OSU Hangover. Rose Bowl Colored Glasses
We all view the past in Rose Bowl colored glasses. Why don't we honestly reflect on the past, while we debate our current coaching situation.
My first memory of Michigan football: watching Raghib Ismail run up and down the field at will. My first memory of Bo was the following joke: "Why can't Bo eat Cheerios? Because he always chokes at the bowl."
Bo's national championships: 0
Bo's bowl record: 5-12
Bo's Rose bowl record: 2-8
Lloyd Carr national championships: 1 (4th & 5th-yr players were Moeller recruits)
Lloyd Carr's Bowl record: 6-7
Lloyd's Rose Bowl record: 1-3
Lloyd Carr record vs FCS (I-AA) opponents: 0-1
In 2005, we went 7-5 with a team full of seniors in a program that was virtually unchanged for 35 years.
This is not to disparage anything in the past, it's just to point out that all those who think that anything less than national championship contention is a failure, apparently have never been happy being Michigan fans. We have been pretty good for a long time, but rarely great.
For those who are up in arms because we have lost 3 straight to Jim Tressel, how about the following facts:
Jim Tressel Big Ten losses since RR took over: 3
Jim Tressel Big Ten losses in last 6 years: 5
Big Teams to beat Tressel in consecutive seasons: 1
Michigan record versus OSU in 4 years prior to RR: 0-4
How can people be upset that RR has lost three in a row to OSU, when the great Lloyd Carr lost four straight, with the likes of LaMarr Woodley, Mike Hart, Chad Henne and Jake Long, just to name a few? It is preposterous.
JT has had an amazing tenure at OSU. This level of success is unmatched by anyone north of the Mason-Dixon line. Even when we beat OSU on an annual basis, in the modern era, they have been a more important figure in the national picture. They have consistently out recruited us. This year's OSU team had 24 seniors and three more potential seniors left early to play in the NFL as juniors. We only had three drafted last year, and one was a punter. They have more seniors than they can even start.
Our program was going to be in a major rebuilding process before RR took the job, combine that with a massive exodus of players who didn't want to work, couldn't make the grade, didn't really attend high school, or were criminals, and you have what we've seen for the past three seasons. How much better would our secondary have been with Donovan Warren, Boubacar Cissoko, and Troy Woolfolk?
What has RR done that's so terrible aside from 1. practice too much (and trivially so), 2. lose games against good opponents with an inexperienced skeleton crew, 3. had the number 2 kicking prospect unable to make a 30-yd chip shot, and 4. invite the media into the program only to be stabbed in the back by that self-hating POS Rosenberg.
RR has done a lot to turn this program around. Our D has stuck together and made improvement each game this season. Our offense is awesome, with a kicker and a slightly better defense, yesterday would have been a low scoring slug fest like those we all remember. The team had a winning record. The team is in excellent physical shape and can maintain their speed right down to the last snap.
This season Michigan has beaten the teams they were expected to beat and lost to the teams they were expected to lose to. We all would have loved an upset or two but it simply wasn't in the cards. Michigan caught no breaks from the football gods. Did anyone honestly think we'd beat OSU back in August? Did anyone think we'd beat anyone when we found out about T-woolf's ankle?
A coach can only do so much. He can prepare the people to be in the position to make a play, but he can't do it for them. He can't take back a fumble, ha can't make a catch, can't even make a tackle anymore. RR can take this program to places it has rarely been. He himself is a walk-on type who has forged his success with his own blood, sweat and tears. He didn't come from a pedigree. Daddy didn't get him a spot on the roster. He has excelled because he understands the game and because he has busted his nuts. The man turns 3 star recruits into 1st round picks. He needs time. Most of all he needs your support.
Support your coach.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:47 PM ^
dirty and gross, yet reminds of something I want
November 28th, 2010 at 5:53 PM ^
Sentient shit?
