If Tate or others get injured, what's the impact on RR's job security?
If Tate gets injured for an extended part of the season, what does that do to Rodriguez's job security? Would making a bowl game still be the standard? If the standard is lowered, how much? Would Rodriguez be absolved?
What if we suffer a lot of other injuries in important areas?
Discuss
Side Question: Besides what effect you think it will have what do you think it should have?
(No meltdown pls)
March 24th, 2010 at 10:06 AM ^
From who's perspective? The general Michigan fanbase doesn't care if injuries prevent us from going to a bowl game. I think either way Michigan needs to make a bowl.
I'm not the AD, so I can't say for certain, but something tells me RR would be fine.
EDIT: To be more clear, I think Michigan needs to win at least 8,9 games to quiet his critics and please most fans, irrespective of injuries. Brandon probably sees the bigger picture and evaluate what Rich Rodriguez had to work with to win.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:09 AM ^
If we don't make a bowl game this year, it won't matter how many freshman we needed to start, walk on's we had to play, or injuries we sustained. The sports media won't let up until RR is fired, and as a side effect, the majority of Michigan fans will feel the same way.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:26 AM ^
I'm not so sure that's accurate, unless you are counting the types who claim that it is OK to be both fans of Michigan football and MSU basketball. Fair weather fans come and go. What do the majority of blue blooded fans think?
To put it in perspective, my ex-step grandfather (yeah...) has had season tickets for 30+ years. He defines old school. I recently asked him what he thinks of RR now that he has had two years under his belt. The answer I expected was not the answer I got. To paraphrase, he said "He'll be fine." Not all fans' judgment hinges on the numbers in the W and L columns. Some do see the big picture.
With this said, there certainly is a saturation point for everyone. For me that would be after the 2011 season.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:03 AM ^
I dont know if it is a majority, but anecdotally I can definitely tell that the support you see for Rodriguez on Mgoblog does not carry over to the rank and file. Many fans from the older generation I have spoken with hate Rodriguez and did even before 3-9. Also the nugetty middle of M fandom, the generation X'ers who grew up in the 70's and 80's - those who dont read Mgoblog and dont really follow the team in the offseason think he is just a bad coach, although they have no personal animus toward him like the old-set, they get their sports news from mainstream outlets and the real die-hard of that set buy a preseason Street and Smith preseason preview (yes they are stuck in the 1980's when they went to M), they still read the New York Times and dont read blogs, they think stats are silly. They don't watch all of the games - even now with the games being on B10 network and they will not read about the game after it is over.
I know at least a dozen fans like this in my town and see them on gameday - not wearing M gear and asking and stating such things as: "Who does Michigan play today?" "Utah? We'll kill them?" "I heard this guy Rodriguez has gotten rid of all the traditions" " (after loss the previous week)Rodriguez sucks. They should have hired Les Miles." "I know you are a Rodriguez guy, but he is the suckiest suck to ever suck." And things like that.
I sat next to an alum on the plane who was bitching about Rodriguez after 3-9, and I at least had some time to go through his track record with her, tell her about the attrition and that she just needs to stay the course. I think I had her convinced by the end of the flight from Chicago to LA, but I usually dont have that much time to convince people to get off the ledge and weather the storm.
I'm an early Gen X'er alum/fan with two siblings that are alums and I cam from pre-Bommer alum parents.
That is a gross generalization about the how and why of fandom from that group/era of people. Both myself and my friends from school follow the team religiously and get our information from all types of sources, in fact I would say we eschew mainstream media sources altogether, certainly they are no longer our primary source.
What you say might be true of a few generations before that, but within any segment/era of fandom, you have people that are/stay fanatics and those that drift away a bit and become more peripheral as fans.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:11 AM ^
The local sports media like Sharp/Valenti/Freep etc. will always find ways to rip RR, even if he wins 12 games. And yes unfortunately that does have an effect on some (definitely not the majority of) Michigan fans. But to be honest, I don't really care what those Michigan fans think if they're the type of people that let themselves be influenced by those types of media members.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:13 AM ^
I imagine a number of key injuries would lower the bar in terms of performance that Rich Rod needs, whatever that bar is set at. For what it's worth, I think we will have an excellant season this year.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:14 AM ^
I don't think injuries would ease up the pressure put on Rich. He is supposed to bring in kids and develop them so the team has depth. Look how well Brian Kelly did with his quarterback situations or Texas keeping it close in the National Championship after Colt went down. I think the media and public have similar expectations of Rich.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:17 AM ^
It would probably depend a bit on how everyone looked during the spring and the few games they played in.
If robinson continues to close the gap then I would expect most people would expect him to come in and carry on as normal.
If there is still a sizable gap then the expectations would surely be lowered
March 24th, 2010 at 11:09 AM ^
Robinson had only the fall to learn the offense. He's dangerous with the ball and IF during the spring and fall the game slows down enough for him to play like Iowa (short of that one thing) he should be capable of stepping in and keeping the offense from crumbling.
I'd be more worried about some of the defensive positions.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:19 AM ^
"At Michigan, the expectation is for the position not the player."
One player QB or otherwise should not be the difference between making a bowl or staying home.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:25 AM ^
But if you have any decency, you'll share it with MaizeandBlue14.
EDIT: PostGoFail. That was to Birdman.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:31 AM ^
There's a short list on the team that, at least in my opinion, are essential personnel, and long term injuries to even half of that list could contribute to a new "Rodriguez, Richard" resume showing up on Monster.com.
The question is, who's on the short list?
