, lol) that talked to Dave Brandon for over an hour on WEDNESDAY and he still had absolutely no idea where he was leaning.


December 24th, 2010 at 1:18 PM ^

game that will factor into DB's analysis of the job RR is/has done.  That cannot be favorable.   RR has hung his hat on the academic numbers while he has been coach and I believe they have been favorable.  But if any key players are missing on Jan. 1 and there is a loss that day, it cannot bode well for our embattled coach.

If there is a loss, academic eligibilty questions, especially a punter(OMG) and the number DB has to work with and he waits two months to announce the coach is staying, he's going to have some serious questions to answer in January.  A stud DC from the NFL may not be enough of an answer if the rest is true.  Will he have to run the 3-3-5 too?


December 24th, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^

The bowl game should not be a factor in the decision on RR (positive or negative).  I'm happy to be able to watch my team beyond November, but whether we win or lose, it has very little to do with how RR can/will do in the future.  He has a resume of three years and one game, against an ok opponent (oooh, big bag Mississippi State) shouldn't make a difference at all.


December 24th, 2010 at 3:27 PM ^

I think you, in the quest to defend RR, missed the point...

Does a win over the #21 team in the country really count as a "big victory"?  Whether you think RR has done enough to keep his job or the opposite, this game shouldn't matter in terms of his evaluation.

As one who thinks that RR deserves to lose his job, I'd say that, even if we beat the #5 team in the SEC West (yes, that's right, "big win"), it would not erase the following:

-We have not beaten a Big Ten (our conference) team with a winning conference record
-We are not competitive with the top half of the conference.
-We have not beaten our two main rivals.

If you're a RR supporter, even if we lose, you might think:

-We're young, so a loss to an SEC team doesn't change anything.
-Our offense is dynamic but can stall from time to time because it's young.
-Denard had 258 total yards.

Point being, folks, don't be so damn touchy.   Whatever the outcome, whatever ones opinion of RR...the bowl game shouldn't make a difference other than giving some entertainment on Jan. 1.


December 24th, 2010 at 4:22 PM ^

The wins over ND (no matter the state of their program) are RR's best wins at Michigan.  They are a rival, but OSU and MSU are, frankly, bigger games and are in conference.  Getting doubled up by MSU, at home, doesn't cut it.  When teams are beating us so badly that they take their foot off the gas (Wisc, OSU), tis time for a change.


December 24th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^

MSU is a bigger game than ND? Maybe this year and next, but historically that is a f'ing joke. If we were 2-1 against MSU under rich rod, and 0-3 against ND you'd be saying the exact opposite. Go away.


December 24th, 2010 at 5:38 PM ^

This isn't true.  Michigan expects to beat MSU and has done so with regularity in the past (67-30-5 all time and 13-7 over the last 20 years.)  MSU had never beaten Michigan thrice in a row until now.

On the other hand, ND is a historically strong program that Michigan is happy to play 0.500 ball against and that's exactly what has happened since the series resumed in the 70s.  Michigan has never beaten ND thrice in a row in the modern era.

During Rodriguez's brief tenure, he's managed to meet expectations against ND but has fallen way short against MSU.


December 25th, 2010 at 11:59 AM ^

Get out of the MGoBubble for a minute.

I love the ND game and have always enjoyed it (my freshman year saw "the catch"), but it's not as big a rivalry as our in-state rival.  We have played ND 38 times.  We have played MSU 103 times.

Outside of the bubble, facts make a difference.  We've played nearly triple the games and they're an in-state rival.  State, by its very nature, is a bigger rival.  Only someone blinded by the bubble could think otherwise.  We expect to beat State every year (well, until RR came to town) and expect ND to be a tighter game, but it matters more to beat State and silence the little sisters scattered around the state.


December 25th, 2010 at 12:48 PM ^

So you think State would never be as good as us because we expect to beat them every year.  State will have some teams like they do now and in the 60's.  They have a great team this year and beat most teams.  MSU is big for in state recrutiing and beating ND is better for out of state recruiting.  Both rivalries are important.  I am not happy we lose to State and I wouldn't be happy if things were switched and we lost to ND for 3 straight years.


December 25th, 2010 at 1:03 PM ^

I'm not following.  I was replying to a guy who said that the State rivalry was a "fucking joke".  I don't want to lose to anyone 3 years in a row, but State, is a bigger rivalry.  Period.  By the way, State isn't "great".  They're the worst one-loss team in the country.  


December 25th, 2010 at 1:14 PM ^

Ok, I didn't read all the post above.  MSU is the worst 1 loss team and isn't great.  How many teams in the country from BCS conferences or all of D1 have a better record.  And worst one loss team.  They beat the other one loss team from the B1G and didn't play the other. 


December 25th, 2010 at 1:49 PM ^

They escaped from Purdue, NW and ND with trick plays, blocked punts, etc.  They could easily have been a 4/5 loss team.  The win against Wisc was a very good one, but "great" teams don't get trucked by 30+ at home.  They also played a D-IAA team and a new D-I team.  Their schedule was among the weakest in the conference.   When you avoid top competition, it isn't that hard to win lots of game (see, for example, our bball team right now...I love them, but I won't claim them to be great).


December 25th, 2010 at 1:58 PM ^

First they didn't get trucked by 30 at home.  That was away at Iowa.  Second, I hate State, but just calling it as I see it.  Second, give me a break about they could easily have lost 4-5 games, did they.  You can say SDSU should be undefeated since they lost all their games by less than a TD.  They lost. 


December 25th, 2010 at 2:15 PM ^

You're right.  My bad.  They got trucked by 30 on the their biggest game of the year.  Losing by 30 is not something a great team does.

4 losses:
-bad call and trick play against ND
-trick play and late comeback against NW
-late comeback with blocked punt against terrible Purdue
-of course, the Iowa thrashing

Yup.  They won those games (except Iowa), but they're a very flawed team.  I think Vegas agrees with me as well.  We got lucky against Illinois with the tipped ball, but that doesn't make us a great team either.


December 26th, 2010 at 2:33 PM ^

Whether MSU is a bigger game than ND is debatable, but the consequences of losing to MSU are far worse than the consequences of losing to ND.  It's a Big Ten game, and it has a huge impact on the local perception of the two programs.  I'd trade our ND record (2-1) under RR for the MSU record (0-3) in a heartbeat.


December 24th, 2010 at 1:36 PM ^

I'm a little skeptical about adding an NFL defensive coordinator, however, unless the coach has significant college experience as well (Michigan Man or not).  I don't think whatever provides a decided schematic advantage at the NFL level will necessarily relate to a comparative advantage in college given the differences between the games.