November 28th, 2010 at 5:47 PM ^
Everybody defending the current state of the program says "anything but a national championship" is not a proper standard, except we all already agree with that. Being competitive in Big Ten play however is what the fans want, and that was certainly the case under both of those coaches.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^
I'm in the keep RR camp, but I think you're not showing all the data fairly. You're comparing Bo and Lloyd's out of conference and bowl game records to Jim Tressel's Big Ten records. While Tressel has done great, I think it's fair to expect us to be BETTER than him. And Bo and Lloyd both had excellent Big Ten Records from start to finish. And Tressel's teams have choked on the national stage too.
Let's not forget - Michigan's 1997 title was the Big Ten's first since Ohio State's 1968 title. What made Michigan - and Ohio State - great during that era is how we would ruin each other's national title dreams, and ruled the Big Ten with an iron fist.
The past six years, Ohio State has been the undisputed king - and their competition came from Wisconin, East Lansing, Penn State, and Illinois in addition to Michigan. There's nothing wrong with being angry about Michigan's fall from the top to the middle. The question isn't how does RR compare to the past - because at the moment he doesn't compare favorably. The question is, will RR take us back to the top in the future? Because that's the expecatation, and I believe that by letting someone else run the defense with minimal interference from him, he can take us back.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:55 PM ^
Thanks for speaking out. +1.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:58 PM ^
Always chokes in the big games, especially bowl games!
<br>
<br>I have some OSU friends who want tressel gone! They have been expecting NC over the past several years, given OSU talent.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^
How can you say always chokes in big games? If that is true the Rose Bowl last year and the last 7 OSU v. Mich games were not big games.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:38 PM ^
Your friends are idiots. Sort of like your post.
November 28th, 2010 at 7:18 PM ^
5-4 in bowl games. 4-3 in BCS games. 1-0 in the Rose Bowl.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:04 PM ^
Is to be playing for the Big Ten championship at the end of every year, and winning the occasional MNC the years when everything comes together (schedule, few injuries, etc). OSU is the only program in the conference that is acheiving at that level, and our program needs to meet or exceed it...
November 28th, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^
We don't expect mediocre, also ran seasons in the Big Ten. We want to be contenders every year, and any season where we don't win the Big Ten is a disappointment. Everbody knows that we're not there yet and part of that is on Carr and company. But folks are fairly wondering if we'll ever get there under Rodriguez considering the mismanagement of our defense.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:05 PM ^
Good job, though I doubt any minds will be changed. Some people would rather be 8-4 or 9-3 every year than to put up with what it takes to be really good and compete with the best.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:08 PM ^
I haven’t seen very many people arguing that “anything less than national championship contention is a failure.” The question is whether the sequence 3-9, 5-7, 7-5, is sufficient progress, when it includes 0-6 vs. MSU and OSU, and zero Big Ten victories against any team that finished the year with a winning conference record.
It is true that Lloyd Carr lost his last four vs. Ohio State. But that still included a 1st, two 2nds, and a 3rd in the Big Ten standings, and bowl games each year, including the Rose Bowl twice. During Carr’s tenure, Michigan was never a 20-point underdog in a Big Ten game, or indeed any game that I can recall.
I can certainly see the argument for giving Rodriguez one more year. By the same token, one shouldn’t be an apologist for what is, by any measure, a very poor record to date.
November 28th, 2010 at 7:09 PM ^
but we WENT 7-5 under Carr, with no excuse, as I said. I guess it's not a straw man after all. Or maybe you're a straw man.
November 28th, 2010 at 7:25 PM ^
First of all we were 7-4 in the regular season that year and lost in the bowl game. Add a cream puff to the schedule and we would have been 8-4. We also beat MSU and gave Penn State their only loss of the season (a team that finished 3rd in the final rankings). On top of that, we were beating OSU in the 4th quarter before letting Troy Smith take over.
<br>
<br>And despite those "high notes", that year was still called the "year of infinite pain" for a reason. That type of season-long performance was the exception, not the rule. Of course, we would take those results in a heartbeat this year.
