December 21st, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^

Yes - 8 home games and a really easy schedule should help us out.  The only games that scare me other than the final two (Nebraska, OSU) are ND and MSU.  ND looked better in the scond half of the season, and will be returning a ton of talent and more comfortable under Kelly.  As for MSU, they have had our number for 3 straight years - their game plan has been perfect to stop us, having exploited every weakness and stopping our offense. 

That said, assuming that RR is back, I see our offense becoming more consistent and our defense becoming something better than the worst defense in B10 history.


December 21st, 2010 at 12:47 PM ^

While I agree MSU had our number that last two years, unless MSU's game plan was to have Denard begin to regress in his passing game and throw three interceptions, I don't think MSU's game plan was what was holding us back.


December 21st, 2010 at 12:47 PM ^

Dear lord: MSU scares us.  

That isn't a great commentary on this program. Pathetic is a word that springs to mind. Not only do they have a great game plan, but they had the bigger better players. Especially on defense. 


December 21st, 2010 at 1:36 PM ^

Ultimate sentence for RR detractors;

While I have always supported RR as a great coach, his misunderstanding of the rivalry with MSU and OSU, proven by his unwillingness to win these games, is "very telling" that he is just not the "right fit" for the program, which is "unacceptable." 

commence slow clap

Hardware Sushi

December 21st, 2010 at 2:53 PM ^


vnperk, I would like to help. The issue that other posters had your statement wasn't regarding the sentiment of what you were saying but the fact that you completely contradict yourself (meaning you state one idea then have another that pretty much means the opposite:

The "think he's a great coach" doesn't necessarily match with "program headed in the wrong direction." If he is a great coach, in your opinion, then this opinion would seem dictate you saying something supportive about the direction of the program. If RR is a good coach but you don't like the direction of the program then you may want to explain in more depth what you mean besides not a good fit.
As for saying RR is "a good coach but not a good fit." The other posters were simply ragging on you for what has become a cliche on the coaching change threads (along with "UNACCEPTABLE" and "wrong direction"). I also personally (I think this is why it is so taboo on mgoblog) find statements like "not a good fit" to be a cop out to stating actual supportive evidence, similar to the way people say "it is what it is" when they don't have an actual answer for why that's what it is.
No reason to get upset, it's just this is quite a few peoples' home away from home. They have seen so much of those cliches that I can't really blame them for molding newbies with their not-so-subtle humor.


December 22nd, 2010 at 12:06 AM ^

If RR isnt the right fit, who is? RR coaching style is different from anything M has ever seen. It takes time to totally inject his style...players, schemes, coaches, etc..RR is a great coach in CFB and a great mind....If he gets just a decent Defense, ppl will be cheering RR is God! I believe in RR and DB should also....in the long run, RR is the man to revamp Michigan football.


December 21st, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^

unless it isn't anymore.  But, then you have to check and see what it used to be in order to understand that what it is now is merely a transformed version of what it once was and isn't quite yet what it is going to be then.  The real question is: when will then be now?  Soon. 


December 21st, 2010 at 12:55 PM ^

didn't realize our freshman recruits playing in the secondary are supposed to come out of HS being the same size as MSU's Senior and Junior corners..

It was only a year ago and their PATHETIC secondary was getting shredded on a wk to wk basis..


If you think our secondary was suppose to be better  than theirs or anyone else's last year your head is in the clouds


December 21st, 2010 at 1:04 PM ^

"... they had the bigger better players ..."

Ah, the near-myth that never dies.  Yeah, that Taylor Lewan is a sickly little so-and-so, isn't he?  Mike Martin, too.  RVB.  The whole O-line!  Stonum!  Koger!  Cam Gordon!

Seriously, can you give us some examples that don't involve 1st- and 2-year players?

Do you really think RichRod and his staff have purposely recruited small players?  Really?


December 21st, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^

on multiple occasions. For some reason, people believe that RR only likes small players.  I have asked people why they think this, and then pointed out players at almost every position that can hardly be considered small. i.e. Gardner at QB, Hopkins RB, Ricardo Miller WR, our entire O-line (average around 300), our D-line. Besides the fact that he has recruited a couple small slot ninjas, billy-goats, and pure Dilithium, which all seem to be working out well, I think its a myth that keeps getting exposure.  Probably similar to Belien only running a 1-3-1 defense.

Captain Obvious

December 21st, 2010 at 1:34 PM ^

but complaints.  Worse, they are pseudo-"thought out and rational" complaints that really amount to nothing more than UNACCEPTABLE bitching and trotting out tired old memes about player size, spread is dead, SMASHMOUTH and other idiotic empty concepts.

TL;DR version: I pretty much hit the down arrow on every single one of your posts.