Coleman stands behind Rich Rodriguez

Submitted by gater on November 2nd, 2009 at 3:30 PM

I'm glad that she came out and supported RR. I hope this makes the people who are calling for his head to calm down a little bit. We're not getting rid of him, stay behind him, make the big house rock for the last two games and hopefully we'll get some recruits in to help the situation.…

“I don't think it's fair to coaches to bring them in and say, 'We're going to give you three years,’” Coleman told the paper. "When (former Michigan basketball coach) Tommy Amaker came in, we stuck with him for six years. It just wasn't going to work; it wasn't the right fit. But it wasn't a rushed decision.”



November 3rd, 2009 at 7:53 PM ^

I'm sure you have problems understanding what most people talk about. A 3rd grade IQ will do that to you.

It actually all started out because you stated the indefensible position that we have had 1 bad half the whole season. Ignoring the whole bad game against PSU (yes, they were a better team...did we even play well against that better team?) MSU, where we were bad for 3 and 3/4 quarters, and various other games. And I just wanted to you clarify when you expected success from this regime, so we don't continue with the sliding scale. Kinda like how we go from "they are who we thought they are" to "are overachieving" and back.

Please, get out of your delusion world - insults were started by you with the "you are not smart" and "you were fooled" comments. If you look at anyone's log of posts, you'll find yours littered with insults and foul language. And mine..not so much. Except when I have to deal with a douche like you.

And again, it comes to this - you can't consider, or handle, any criticism of Rich Rod, because it crushes your little world you've created that "Lloyd was doing such a bad job, and this new guy will have us winning National Championships every year! Yay!". Not your position? Well, it's probably a lot closer than stating that I've said ANYWHERE that Rich should be fired. Now, later, or any other time. In fact, at least around here, that view is almost nonexistent. But That's what you're left with, because you can't consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, the coaching staff isn't doing their best job the last couple of years. That maybe they could get more out of the team. Because if it's an incorrect opinion, it's one that Rich seems to hold, because he keeps saying they have to be coaching better, and made a major staff change from last season to this one, so he must have thought something wasn't going right from the coaching end. So, if I'm "incorrect", I'm apparently in much better company than you.


November 2nd, 2009 at 8:46 PM ^

Carr's last few recruiting classes didn't end up panning out the way we expected, but that doesn't mean that we have to point fingers at him (or anyone else). It just happened. Some guys didn't turn out to be as good as everyone thought, and then there was some bad luck (like Antonio Bass getting hurt). The attrition was then exacerbated by the coaching change, and the system change meant that some players that did stay were no longer a good fit. It's no one's fault. It's just one of those unfortunate things that can happen around the time of a coaching change.

cooler 517

November 2nd, 2009 at 5:10 PM ^

But an easy one, would be to look at his qb situation through 21 games: RS FR transfer-runs like Navarre, Death, another Freshman that is not allowed to think about throwing; True freshman, true freshman, Death

Everybody was hoping for the miracle 9-3 RR turnaround season. As much as I enjoyed the ND game, I would trade that win , for the Illinois game! We would still be 5-4, but as a fan base, we would have our expectations in check!

Look at this year as year one, and figure to see huge improvements next year


November 2nd, 2009 at 6:26 PM ^

I agree completely that we need to have our expectactions tuned back in to something like 7 wins. My only problem with the loses is the mental mistakes that they are having. The turnovers and muffed kick returns...those are the coachables. This team shows glimpses of what could be....we just have to wait... GOD, I HATE THIS!!!!! lol


November 2nd, 2009 at 5:38 PM ^

Personally, I think a lot of people who ranted insanity about getting rid of Lloyd are a lot of the same people ranting insanity now about getting rid of Rodriguez

They refuse to admit the stark truth about the program then. They refuse to admit the stark truth now.

I know most of RR's most fervent supporters across the M blogosphere are people like myself and my comrades at the WLA. Guess what? We were also the most fervent defenders of Lloyd. Dig through the old Haloscan threads. You will find several off base monikers telling me to stop posting for being a Lloyd Apologist. I am sure most of those same folks are pissing themselves today all because they cant brag about their elite program since they're on a losing streak.