November 29th, 2010 at 5:20 PM ^
Of course, we would take those results in a heartbeat this year.
I'm sure. Depending on who "we" are, this seems disingenuos. Losses at Minnesota and Notre Dame would probably mitigate any good will most haters would have for a 7-4 season.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^
and PSU (worst game of the season, IMO). Yup, we need to beat the best teams but--as the OP reminds us--RR could finish the season with a record identical to Lloyd's in his last year, with fewer consecutive losses to OSU. . . and get fired.
I'm not at all convinced that RR will win here--there are lots of institutional forces stacked against him, lots of irrational hatred. (And for some reason I can't conceive, he may really WANT the D to blow!) But Brandon shouldn't be captive of that hatred, not with so much invested to get us where we are now.
Your reminders about OSU's prowess are salutary. Whining about recent losses to them doesn't alter the calculus.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:26 PM ^
We were 9-4 with a memorable win over the defending 1A champ, Florida, in the Citrus Bowl. We were 8-4 in the regular season, so one game better than this season. But we were also 6-2 in Big Ten play, finishing 2nd in the league. That team was a veteran team plagued by injuries from start to finish, but after a terrible start they certainly found their legs.
A better correlation is the young 7-5 team from 2005, who was 5-3 in the Big Ten, and were truly competitive in every game they played. While that defense was frustrating, it was far better than the one we have today.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:40 PM ^
thinking 2005 was Lloyd's last year. But re: your notions of how good Michigan SHOULD be: odds are slender and times have changed. Iowa and Wisky are also on the rise and Nebraska is entering the conference. If we don't watch our behinds MSU will be there with them as a perennial power. I still think winning 8-9 games regularly and challenging for the B10 should be enough to keep a coach around.
November 28th, 2010 at 7:49 PM ^
If we had 8-9 wins every year and were competitive in every game, I'd be okay with that - as long as every senior class won a Big Ten Title, we beat Ohio State as often as we didn't, and made a serious run for the national title every 5 years or so. And I don't blame Rod for not getting us there yet. But I do think there is a legit concern on whether we will get there. I still think he's the right man for this job, and I still think that some of his struggles are the cards he was dealt. But I think that the rise of Iowa, Wiscy, Sparty, the rebirth of Penn State and the addition of Nebraska increase the urgency that he get it right, and fast.
And while Ohio State does have some built in advantages over us, we're still Michigan, and they've always had those advantages. It's not too much to expect us to be at their level. As recently as 2004 we were above their level. Since then they've passed us because we fell, hard - not because they've done anything that we can't do.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^
For Michigan football to be competitive as an 'elite' modern program in the future...keeping the Bo 'line of ancestry' alive with 'Michigan Men' would have maintained the status quo: winning the Big Ten more often than not, averaging about 9 wins a year, but rarely being in the MNC conversation. When this transition is over our program will be modern, competitive and dominant in recruiting; winning 10 or 11 game every year, top 10 finishes every year, and a MNC run every 3 to 5 years. Hopefully Brandon makes the right decision to keep RR and finish the transition.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:33 PM ^
Can it not be true that we both needed a transition and that RR is not the right person? What have you seen to be convinced that we are going to be dominant in recruiting? What have you seen that suggests we are going to contend for national championships? I think you really just assume this stuff but after watching our team for 12 games, we don't seem close to competing for a top 3 finish in the Big Ten, let alone a MNC. We definitely aren't burning up the recruiting trail. I agree we needed some sort of change but that doesn't mean we chose the right guy to do it.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:42 PM ^
for some time to come, and that we are contending with Iowa, Wisconsin, and MSU for large-bodied football players if we go back to trad ball. Is there some advantage in the fact that RR recruits a different type player, at least on O? Quite possibly.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:24 PM ^
This is almost exactly how I feel about the entire situation. Somehow, though, you said it without the anger that I feel toward the critics and naysayers. Congratulations.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:49 PM ^
A coach can only do so much. He can prepare the people to be in the position to make a play, but he can't do it for them. He can't take back a fumble, ha can't make a catch, can't even make a tackle anymore.Why have a coach? Is a coach responsible for any of the things that happen on the field? When a team wins TO margin every game, why is the coach praised? When a team gives up small amounts of yards via penalties, why is a coach praised? If a team can make fundamental open field tackles every time, why is a coach praised? According to you, a coach has nothing to do with these things.
