RR Downgraded

Submitted by blueman on January 24th, 2009 at 11:30 AM

CFN is less than impressed with RR-ranked dead last among new coaches in'08.

Ranking the 2008 Rookie Head Coaches:

http://cfn.scout.com/2/832466.html

I picked this up from another site. I find it hard to dispute. RR has gone from "great" hire to WTF happened in less than a year. Let's hope he gets it turned around.

Comments

Magnus

January 24th, 2009 at 11:40 AM ^

That article is hogwash and largely just a potshot at Rodriguez. I'll grant that Michigan's defense should have been better, but Michigan's offense was about all anyone should have expected. We had practically ZERO senior leadership on offense, tons of freshmen playing, and quarterbacks who didn't fit the system at all. On top of that, it mentions that Michigan had its long winning streaks against MSU and PSU stopped - but fails to mention that those were perhaps the best MSU and PSU squads Michigan has faced during that time period.

blueman

January 24th, 2009 at 12:19 PM ^

RR in COMPARISON to other 1st year coaches had the worst results. Are you saying Nutt, Johnson or Pelini or any of the others had more overall talent than RR? Johnson instituted a completely new O with less talent and had spectacular results.

Not that it matters, but I do not agree that the '08 MSU and PSU teams were the best we have faced in the last few years or whatever "that time period" means.

Magnus

January 24th, 2009 at 12:23 PM ^

Wait a minute...when you rank people from 1 to 18, you do it by making comparisons between them? Holy shit.

Anyway, "that time period" clearly means from the time those winning streaks against MSU and PSU started until this past year. They might NOT have been the best squads...but they might HAVE been the best squads. PSU won the Big Ten title, for example.

bluebloodedfan

January 24th, 2009 at 12:32 PM ^

Name a MSU or PSU team that has been better than the teams they fielded this year in the past five years? And as far as comparing coaches and talent it is not a fair comparison. The rationale would be more of a fair metric if players were gauged for there compatibilty to the new system as well as talent level etc... And it also doesn't take into account how much that defense played this past year. They were on the field entirely to often due to the lack of production from the offense. I don't care how good a defense is. If they are called on week in and week out to play as many downs as our defense was it is going to have an adverse effect on them.

The Spread

January 24th, 2009 at 12:51 PM ^

PSU had a pretty good team with Michael Robinson as a QB. If I recall correctly, that is the same year where UM freshman Super Mario caught the game winning TD as time expired. That was a great game against a good Joe Pa team. I dont know if they were necessarily better than this year's team but definitely comparable.

jamiemac

January 24th, 2009 at 1:01 PM ^

Penn State 2005 >>>>>> Penn State 2008.

Robinson was more dangerous than Clark ever will be.

Defensviely, they were deeper and better in all units....especially that secondary with Zemitas and company.

Just my opinion, but I'd take the 2005 edition.

jamiemac

January 24th, 2009 at 1:09 PM ^

While Fiutak (the head honcho of the site) is quick to talk down about UM and its 'leaders and the best' attitude, it should be noted that over and over again in coaching rankings they've put RR in the top 10.

Of course, that would probably be downgraded as well if they were to do a new list today, but the site has been a long time admirer of RR for a while.

Like everyone else, once RR starts winning, all the love will come back.

jmgoblue81

January 24th, 2009 at 12:37 PM ^

Johnson may have had less overall talent, but he had a QB perfect for his system. The talent he did have "fit" his sytem much better than the talent RR inherited on offense. And let's not forget that GT is going to have 3 defensive lineman drafted this year - I'm not sure the talent gap on the defensive side of the ball is very big.

As for Pelini and Nutt - they inherited plenty of experience. There's no substitute for that. We had easily the least-experienced offensive team we've had in many years.

What other MSU or PSU teams have been better in the last 8-10 seasons (the time period during which we've had the win streaks).

Yinka Double Dare

January 25th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^

Johnson had more talent for his offense. He had a QB perfect for his system, along with a couple of very good running backs. At QB we had a freshman who didn't fit the system and a walkon who didn't fit the system.

Nutt had a very good QB who had transferred from Texas because he couldn't beat out Colt McCoy.

Pelini's team was loaded on offense (Callahan recruited offense very well) with a senior QB. The defense was a bit more dicey, which is why Callahan got fired and Pelini got hired in the first place, but it isn't like they were devoid of talent there either - Suh would start for any team in the country.

blueman

January 24th, 2009 at 12:25 PM ^

But the article is full of facts. From those, the writer draws his conclusion. He may be wrong on any of the individual ratings. They are his opinion based on the facts. Should RR be ranked 16th rather than 18th? That is a matter of opinion. But he certainly does not belong in the top 15. Now that's my opinion.

PA Blue

January 24th, 2009 at 12:30 PM ^

It seems absurd to take a ranking seriously when the real proof of the quality of these hires will be in two years.

My guess is that UM will be the best program of those listed in two years. The rankings as they are this year will look pretty silly.

beardog07

January 24th, 2009 at 4:33 PM ^

Yeah, you should really shut the fuck up you clearly don't understand what you are talking about and you don't belong on this site. RR belongs in the "You were under .500, but better days lay ahead" category you idiot. Did you see our team this year? Our QBs fuckin sucked it up at the most important position. Why don't you go make comments on mlive where idiot fans like you can freely bash RR and then feel stupid in 3 years.

GoBlue-ATL

January 24th, 2009 at 12:51 PM ^

a Loss to Toledo, is beyond unacceptable. They did not win the 4th quarter or look dominate except for one game (Wisconsin), which makes you question the "Barwis" factor.

My analysis is Rich Rod did not connect with the Carr era hangovers. And, he chose to work in his philosophies, as opposed to working with what he had.

That said, I think the future is still very bright.

befuggled

January 24th, 2009 at 9:49 PM ^

Charlie Weiss went 9-3 in his first season at Notre Dame, losing close games to Michigan State and Southern Cal and then 34-20 to Ohio State in the Fiesta Bowl. That was a big improvement over the 6-6 record compiled by Ty Willingham and whoever replaced him for the bowl game. I'm sure Weiss would have been in the top 5 of any such list compiled after that season. Notre Dame certainly thought so, as they didn't even wait for him to finish the season before giving him a big contract extension.

A couple of years later, Charlie Weiss is rumored to be in danger of losing his job. His 2006 team was respectable, but his 2007 team was one of the worst in school history. He brought them back to a bowl game in 2008, but also lost to a bad Syracuse team.

Moral of the story? You can't judge a coach by one year. Yeah, if RR doesn't start winning he's going to get fired. Obviously.

befuggled

January 24th, 2009 at 9:59 PM ^

No. 2, Brett Bielema, barely reached a bowl game this year. His teams have gotten worse every year.

No. 4, Ron Prince, fell to 5-7 the next two years and apparently resigned.

Again, one year is too little information. Three years often isn't enough, honestly.

For the next year (2007), he had Minnesota's Brewster nearly at the bottom. It's still too early to tell, but Minnesota looked substantially better this year.