Proposed bans

Submitted by ijohnb on October 11th, 2010 at 11:11 AM

On the following:

1.  The cupboard was bare.  OK, our roster wasn't loaded, but come on already, this statement is so far past irrelevant that it really makes my blood boil.

2.  How many wins will it take for Rich Rod to stay?  He is staying.  This thing is not over.  This is not how this story ends.

3.  Those who stay will be champions.  This era of Michigan football has nothing to do with the 1960s or what Bo's teams did or did not do.  To keep with this theme is to attach a context to this team and this time that just does not belong.

Any other suggestions. These are just tired.  And they come out in full force after the first loss of the year and only intensify as the year goes along.   


Nosce Te Ipsum

October 11th, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^

Good call. I agree with all three. I would add how people say that RR doesn't recruit defensive players. Witherspoon, Hill, Lalota, Turner, Emilein (spelling?), Dorsey, BooBoo. Those players weren't all his recruits the first year but he did get them to sign. Things would be drastically different on this defense if we had all of those players wearing the Maize and Blue.


October 11th, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^

is the cupboard really bare on topics to discuss, especially given RR needs to win these upcoming games or else our players will not be as physically adept and will possibly transfer should their coach be forced out?


October 11th, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^

that the INTERNET is a good place to propose banning any ideas. You know, being the medium of free and open communication that it is.

I can't say I disagree, but there's no way to ban these things.


October 11th, 2010 at 1:33 PM ^

I agree especially since we live in the good ol' US of A...Freedom of speech and all that.

i know sometimes that means listening/ reading some idiotic S#!t but hey, there much worse things in the world to get all wound up about right?


October 11th, 2010 at 11:18 AM ^

Well, I don't blame RR because the cupboard was really bare!  And, in the end, all he needs is 6 wins to get another year at the helm.  If everyone on the team buys in they will realize...



October 11th, 2010 at 11:21 AM ^

1 and 2 are positions with which reasonable people may differ. This board may have a majority view, but debate and civil disagreement are healthy.

Regarding 3, the past, the '69 season, are actual living memories, and will always shade how many Michigan fans view the present team. That is a large part of the reason RR came here in the first place. Yankees are compared to Ruth and Mantle. That is what tradition means, how it shapes perception and expectations.


October 11th, 2010 at 11:28 AM ^

a ban on the line altogether, but more at the context that it will be used in, which may be directed at the first two instead.  I just don't want to debate the status of Rich Rod's job, leading one to proclaim "those who stay will be champions" in response.  I have heard probably ten times, what will it take for him to keep his job?  And then a back and forth that leads inevitably to "those who stay will be champions" or some variation thereof.  I was just venting on some of these things that seem devisive.  It was just one game, we will win next week.  That is all, I agree now, it was an unnecessary post.  I am just tired of seeing the same old tired issues arise regarding the future of the team and job status.  Nobody is getting fired, there is not a bottom line record before they "clean house."  Just tired of the train of thought.


October 11th, 2010 at 11:24 AM ^

You want to ban "Those who stay will be Champions"?  Not only is this one of the greatest and most iconic mottos in college fb, but it is hanging on a huge sign that they players see on every game day.  Why don't we also ban discussion of Bo, Charles Woodson, the OSU Rivalry and football, generally. 

What is wrong with you? 


October 11th, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^

...Sisyphean effort. When U-M wins its 6th game to achieve bowl eligibility some will say RichRod's job is safe while others will disagree.  When U-M wins its 7th game almost everyone will say his job is safe while a fringe group will argue it's not enough. If/when U-M wins its 8th game, the fringe will be so ragged that they will be universally dismissed. 


Then the conversation will turn to what RichRod needs to do in 2011 (division / conference / national championship) to keep his job.  The rabble, rabble crowd will shift its focus to loftier goals and if they're not achieved, they will rabble, rabble just like they did from 1998 - 2007.

Book it, Danno.


October 11th, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^

While it certainly might be beaten to death by this point, the bare cupboard is hardly irrelevant.  As other diarists have shown with far more eloquence and detail, despite poor choices and horrid luck, RRod had an atypical sparcity of existing potential and depth to work with when he took over the job.  You tell me what this situation looks like if we had a couple more experienced senior 3*/4* linebackers to keep Ezeh on his toes and challenge him for start time.  You can recruit all of the best Freshman talent in the world, but thats not a position played easily without 2 or 3 years of DI-level conditioning and the physical plant of a man who didn't just leave his senior prom.


October 11th, 2010 at 12:04 PM ^

Those who stay will indeed be champions, but enough of the cupboard talk!

Was it bare?  Empty? Full?  Broken?  It doesn't matter.  RR blew up our offense and rebuilt it within 3 years (not getting into the difficulty of learning that offense).  From terrible to potent...3 years.  

The defense, however, has gotten worse each year.  We are on pace to give up ~5400 yards this season.  We are losing, rather than building, depth.  So, any talk of cupboard at this point is nothing other than babble of excuses.  Even if the cupboard were bare, the defense could be producing...just like the offense.  


October 11th, 2010 at 12:16 PM ^

"Even if the cupboard were bare, the defense could be producing ..."

... 'cept that the secondary debacle (with its myriad causes) is without historical precedent.  As we saw even in the glory days (end of the '06 season), a defense vulnerable in one area is a defense that can be exploited by a talented and balanced team.

Bad decisions (say, with the DC position in '08) appear to have been made on the defense, but we seem almost destined to have a weak secondary this year.  Plane crash ...


October 11th, 2010 at 1:19 PM ^

While it's true that our defense is depleted, the bare cupboard excuse is just "excuse".  I think that we've reached a point where that excuse just can't apply anymore.  The problems in the secondary are part bad luck and part poor recruiting/personnel choices.  The DC position in '08 now looks like a dream compared to the numbers we're allowing (not to mention the fact that he was RR's choice too).  We all make mistakes, and I don't think that RR would blame others the way that some folks here do for him.  

Finally, you note that our D can be exploited by a talented and balanced team...It can also be exploited by UMass.


October 11th, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^


 I personally don't see how it's irrelevant that we didn't have a ton of talent on the team when he took over.

 He inherited on recuriting class from Carr with about a month to do his own recuriting.  And other than that he either has True Sophomores, Redshirt Freshmen, and True Freshmen from his own recuriting classes.   I wouldn't disagree at all to say that this is the last year we can bring it up for reasons the team may still struggle at times.  But I still think it's, at a minimum, something that can be brought up.


October 11th, 2010 at 12:19 PM ^

Agreed -- snake oil aside, the '08 class should be considered Lloyd's last one.  (Aside: I've wondered whether RichRod bothered to look at the CB position around that time.  Apparently not ... d'oh.)  That doesn't seem to be appreciated here.  RichRod's first full class is in its 2nd program year (true sophomore / redshirt freshman).

Of note, that means we should be thanking *Lloyd* for Mike Martin.


October 11th, 2010 at 12:14 PM ^

is for you to start your own blog website.

If you don't like what people are saying on THIS blog - then negbang them or don't visit this site.

Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand the post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think you're entitled to!


October 11th, 2010 at 12:38 PM ^

...would have stayed, then we might have been Big Ten Champions this year.  It's still possible if we run the table and MSU does what MSU does best.

So it still rings true that "Those who stay will be champions"


October 11th, 2010 at 1:04 PM ^

I think we should ban threads that express dismay about Mike Barwis's inability to make Michigan's players into superheroes. I would also like to ban the phrases "it's just pitch and catch" and "smashmouth football." I also hate the word "meme." There.