Richrod update

Submitted by jdog on February 6th, 2011 at 10:49 AM

Story today about Richrod in the NYT (link below), discussing his time at  Michigan and his impending move to (the state of) Florida.  Money quote:

“To imply that we didn’t understand a tradition or you had to be there to understand all the things that are at Michigan, I kind of laugh at that,” he said. “We tried to embody that since the day we got there.”

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/rodriguez-reflects-on-his-d…

 

Comments

Tater

February 6th, 2011 at 10:57 AM ^

RR is being asked questions that give him an opportunity to really attack DB if he wanted to, but he continues to give non-inflammatory answers.  It must be a tough balance.  He doesn't want to come off as disingenuous or evasive, but he doesn't want to make inflammatory statements, either.  

He'll "land on his feet."  I think it would be fun to see him cover football for somebody next year before he takes the job everyone in football seems to think he will be taking.  It would be quite entertaining to see the state of SC have two coaches who have been, at times, lightning rods for criticism.  

njv5352

February 6th, 2011 at 12:52 PM ^

While I will agree that this statement was less inflammatory and he did not take a shot at M this time, he has in other interviews taken direct shots at DB. Lets hope he sticks to this type of answer from now on rather than his other answers where has questioned DB ability to run an Athletic Department. Just because you have been coaching for 25 years and been a head coach for over 10 doesn't mean you know how to run one either.

The old saying is, "Just because you can bake doesn't mean you know how to run a bakery." applies here.

DakotaBlue

February 6th, 2011 at 3:09 PM ^

Given the way that Brandon handled the situation, I think it would have been fair for RichRod to take far stronger shots than he did.  He endured a month of non-stop media speculation about his being fired, a premature announcement that he had been fired (likely the result of leaks from anti-RR factions within the AD), and then the actual firing.  On top of that, there's the idiotic drumbeat that he didn't understand our traditions.  

Can imagine the toll that this would take on you and your family?  And after all that, he makes a mild dig at Bradon being a corporate CEO who may not understand the challenges he's faced as coach.  He remained nothing but professional throughout all this.

He's gone now, why can't the haters just let him go without piling on?

njv5352

February 6th, 2011 at 5:44 PM ^

I think you got a few things wrong. First....IbsupportednRich until the day he was terminated. I took a lot of crap for supporting him. I also supported keeping him and hiring a great defensive coordinator. However, our AD thought the time had come to pull the trigger.

As for how DB handled it, I think you are sadly mistaken. He did what he said he was going to do all season. He said he would take a look at the program at the end if the season. Whether this is the last game of the regular season or after the post season had concluded, I will leave to you to speculate.

To assume that it was DB or any other faction that wrongly reported his firing is plain out stupid. With all the media attention that he had been given since taking this job, this was Just one more notch on the belt. It is far more likely that this "leak" you talk of was no more than pure media speculation turns into false truths. The media had it out for him from day one. DB spent the good part of the first 6 months of his tenure cleaning house and trying to get rid of the nonsupportive members of the athletic department.

As for understanding traditions, he openly admitted he hadn't done all his homework when it came to what was expected. I don't blame just him though. As an employer it is your job to make sure employees understand what is expected and the history behind the company. There were flaws on both ends and neither seemed like they were putting in the extra effort to understand one another.

As for DB not understanding what he has faced as a coach....that is a fair question and it was his job to educate DB. He said he did at every opportunity. As for questioning whether or not DB is the right person to run an Athletic Department, that is just a dig from an individual who felt like he didn't deserve to be fired. Not classy at all, and not the kind of response a guy who has had a great coaching resume should give. As for his family, I agree it is tragic and unfortunate. It is also par for the course when you coach at the D1 level. There is no guarantee that you will coach at a place forever (ask Bobby Bowden). There was also no shortage of ammo for the media that was created by RR himself. There were also many items that were embellished by the media too.

When it is all said and done, keep the answers simple, never trash, in any form, your former employer and move on. He would be better served to decline to answer questions from the same media that abused him for his 3 year tenure at Michigan, not the boss who decided to go another direction.

TJLA1817

February 6th, 2011 at 11:05 AM ^

can take solace in the fact that he is now a real "Michican Man" because he is a former coach.  As I understand it, all former coaches -  and assistant coaches - are Michigan Men.  Maybe someday he can be re-hired because he now has the credentials that he didn't have when he was the actual coach.

Section 1

February 6th, 2011 at 2:17 PM ^

But if it is, it belongs to Bump Elliott.  Bo made sure the team gave it to Bump, in the locker room, in November of '69.

Bump's grace and class and support for Bo was a model for how much better Rich Rodriguez could have and should have been treated in Ann Arbor.

When "Michigan Man" is a phrase that was used to bludgeon the then-current Michigan Head Football Coach, it ought to be buried forever.

Jasper

February 6th, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^

Whatever ... RichRod lost me right around the time he upset Michigan Man Mike Boren.

/s

Thanks for posting the article.  If you've ever wondered what kind of fan intensely disliked Rodriguez, get a load of comment #4.  In it, we have:

- "... he really did NOT understand what it means to be a Michigan man and the traditions behind the program ..."  Check.

- "He came in like a bull in a china shop, with a bunch of hillbilly coaches ..."  Check.

- "... he took over a team that went 9-4 and beat Florida ..."  Ah, yes.  Don't look at the big picture or anything.  Concentrate on one game.  Just one game.

- "Rodriguez then lost a large number of key players ... after making little effort to keep them."  Yes, I get all my news from the Free Press, too!

Section 1

February 6th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^

I'll tell you what; if we want to start burning the credentials of dishonorable, disreputable and thoroughly disgraceful "Michigan Men," let's just start with a bonfire, in the middle of the Diag, to burn the effigies of Michael Rosenberg and Mark Snyder as "Michigan Men."

Callahan

February 6th, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^

We're on probation for something that RR brought with him from WVU. That's a fact. Mike Rosenberg and Mark Snyder overreported the magnitude of the overpractice, but it still happened. So stop getting so offended when people bring it up. It happened.

Wolverine318

February 6th, 2011 at 12:34 PM ^

Just read the NCAA report, the practice overrages were occuring while Carr was at the helm. Secondly, they are major since the entire AD was under still probation during the time period under investigation thanks to the freaking fab five. 

How about next time you actually read the NCAA report and not look like a complete moron. Like I am going to take shit from someone with 58 mgopoints. 

Butterfield

February 6th, 2011 at 12:54 PM ^

I'm not particularly affected by arguments which utilize mgopoints as a basis for someones qualifications.  In fact, the fact that you have 13,326 mgopoints and are totally wrong about this proves my point sublimely.  You'll notice that the cited start date is always January '08.  Moran. 

A Rosenberg/Snyder-free summary of the violations from the Sporting News (http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2010-02-23/findings-nca…)

A look at what the NCAA says are five potentially major rules violations involving the University of Michigan football program. The NCAA outlined them in a "notice of allegations" that was received by the university Monday and released to the public on Tuesday.

1. From January 2008 through September 2009, the Michigan football program "exceeded the permissible limit on the number of coaches ... engaged in on- and off-field coaching activities."

2. From January 2008 through at least September 2009, the Michigan football program "violated NCAA legislation governing playing and practice seasons when it permitted football staff members to monitor and conduct voluntary summer workouts, conducted impermissible activities outside the playing season, required football student-athletes to participate in summer conditioning activities for disciplinary purposes and exceeded time limits for countable athletically related activities during and outside of the playing season."

3. A graduate assistant coach provided "false and misleading information to the institution and enforcement staff when questioned about his involvement in and knowledge of possible NCAA violations."

4. Michigan coach Rich Rodriguez "failed to promote an atmosphere of compliance within the football program."

5. The Michigan athletic department from January 2008 through at least September 2009 "failed to adequately monitor its football program to assure compliance regarding the limitations on the number, duties and activities of countable football coaches and time limits for countable athletically related activities."

So get off your RR blow-up doll and own up to the fact that he and his staff were responsbible.  It's okay to like RR and his methods - I personally don't - but to defend him at all costs is beyond absurd.

Section 1

February 6th, 2011 at 1:06 PM ^

You shit head.

The NCAA made the rare concession that it had gotten it wrong in making Allegation 4, and transformed it to a general "failure to supervise" allegation against the University.

Next time you come here to debate the NCAA Investigation, brush up on ALL of the facts.

Butterfield

February 6th, 2011 at 1:12 PM ^

I posted the allegations by the NCAA, the same ones that you said implicated the Carr regime but clearly DO NOT.  I am fully aware that the "Failure to Monitor" allegation was dropped, the remaining four were not.  And no where along the way were dates changed to go back further than January 2008. 

My point is proven.  Carr's era was in no way, shape, or form involved in this atmosphere of non-compliance.  Perhaps you should take your own advice except expand on it a bit - next time you come here to debate the NCAA investigation, brush of on SOME of the facts. 

Love the name calling by the way.  Very mature debating style. 

wolverine1987

February 9th, 2011 at 4:39 PM ^

that "your passion hasn't been this great for years" because I'm taking this to mean that you lost passion for the program since you may or may not have liked the old staff? If so that sucks--the passion should be there regardless of coach.. I'm I'm wrong apologies.

Section 1

February 6th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^

I didn't make any claims about the Carr era.  Although there is a case to be made about pre-Rodriguez personnel, but only in the sense that much of the mid-level paperwork kerfuffle involved Athletic Department personnel (Draper, Labadie, etc.) who predated Rodriguez were not part of any Rodriguez Regime.

For any of the Rodriguez detractors; go ahead and read the full text of Allegations 1,2,3 and 5, and just try to find any mention of any alleged Rich Rodriguez wrongdoing.  I can save you the search for any proven wrongdoing; there is none

M-Wolverine

February 6th, 2011 at 2:34 PM ^

Whose staff was illegally monitoring practices at both WV and Michigan? Who hired the guy who LIED to the NCAA? They were all Rich people. They changed 4, but didn't eliminate it completely. The fact is he hired guys that were making mistakes, didn't supervise them enough, and let them continue to make mistakes, and was not monitoring it properly. They just didn't think it was a completely flagrant act, and didn't rise to the level of loss of institutional control. But to say he did NOTHING wrong is just stupid.

M-Wolverine

February 6th, 2011 at 3:01 PM ^

I know you're angry that it's unrequited, but that's the way it's going to be. Accept it. 

But at LEAST come up with something other than your tired, made up arguments. We know you can't actually win an argument based in fact, so you have to make up extreme position that were never said to make you seem right. I'd explain how wrong you are, but it's not worth the breath anymore. You don't actually engage in debate, just attacks, and crawl back under your rock when shown to be wrong again. (Still waiting on that reply on how you'd feel if we didn't land certain basketball recruits....). It's attention you crave, but if you want to be shown to be stupid again, keep it up.

wmu313

February 6th, 2011 at 5:09 PM ^

The compliance staff was having issues with the football program before RR arrived. 

 

"Even before Rodriguez arrived at Michigan, the football program had historically

been late in submitting CARA forms to the compliance staff. For example, when

Rodriguez arrived in January 2008, the compliance staff had not received CARA

forms from football dating to August 2007."

 

http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/documents/NoticeofAllegationsResponseofRichRodriguez.PDF

JoeBenczarski

February 6th, 2011 at 1:09 PM ^

Carr made players run the bleachers in the Big House outside of practice, when they screwed up. If my memory serves me right, Adrian Arrington is a prime example. That is an NCAA violation, only reason why it wasn't addressed is because the media didn't have a vendetta against the Carr.

BigBlue02

February 6th, 2011 at 3:29 PM ^

Nope. All of the people who dislike RichRod have decided to look the other way when anything negative about Carr is brought up. Actually, that isn't really even negative about Lloyd. Just amazing what people will disregard when they are trying to make an argument.