Certainly it depends on who you ask, but mine includes, in no particular order:
1. Forcier
2. Woolfolk
3. Mouton
4. Schilling
5. Odoms
6. Martin
Certainly there are lots of other names that come to mind, but fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on your viewpoint) they are not critical to the position group. For example, Stonum is a veteran player who we need to contribute this year, but if he went down we still have Hemingway and others that preclude him from being considered critically essential.
Off my list, the two that will directly influence the team's performance the most are Tate and Woolfolk. Ideally we'll get to a place with depth and experience that the list is scrubbed considerably, and perhaps only the starting QB becomes a direct influence on output. Thoughts?
March 24th, 2010 at 10:32 AM ^
Add Molk.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:25 AM ^
cups?
March 24th, 2010 at 11:32 AM ^
and probably #1 or #2 based on the impact his absence had last season
March 24th, 2010 at 10:33 AM ^
It's hard to leave Molk off the list after seeing our O-Line play after he went down.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:34 AM ^
Forcier and Molk as 1 and 2 on that list. Center in this offense is complicated. I know that others are learning center this spring but there is a learning curve and Molk is still the star. And we all saw the effects of his injuries last season.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:37 AM ^
As soon as I finished that post, I stepped away to reply to an email (work is SO demanding while I'm at work), and then it hit me--
How could I forget Molk>> He was critical to last year's on-field performance, all too obviously. Sorry for missing it earlier.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:38 AM ^
I agree but would add David Molk & put him at number 2 on your list. The o-line wasn't the same without him last season.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:10 AM ^
you have to have Molk pretty high up on that list. (SEE LAST YEAR)
March 24th, 2010 at 12:19 PM ^
I really like those guys but I think we would be fine witout them. I think Gallon and Roundtree can take care of slot and Demens or Fitzgerald can take care of inside linebacker.
For me the most crucial players are Forcier, Molk and Martin. With Martin and Molk being out this spring and Tate having injured his shoulder last season, it does make me a little nervous, but as long as those guys are 100% next season I think we could weather any other single player loss without much trouble, including Schilling. Woolfolk will be very important too, but only because of his leadership and experience. I think with Jones and Dorsey, we will have the speed in the backfield we lacked last year and with Turner, Christian and the other dbs we have we will be improved overall in the secondary.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:30 AM ^
on the state of Michigan, what effect it would have on Rich Rodriguez's job security?
If the attack occurred in August, and stopped practice, but then the season started on time in September, would people take that into account? Then I thought, what if the attack was only with tactical weapons, on Flint, or Muskegon, would that change whether practice time were lost? But then I thought, what if the attack was with strategic weapons, on Chicago, and radioactive dust blowing east affected South Bend, East Lansing, Ann Arbor and Columbus, but not Madison, Iowa City or Minneapolis?
And then I decided to take another pill.
March 24th, 2010 at 10:43 AM ^
You might have to go to [email protected] to have your question answered. Make sure you start out by saying how much you love their site and really enjoy their view on everything Michigan related. Then sign it...
Harry P.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:03 AM ^
At this point in my life I actually refuse to consider the possibility of major injuries to the 2010 team. ignorance, and xanax, are bliss.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:03 AM ^
At this point in my life I actually refuse to consider the possibility of major injuries to the 2010 team. ignorance, and xanax, are bliss.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:33 AM ^
If anybody GETS injured this YEAR, the coach should BE FIRED!!1@
injuries are UNACCEPTABLE!!!1
March 24th, 2010 at 11:40 AM ^
I believe the 2009 team was umfortunate in that they had more than their share of injuries (by position) and had little depth to be able to deal with it. We may not be able to control one of these issues, but we can certainly work on the other.
I have a friend in the AD's office that I had asked about RR and his team. Their comment was that RR told them he had 90% of what he thought he was going to need to succeed (players) in Ann Arbor. If that is true and we are injury-free, I'm looking for a breakout season for him.
Of course, this depends on what RR's definition of succeeding is. I'm sure he has his sights set pretty high. He would love nothing more than to crush all of the naysayers.
March 24th, 2010 at 11:44 AM ^
After the past two years, I think that if RR does not achieve whatever realistic goal the AD has set for him, he is likely gone. None of us know that goal - maybe it is simply make a bowl, maybe it is seven wins, or maybe in light of some of the NCAA crap he needs 8 wins to stay - but whatever that goal is, he either hits it or he doesn't. Injuries are a fact of life in football, and I cannot imagine that in oight of the past two years of results (as well as 2.5 recruiting classes in which to recruit suitable backups in the event that Tate goes down), RR would be given a pass based upon injury.
Just my $0.02
March 24th, 2010 at 12:21 PM ^
Fair or not, I suspect that the team will have to show improvement no matter who is injured and a bowl game may be necessary.
March 24th, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^
A Tate injury would put a damper on expectations considering the other two haven't proven they can be effective passers yet (albeit Denard didn't get many reps before last season and Devin simply hasn't gotten a chance yet - so there is hope).
Since QB is likely the most important position on the field, I'd say that it puts more stress on RR if it does in fact happen that Tate goes down / gets dinged up to a significant degree.
HOWEVER - our depth at QB is better than last year, so barring a significant (e.g., "out") injury - I think there are several other people we can ill afford to lose:
- Molk (see: Last Year)
- Any other OL who steps up like Molk did last year (I'm betting on this - we'll have another stud on that OL this year)
- Roh (thin at his position and a beast as a frosh)
- Mouton (thin at LB, performed better than Ezeh last year or else he would be here)
- Woolfolk
- Combo of Turner/Dorsey/Cullen - not just limited to injury because if only one of these guys is truly ready to play and they go down, we're in trouble
All in all I think it looks like a great year for us, but injuries could derail this team.
If Tate gets injured we still win 8-9 games, so none? I put a question mark because no matter what Rich does I still worry about the "pitch fork" crowd.