That said, the stark truth is this program was on the wane, even when things looked great. I cant help it if people dont want to come to grips with that.


November 2nd, 2009 at 7:27 PM ^

Exactly. The few fervent Carr supporting-RR hating people I know do refuse to acknowledge that the program had been on the wane for several years before Carr left. It seems that reality has a distinct pro-RR bias right now and many can't deal with it.


November 2nd, 2009 at 8:15 PM ^

But I think it's the opposite, in the general public. Those that railed and wanted Lloyd fired are now defending RichRod no matter what. Because they wanted change, and they got it, and if it doesn't work, it mean they were WRONG. oh no...


November 2nd, 2009 at 8:10 PM ^

There's something wrong when a reasonable post like this gets negged.

We may not have had lots of talent, and sure, people like Meyer walked into it. But other situations like Oklahoma had been bad for a DECADE...and it didn't take Stoops 6 years to make them good. Too much excuse making going on.


November 2nd, 2009 at 9:31 PM ^

John Blake (Stoops' predecessor) was supposed to have been a good recruiter. For instance, 13 of the 22 starters on that 2000 national title team in Stoops' second year were Blake's recruits.

Stoops also had a senior quarterback who fitted his system. To be fair, I think Heupel was a juco transfer, but that's more difficult at Michigan.

You can call it excuse-making if you like, but it's more of an explanation. The talent and experience levels are both down. Frankly, I think Carr would have struggled had he stayed on, although continuity would have made it a little easier on us fans.


November 2nd, 2009 at 5:26 PM ^

I may be in the minority this week, but I think that a healthy Forcier could have led UM to a 9-3 record this year. I certainly don't think Illinois or MSU would have been losses with a healthy Forcier. Despite the score of the Illinois game, I still think a healthy Forcier would have jumped on them and they never would have gotten hot in the second half.

If that had been the case, the losses would have been to Iowa and PSU, both top-twelve teams, and all three remaining games would look very winnable to everyone right now.

And this is with a team that is younger than every team they face.


November 2nd, 2009 at 5:34 PM ^

First of all, Tate was fine for the MSU game. He was just gassed in OT and made a freshman mistake, which unfortunately resulted in an interception. Looking back, what probably doomed us was the lack of a running game, which put the whole game in Tate's hands in the first place. If we could have run the ball in OT, we might have won.

Secondly, Tate seemed fine physically in the Illinois game. He just made a number of poor reads and didn't secure the ball well. The former is forgivable for a freshman QB. The latter is not for anyone.


November 2nd, 2009 at 7:49 PM ^

That was classic! The honesty was quite refreshing. I hope Amaker reads the quote. He was a total failure. And he can't even field competitive teams at Harvard!

Let's hope Bilas doesn't go crazy on us now.

The Claw

November 2nd, 2009 at 11:21 PM ^

So I can't start my own thread yet but I had an interesting thought for a poll question for the board. If someone agrees feel free to post it on its own thread. And of course it's around should RR be fired if UM loses the last three games and ends up 5-7.

As we can all see, the team has digressed each season under RR as the year went on. And they're 0 for October over the last 2 years. Is having 2 bad, losing seasons worthy of the axe? I think from a football perspective and being at a major University like Michigan it is. Do I think it will happen? No, especially when Coleman says she backs him. I just hope and pray they win there next three and the players and coaches save a little face.

But what intrigued me more about this poll question is some digging I did tonight that might sway a vote or 2.

Last year, Desmond Howard was interviewed by Columbus radio, I believe with Herbstreit, and he said if RR has another season like last years season, he won't survive a third year. This coming from a person who was on the search committee and face of the University.

Then I found an interesting quote from Bill Martin which said something to the effect that RR and he were talking over the summer and they both joked that if they go 3-9 again this year, they'll both have "for sale" signs in their lawns.

I think that quote from Martin is gold. He basically said if we can't be .500 next year, we'll both be fired because we did poorly at our jobs.

Is 5-7 such a huge step forward from 3-9 to save a man his job?

So blog community, does a 5-7 record get RR fired or not? Howard and Martin think it does...