Section 1

March 5th, 2013 at 4:55 PM ^

"Adding insult to injury, Rich Rodriguez foolishly burned Gardner's redshirt after Tate Forcier was temporarily demoted to third string, to punish him for a lackluster effort in off-season work-outs. Gardner played a total of three snaps in two games when Robinson was briefly sidelined, plus garbage time against Bowling Green.

At this writing, it is still unclear if Gardner can obtain a medical hardship waiver for an alleged back injury that he suffered midway through his freshman year. I am not sure how serious that back injury was. By the time of Michigan's bowl game, Forcier had already flunked out of school. Gardner made the trip to Jacksonville and would presumably have played if Robinson had been forced out of the game.

Should Gardner be unable to secure a fifth year, his lost freshman season is probably the worst burned redshirt currently on the team, and one of the dumbest ever." 

So, uh, there is that isn't that, anymore.  And I don't think that Rich Rodriguez is going to "face the fanbase" much anymore.  Not this fanbase, anyway.  God knows what he must think of this fanbase. 

So just another MGoFreakout for nothing.  Nothing other than the usual Rodriguez defamation.


March 5th, 2013 at 5:03 PM ^

"Should Gardner be unable to secure a fifth year, his lost freshman season is probably the worst burned redshirt currently on the team, and one of the dumbest ever."

Raising a hypothetical situation is a pretty fair point.  It WOULD have been a terribly stupid burning of a redshirt.  Michigan fans and the coaching staff have been wondering for a few years whether he would get a fifth year or not.

The fanbase wasn't freaking out for nothing.  Sometimes there are freakouts for no reason, but there was genuine concern.  Rich Rodriguez couldn't coach a lick of defense and lost 22 games in three years.  He also burned William Campbell's redshirt for no reason the year before.  He recruited a bunch of washouts in the class of of 2010.  We're not talking badly about Rodriguez because he has an accent.  We're saying bad things about him because he failed.


March 5th, 2013 at 5:23 PM ^

Open the can?  See Magnus' post - it's a point that Brian himself has made.  RR is a central figure in this whole discussion, and if it can't be pointed out without Section 1 turning all Section One-ey, whose fault is that? 

RR should feel relieved today despite him not being here anymore.  If he is a human being, he should feel great for Devin knowing that his mismanagement didn't cost a kid a year of college football and an enhanced chance at an NFL career. 

Section 1

March 5th, 2013 at 5:51 PM ^

Just because I am that kind of guy, this is just another chance to repeat the essential fact; that as is always the case nowadays, it is the Rodriguez-haters who bring up the topic of "Rich Rodriquez."  Without fail.  I'd be surprised if anybody can find a thread in a year's time where I have mentioned Coach Rodriguez's name, when it wasn't underneath another preceding post attacking him.

So there.  Yeah.  Another mention of Rodriguez.  Argument started.  And finished.  Thank you all very little.

Section 1

March 5th, 2013 at 6:15 PM ^

And quite honestly, Rich Rodriguez's situation is the only thing that has seriously damaged my love for my university.  I attributed the basketball fiasco to the guilty parties themselves -- Ed Martin and a handful of others -- because the institution was mostly blameless.  There have been the assorted semi-regular political kerfuffles attendant to an institution that is so large and so p-c.  But nothing that would shake my faith in my alma mater.

That is, until Rodriguez, and Rosenberg (and his friends) and the Free Press, and the institutional cowardice and back-biting; I was always essentially proud of Michigan.

It's just one thing, but it was a bad one.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant for one bad thing.


March 6th, 2013 at 12:06 PM ^

You said it was a fact that it's always RR haters that do. That's not true. In fact-

So you keep saying that, but it's NOT true. (You might want to have a talk with this guy at your next meeting).

Whether you have ever brought it up, that's mostly true. I'm sure a search would find a case or two where you insinuated about how the previous staff was treated into something that had nothing to do with it, but the vast majority of the time you're taking the bait someone else left and going from there. Whether you should take the bait or not is another story, but you are usually responding to someone else. That we agree on.


March 5th, 2013 at 6:06 PM ^

Let us take the names out of it and then everyone can determine if i'm "flamebaiting". 

One man (Person A) learned today, after years of uncertainty, that his highly questionable decisions in 2010 will not end up negatively impacting another human being (Person B) in the future.  Making the assumption that Person A is a human being who cares, this is cause for Person A to be extremely happy today. 

That's it.  Just because Section 1 ruins it for everyone doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to discuss all aspects of a story, especially good aspects, which this is. 

snarling wolverine

March 5th, 2013 at 8:40 PM ^

I don't see how this is a "good aspect" of Rodriguez's tenure here.  He played Gardner when he was a true freshman and not ready to play.  Gardner made no real impact that season, playing just a handful of snaps.  We didn't win any games because he was out there.  And whatever lesson he was trying to impart to Tate Forcier didn't seem to get through either, given that Forcier was off the team a couple months later.  You're making it sound like Rodriguez's decision to play him is vindicated.  I think it still looks like a poor decision, but it fortunately isn't going to haunt us.    

I see the decision as being akin to throwing a pass into double-coverage that gets picked off, only to be ruled incomplete following video review.  We were bailed out by the zebras.





M Fanfare

March 5th, 2013 at 4:29 PM ^

I like the video interview with Gardner. I'll miss the hell out of Denard's infectious enthusiasm, but Gardner seems like a cool dude with a great attitude and a great head on his shoulders. Here's hoping for two big years from him.


March 5th, 2013 at 4:30 PM ^

Great news! After watching Devin's play last year I can't wait to see him for the next two years. Look forward to his continued growth and success.

Dutch Ferbert

March 5th, 2013 at 4:31 PM ^

I love his potential and his attitude. He just seems like a smart guy and obviously is a team player. Two more years of DG is good for the program on so many levels. Go Blue!


March 5th, 2013 at 4:32 PM ^

Loved what I saw out of Gardner last year and I think he'll benefit as he gets more experience in the starting role. Him getting an extra year definitely helps our depth problems and it'll allow Shane to mature and learn in the meantime. I'm not sure what Gardner can become as a quarterback, but I feel like has a lot of potential because he can do anything you ask him to do. This is TREMENDOUS news!


March 5th, 2013 at 4:32 PM ^

This is like getting a commit (except with more certainty)!  I Recommend a title change to "Hello:  Devin Gardner's 5th Year"!

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes!