Informal poll: grading RichRod
Brian has restated his generally favorable opinion of Rodriguez today, and obviously there are a lot of people out there who disagree. But I was just curious to hear from some of you who haven't given your thoughts on these here boards. Which of the following grades do you think most accurately describes the job RichRod has done so far and why? Feel free to add a plus or minus to your grade as you'd like. (Note: I know anything negative about Rodriguez typically gets neg points here, but since I'm asking for opinions, I'd hope we could let it slide as part of this poll.)
A. OUTSTANDING - RichRod is doing a fantastic job. Nearly all our problems are due to lack of player talent, injuries/attrition, inexperience, etc. An average coach installing a new system in this situation would be faring much worse at this stage. By next year, without a doubt, we'll be on top of the Big 10.
B. GOOD - RichRod is doing a good job. He's made some mistakes here and there, but the relative lack of success is due to things beyond his control. We have improved from last year and, by next year, we should be in the top three of the Big 10.
C. MEH - Could be better, could be worse. We expected to have a rough couple years because of the change, but last year we should have had another win or two, and by now we should be a little further along than we are.
D. POOR - Despite the youth on our team, we still have better recruits than anyone in the Big 10 except OSU. Maybe we should have had some hiccups, but there is no excuse for EVER going 3-9 at Michigan, and no excuse for that Penn State game. Most of the players' mental mistakes should be blamed on the coaches.
F. Fire him now.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:44 AM ^
Good idea. I personally think it should be broken up on a game by game basis.
I'd give both the Iowa and ND games an A, given the talent differential. I'd turn around and give a D or worse for the MSU game, Michigan was severely out coached and under prepared. EMU and DSU get an INC, they are both awful teams. PSU is a C, Michigan just isn't ready yet. Indiana a B or C.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:40 AM ^
B+
Every time I think about downgrading him, I think "what should he have done instead?"
Putting Denard in against Iowa? Tate had struggled throughout the game with the defensive pressure and with his bum shoulder, and turned out to be concussed. In other similar situations I assume that he has a better read on his QBs than we do being on the outside looking in.
Play better defense? What can you do when you don't have a credible starting lineup, much less depth? We are starting a walk-on at safety, and RR's recruits are too young to be expected to have much of an impact. Our secondary means that distance to go means nothing on 3rd down. I honestly believe that we are more capable of defending a 3rd and 3 than a 3rd and 15, because there is a chance that they might try to run on 3rd and 3. Any 3rd down with less than 20 to go feels like about a 50/50 shot at this point.
Turnovers? We have young players at most of our skill positions. The offense is still in the process of being implemented. If we expand the playbook we gain the element of surprise, but struggle with consistency due to lack of reps. If we keep the offense more vanilla, we might execute the plays better, but defenses will be able to gameplan for our tendencies. We are improving, but it will take time.
I also cannot blame RR for Mallett and our WRs leaving upon his arrival. He was brought in to run the spread, and they weren't interested in that, regardless of what he said to them. Mallett was mostly out the door already, anyway. The attrition has hurt us, but most of it was probably already going to happen once RR was named coach.
I was as frustratd as anybody about Saturday's apparent regression, but it really just put us right about where we expected we would be. With a freshman QB duo, young players on both sides of the ball, a new offensive system, the 3rd DC in 3 years, etc., should we have expected to beat one of the best teams in the Big Ten, with a 5th year senior, a very solid, consistent defense, etc.?
I still think RR is going to do a great job, even if this year does not live up to the typical Michigan expectations.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:10 AM ^
A-/A
Life isn't a damn video game. Given the situation, a lot of other coach would have cratered. I can't think of a better way to handle most of the situations he has been put into, other then putting on pads himself and holding onto the damn ball on punt returns.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
Whatever brah, I bang hookers and run them over to get my cash back all the time.
Just how me and the bros do it on the red cedar.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:06 AM ^
I've been and still am a strong supporter of RR (primarily based on his resume and his personality), but in terms of what's transpired on the field so far I can't go any higher than a C-.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:21 AM ^
Despite higher expectations coming off of the Notre Dame victory it looks like Michigan will probably have a 7-5 season this year. There is no question that despite the horror of last year, this team is much improved.
Ultimately, if Rod & Co. can pull off an upset on November 21st coupled with commitments from some four star recruits in the secondary, I'd be more inclined to give him an 'A' at seasons end. However, if we stumble at all versus lower echelon Big Ten Teams (Illinois and Purdue) and we end the season at 6-6 a 'C-' is probably deserved.
October 27th, 2009 at 6:16 AM ^
B-. I think if we had hired Brian Kelly we would have the same long-term upside w/out nearly as serious growing pains.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:07 AM ^
I haven't lost the faith, but I've not been happy about on-field coaching. Play calling (at times), fundamental mistakes, management of the sidelines, etc.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:25 AM ^
When we were 4-0 I would have said A, now I say B or B-.
October 27th, 2009 at 7:32 AM ^
C
I expected to see more development of the offense by now. For two games we saw the pitch play which, I thought, would spawn several more plays out of that set. In the Penn State game the pitch play never happened...
I only know football from watching it, with interest, for 20 years, but I thought we'd see more of the offensive wizardry by now.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:16 AM ^
B verging on B-.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:52 AM ^
I want to see more diversity/creativity on the offensive side of the ball. B-
October 27th, 2009 at 8:26 AM ^
B-/C+
October 27th, 2009 at 8:28 AM ^
I think we're on schedule, even if we had a blip last weekend. We should resume our progress this week.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:37 AM ^
B...for the moment. I'm still grading on a curve but that only lasts for the first two years. Next year I will be a very tough grader.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:38 AM ^
Given your definitions of A, B, C, D, & F, I would say C.
He definitely should have won 1 or 2 more last year and is progressing this year (except this PSU game).
Most of the negatives affecting him are factors beyond his control, but there were ways to have handled this better (stupid things like the #1 Jersey, GPA issue...)
However, in the future, I firmly believe that RR will be a better coach and will be graded as a A-/ B+ next year and A/ A+ going forward.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^
C
b/c we are an avg football team and I know this is his second year but there have been many coaches who have turned it around their second year (Saban, Tressle, Carroll, Kelly).
October 27th, 2009 at 8:54 AM ^
Add Rich Rod to that list
October 27th, 2009 at 9:16 AM ^
ask a real question:
How much money would you be paying RR right now if you were in charge of pay checks.
In which case, I would be paying what his contract says for the most part, but I would be deducting for things like the condo scandal, Rita's hair, and the lack of night games.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:30 AM ^
C+
The team is still young and lacking depth in critical areas. They're better than they were last season, were at least competitive against Iowa, a top team. But there is plenty of room for improvement.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:18 AM ^
I'm sure there are a few things he could have done differently in retrospect, but AFAIK nobody gets retrospect in realtime. I think he has done a very good job at UM with what he has to work with.
To use a popular measuring stick, Lloyd Carr might have won an extra game or two last year by being so conservative, shortening games, and having a more familiar system, but I don't think he could have made it to a bowl with Threetidan either. That means that everyone probably would have been clamoring for his firing last year (I had been since about 2004), and there would either be a new coach this year with an empty cupboard, or a "Fire Lloyd Carr" circus. To summarize, I think the program is in a better place right now with RR than it would be right now if Carr was still coaching.
The only reason I can't give RR a full A is because of assistant coach issues. Shafer was a mistake, and the sideline discussions still get a little too zoolike for my taste on gameday. Other than that, though, I think he has done great. He has recruited well, taught well, and the conditioning system is a lot better than it was. This team should continue to improve next year, with a championship in the still-weak Big Ten a possibility.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:21 AM ^
Before the PSU game it would have been a B. I expected rough patches here and there this season but to have an entire game (sans the first drive) reminiscent of the first half of Wisconsin 2008 at this point in the season is highly discouraging.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:00 AM ^
B if being realistic.
D if we lose out.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
I think we're on the right track, but his grade would go down significantly with a loss to the hapless Illini this weekend. So far, I don't feel that we have lost to any teams with inferior talent, and we need to keep feasting on the cupcakes in Champaign.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^
I like what RR is doing with the program, but unfortunately it is still a "show-me" program and sport so I have to give him a B-, at this time. I'm confused (but not overly concerned) with the play against Penn State on Saturday. I'm hopeful that against Illinois we are able to execute at all positions, not just the notable ones. "In for a penny, in for a pound" - I'm All-in-for-Michigan!!
October 27th, 2009 at 11:29 AM ^
C+.
As others have said, these last four games are going to go a long way towards determining the future. Win out and things look much, much better for the near future. Lose out, and, well, it's meltdown time.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:35 AM ^
I'm going to go with a C for now. Next year is when I'll start making more of a decision one way or the other. Here's hoping for an A.
October 27th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
Although UM could conceivably be 7-1 this year, they absolutely SHOULD BE 6-2 at worst. The loss to MSU was inexcusable.
Overall--I'm hoping that this year's recruiting class finishes strong, otherwise, it's a bad class--extremely top heavy, but then a dropoff full of a bunch of fliers who might end up switching positions all over the place.
There's no excusing last year's disaster and no excusing Scott Shafer. I know people are going to bitch about Carr, Threet, and Sheridan until they have worn those jokes out more than Paris Hilton's knees (or back)--but that team should have made a bowl game and that would have given Rodriguez a longer grace period.
Again this year, though--UM is going to live off the Notre Dame win and conveniently excuse the other losses. What I fail to see is offensive adjustments--and that is really bad news coming from the supposed offensive guru Rodriguez is touted as being. Still--once the other team figures UM oot--they go long stretches where they look like the Keystone Kops.
I look at WVU, and they are doing quite nicely, thank you--at 6-1 and with two pretty good recruiting classes--certainly they are recruiting better now than they did with Rodriguez.
What worried me most about this hire was recruiting. He's never really shown recruiting prowess. I think he got an uptick with the Michigan brand--but that ain't doing much this year. And with everyone seemingly dead set that the talent on this team is sub-par (part of the new Blame Everything on the Players mentality of Michigan fans)--well, there can be no bad recruiting years early in RR's career here.
Now there's no reason to contemplate firing him--that's dumb-dumb talk. And we need to see how this year finishes (can they still go 8-4? I think so). If it finishes well and ends with a bowl win--and is not followed up with sanctions from PracticeGate--we have liftoff.
If the team flops the rest of this year, losing to Purdue, Wiscy and OSU (don't even mention a possible loss to Illinois), then RR is in some serious trouble--and if this PracticeGate shit blows up--he'll be gone by April.
October 27th, 2009 at 12:34 PM ^
This thread hurts my head.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:38 PM ^
I thought everything not on WLA hurt your head these days.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:50 PM ^
This isn't on WLA right? So, yeah, so far you're right.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:15 PM ^
The Toledo Rockets and last week's debacle dropped him from A-/B+.
October 27th, 2009 at 1:48 PM ^
The rationale behind this C grade is based on a perceived stubbornness I sense from RR and the staff as a whole. Obviously the personnel on offense last year was not in any way fitting to his system but he continued to run his offense without any adaptations. While I surely don't expect him to come up with a brand new scheme overnight, last year's results and streaks lost speak for themselves.
This year I feel like since the weather has gone south we have once again encountered the stubbornness - tate and denard are clearly struggling in the conditions but the offensive scheme has not seemed to become fitting to their struggles. While the injuries, drops, and lack of continuity on the o-line have hurt I feel like the offense we saw the first 4 games has completely regressed in the poor weather conditions that are the essence of big ten football.
Most importantly to my grade, however, is the defensive performance. Noted in an earlier post was the noticeable lack of improvement for many players from last years team and I could not agree more. With an extremely difficult schedule next year, the loss of Brandon Graham and an offensively-focused, average recruiting class I feel there is reason for concern.
Finally, there have been many basic coaching mistakes made by this staff. The fake punt and poor challenge against MSU, unnecessary timeout near halftime against Iowa which almost cost us 3 points, and the botched drive at the end of the 2nd quarter this past weekend come to mind.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:18 PM ^
The only reason i wouldnt fire him now is because there is nobody else to coach the team right now. He has a bad record in the B10, horrible fundamentals as a coach, the football program is being reviewed by the NCAA. As Ron Simpkins said it has taken 1 year for RR to destroy everyhting Bo built in 40 years.
October 27th, 2009 at 2:49 PM ^
Here's the interview with Ron Simpkins:
http://www.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=988932
His words are
"You know, I get asked and I think about Michigan's tradition and whether this coaching staff understands what that's all about, and you know what I think they do but I think it's also important to let Rich Rodriguez build his own legacy. Tradition has to start somewhere. Do you think Bo [Schembechler] only did what was done before? No. He added his own elements and now, 40 years later, they're a big part of Michigan football.
"I don't believe in abandoning everything but that's not what he's doing. He's been making subtle changes to put his own stamp on Michigan football and that's OK with me.
"The thing is, if he wins, people won't care if he's tweaked the uniforms or added music to game days. All they really want are good memories and that's why Saturday was so huge. This was his first real big win at Michigan and now you've got people that two weeks ago were ready to hang him by the neck, changing their tune. Now, they're talking Big Ten championship and they're on board with Rich Rodriguez.
"I think when you see how quickly people have changed their mindsets it just goes to show you that everything created during the offseason was all about winning football games. It's sad that some folks out there were willing to trash the program, the kids and the coaches just because they went 3-9 last year."
October 27th, 2009 at 3:22 PM ^
I like the guy, and I think the young players he has will grow up and eventually get it done. BTW, PSU's Darryl Clark is a FIFTH YEAR senior, who didn't really play a lot until his fourth year. Not much Rich can do about youth.
On the downside, I think RR underestimated the level of play in the Big Ten, especially from perennial non- contenders(MSU,Northwestern, Wisconsin, Purdue, Illinois). But I think he'll adjust to that as well.
I am sure he is as frustrated as we are.
October 27th, 2009 at 3:55 PM ^
but you have to admit his fundamentals as a coach are very poor and he record in the big ten is just dreadful. I think his style is more suited for the Big East. The B10 is not a great conference but it is still much better than the Big East.
October 27th, 2009 at 4:05 PM ^
RichRod's technique in turning on the video system for film review is incredibly sloppy. He pushes the "Power" button with the whole tip of his finger, when you know he should only use the upper third of his fingertip. He also takes a poor angle when putting on his headset, resulting in extra milliseconds of adjustment. He also takes too long to get into his stance after he's been sitting in a chair, and his stride length when he's pacing the sidelines is woefully inefficient. These are costing us on Saturdays.
October 29th, 2009 at 11:58 AM ^
B+ so far, but next year should be easier to evaluate his grade.