November 28th, 2010 at 6:56 PM ^
I may not 100% agree with everything you've said - but I do agree with the conclusion.
November 28th, 2010 at 7:30 PM ^
I believe your post has some very valid points. But you need to look at the fact that we played against ohio state for the big ten championship in 2007, 2006, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001... ect.
We were constantly playing for Big Ten championships, which is where everyone would like us to be.
And I really wish people would stop bringing up 2005. I understand that we are 7-5 this year and we went 7-5 that season. But do you even remember that season??? We lost 5 games by 21 points. 21 points! 21 points! We just lost by 30!
Our biggest loss that season was 7 points. We lost 17-10 to ND and in that game we were stopped on 4th down on ND's 5 yd line. Threw and INT at the ND 1, and fumbled at the ND 1.
I really think that your point was that we weren't setting things on fire before RR got here, so why is everyone complaining? Its just where we've fallen in the Big Ten race. When was the last 3 times we've had less than 5 conference wins before the Ohio State game? 1967/1966/1965. Since 1968 we had finished outside the top 3 in the Big ten a TOTAL of 7 times. Its not hard to figure out when 3 of those 7 were.
Coach Rod said it himself, this has taken longer than expected. But be patient everyone its going to be better, RR will continue to show improvement and I truly think that in 3 more years people will be back to complaining about people jumping on the bandwagon!
Go Blue! Go Coach Rodriguez! Lead us back to the top!
November 28th, 2010 at 8:23 PM ^
This season Michigan has beaten the teams they were expected to beat and lost to the teams they were expected to lose to. We all would have loved an upset or two but it simply wasn't in the cards. Michigan caught no breaks from the football gods.
Actually, given that we went 4-0 in close games, we were pretty lucky to post the record we did.
I agree that some of those old Rose Bowl losses were frustrating. What I don't understand is your implication that RR somehow has the magic formula for winning Rose Bowls and national titles. The teams that win those are good in all three phases of the game. We're beyond horrible in two of the three phases, and inconsistent and mistake-prone in the other.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:03 PM ^
I haven't really seen very much improvement from the defense at all. Fundamentals like tackling are missing from this defense and are things I believe the coaching staff could put more time into teaching. And although I sort of agree that we beat who we should have beat, it was the ugly fashion in which we lost the games (especially OSU) which scares me. We should at least be competitive in the first half of these games, and catching up in the 4th quarter when the opposing defense softens up doesn't mean much IMO. The offense always seems to stall in the first few drives against the good teams we play.
Having said all of this I am still not sure which direction I think DB should go with this coaching dilema. I guess to me its either keep RR and hire a new D staff or bring in Harbaugh. No other scenario is good in my book.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:11 PM ^
The team needed to be modernized. It didn't need to be demolished and rebuilt. That's where idiots like Martin got it wrong. They totally panicked after whiffing on their first two coaching choices, neither of whom is a spread guru. Good thing those guys passed, I guess.
But still. M had built-in advantages in recruiting. It landed top-tier linemen, receivers, qbs, and backs. They just needed some new coaching blood. Martin threw out the baby with the bathwater.
And I love the "RR is building a great defense" thing. No, he's not. His recruiting has been mediocre at best. This year, so far, he seems to have landed a couple promising young players. But he hasn't landed a single holy-shit player. Look at the recruiting ratings (which aren't totally reliable, but are generally so). On the D side, we're an also-ran. We don't have nearly enough D talent coming in.