Future of Michigan football

Submitted by Duval Wolverine on December 1st, 2010 at 12:48 PM
I saw this quote on another site and agree a 100%! "If Brandon cans Rodriguez now, we will have much bigger problems than finding another coach. Brandon will demonstrate weakness, and that he is not up to the job. If he reacts to pressure from the media, noteably the Freep, he will be going back on the agreement between the university, and his coach, for a five year rebuilding program. (And the program WAS a shambles, thanks to Carr.) Even Bo got five years, when he came in, via verbal agreement with Canham. So far Rodriguez has demonstrated he can coach offense. And while the defense is too weak currently, the man is forced to play with 8 or 9 freshman on the two deeps! RR is a coach,(and a darn good one), not a miracle worker! In two years, he will have this defense turned around, and the team as a whole will be right where we all want it to be. Meanwhile the affluent, entitled alums, who have an inordinately high opinion of themselves, need to buckle it up, and display a little patience, and a lot of maturity. So far, I am much more ashamed of them, than I am of our kids, and coaches. This team is group of warriors, inexperienced, but dedicated, to restoring UM's greatness. Why can't we as fans, and alums, give them the support that they deserve. Go Blue!" --

Comments

scottydreisbach

December 1st, 2010 at 1:23 PM ^

I agree that patience is definitely needed.  Coach Rod has shown improvement each year.  That said, I think it is a bit of a straw man to talk about "entitled alums" and "wealthy" donors who support our football program.  The idea that it is rich, ignorant old alumni who are ruining it for younger, more football intelligent alumni seems pretty silly.  

BlueintheLou

December 1st, 2010 at 12:54 PM ^

This is a brand new thought.

Thanks to Carr, indeed! He didn't bring us a national championship, 4 Rose Bowl appearances, the greatest Game of its history. A SHAMBLES, I say.

Soulfire21

December 1st, 2010 at 3:28 PM ^

..Lost 4 times in a row to OSU, Rich Rod 3 times in a row.

Rich Rod >> Carr?

Well, not quite ... but, the team was losing to Ohio State en route to anywhere between an 8 and 10 wins season and getting blown out in the Rose Bowl.

Admittedly, I'd give my firstborn child to be smelling the Rose Bowl right now [Not really, don't report me to social services], but I understand Martin's hire in that he wanted something drastically different.  The stuffy "Michigan Man" meme was, well, not working out exactly like we wanted it.

Mehh.  Yay apathy.

PurpleStuff

December 1st, 2010 at 1:02 PM ^

A soft taco is just a tiny burrito that doesn't fold all the way over.  A hard taco is a piece of crap that just crumbles into a million pieces after one bite so you end up scooping up seasoned ground beef with your bare hands while giving your girlfriend the evil eye so she doesn't run her mouth about how you are a gigantic slob.

Burritos FTW!

PurpleStuff

December 1st, 2010 at 1:13 PM ^

Spaghetti is a messy blob, but it stays a messy blob from beginning to end.  You know what you are getting.  Also, you have soft, super absorbent garlic bread to sponge up any excess sauce. 

A hard taco is just a pointless fucking charade.  It comes out like this engineering marvel, then one bite later you just have a loose, messy pile of crumbs.  I would rather just get a plate full of meat and toppings along with a bag of tortilla chips to scoop it all up with.  Less mess, no lies.

Nonetheless, by advocating spaghetti in a tortilla you have confirmed your genius.  We are on common ground, just in disagreement about the details.

jhackney

December 1st, 2010 at 2:26 PM ^

I think the brittleness of the tco shell depends on cooking time. Also eating technique comes into play. I believe if your meat is hanging out the other end after a bite from the original end, you should turn the taco around and bite into it, thus saving a nasty taco mess.

Tha Stunna

December 1st, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^

Tacos, because you actually have a logical stopping point.  Everyone's been stuck with that point where they ate 3/4 of a burrito but don't want to eat the rest; then you have to eat food you don't really want or save it to enjoy dehydrated, crusty beans later.  With a taco, you just save a taco, and it'll still taste good later.

michgoblue

December 1st, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^

This post should have been entitled:  "CC: Future of Michigan Football"

If you are unclear on this, please see my post from earlier today entitled, "Meta: Coaching Change Topics."

Thanks.  I will not personally neg you for this, as the policy is still new and has yet to be accepted, but going forward, I think that it would be a good idea.

michgoblue

December 1st, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^

I think that out two acts (mine is less of an act than a proposal at this point) work well together.  To the extent that someone starts a topic that should be labeled as CC, but which is not, I will issue a call to neg that post into Bolivia.  Your act can then come in and issue violations for individual posts. 

I like.

Bluerock

December 1st, 2010 at 1:11 PM ^

I've got an errand to run (sometimes you just need to take care of THINGS yourself ) ...oh... I have a car load of beer, naked women, cigars and a cannon FS100 48X advanced zoom.

coach stays

 

 

s/

profitgoblue

December 1st, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^

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 Article . . . awww hell, I don't even know where to start!

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.

skegemogpoint

December 1st, 2010 at 1:44 PM ^

have you seen the Big 10 Team rankings for 2008, 2009, 2010? We have gotten progressively worse in defense and ST.  Yes, Rich can coach offense but 2/3's of the phases of the game are deteriorating under his watch.

Mitch Cumstein

December 1st, 2010 at 1:46 PM ^

"And the program WAS a shambles, thanks to Carr"

 

I stopped reading at that point.  I mean I can see the view of both keeping and firing RR, but to be so desperate and and in such denial that RR has done anything wrong as a coach to bust out that gem, I just can't see eye to eye with you.