RR v BH Recruiting Comparison

Submitted by rockydude on June 24th, 2011 at 10:22 PM

This is in no way meant to be a "Bash RR" or "try to love RR" thread, so look elsewhere for that. This is just meant to compare two very different approaches to recruiting. Something interesting jumps out at me about RR's recruiting v BH's recruiting.

Given that the 2011 class was kind of a weird Frankenstein compilation between RR and BH, I'm not looking at that one. However, 2010 was all Rodriguez, and 2012 is all Hoke. The class of 2010 had 27 players, of whom 15 were under 200 lbs. The class of 2012 is 17 currently (counting Jeremy Clark as the last commit), of whom two are under 200 lbs, and both are CBs, who are typically the smallest players on the field.

I'm not trying to make the point that the RR recruiting was objectively bad, because a lot of those smaller players carried high grades and it was a well regarded recruiting class, as is our 2012 class so far. I bring this up because it would seem like a pretty objective way to look at the different philosophy that the two coaches bring to the game.

Sure seems to back up the general idea that RR wants speed and agility at all cost, whereas BH wants to play a physical game and see who wins the strength contest. We won't know for a while whose approach is best suited to the Big Ten, but we should certainly get an answer that we can take to the bank, once all is said and done . . . 


OMG Shirtless

June 24th, 2011 at 10:29 PM ^

There is absolutely no way to avoid the fact that this will turn into a RR bashing thread filled with His Dudeness and Section 1 repeating the same shit they've been babbling on about since early January.  Maybe if we're lucky His Dudeness will drop some homophobic shit, get called on it, and hide for a few months again.

Section 1

June 25th, 2011 at 12:39 PM ^

And his 3:40 am Belle Isle fender bender.  Much of the rest of the Board membership didn't like it; Braylon is apparently an untouchable Michigan hero once again.  The thread was altered and closed.

I didn't violate any Board rules, and I don't know what rule I am supposed to have violated.  No moderator has told me.  I got a form e-mail explaining that board moderation was not always fair, and so don't bother Brian (uh, especially on his wedding day I would guess) with questions.

I presume that a lower-level moderator did it, because I don't think Brian is so arbitrary and unfair.  No one has given me any information, so I can't answer your question.  I wish I could.

Brian might be very surprised if Braylon-sarcasm was now a bannable offense.  Because in that case, Brian might get suspended.

I think cooler heads will prevail later and my 11,800+ points will be restored.

Bando Calrissian

June 25th, 2011 at 12:52 PM ^

Or perhaps cooler heads will still realize, as the mod did last night, that you habitually troll this place with longwinded rants that scarcely vary from your prescribed narrative.  Your hatred of Braylon Edwards borders on the irrational, hence why that thread was such a disaster.

Nothing new under the sun, which, perhaps not coincidentally, shines quite brightly in Bolivian.


June 25th, 2011 at 1:26 PM ^

This is Brian's blog.  We keep coming here because we like his writing, his content, and the opportunity it provides Michigan fans to discuss Michigan (and other) topics.

You, on the other hand, are not Brian and you're finding out that people here don't like your writing, the content held therein, and the discussions that it invariably creates.

Stop pretending like you and Brian are equals.

Section 1

June 25th, 2011 at 2:53 PM ^

And since you were a reader of the earlier thread, you should have known that I didn't compare myself to Brian Cook.  I wrote that I merely agreed with Brian, and he with me, on practically every big contentious issue in Michigan sports.  (The support for Rodriguez, the outrage at the Free Press, the dubious throwback jerseys, the Rawk Music issue, the misplaced blame for the I-94 billboards.  Time and again, I have been in agreement with Brian, who sets the tone at MGoBlog.)  I also pointed out that I simply liked to read, largely without ever commenting, on Brian's and others' technical football commentary.  Yours included.

What I said in the earlier thread was that it was others, not me, who seemed to freak out over a humorous Letterman-style list of Top Ten things that someone might say to explain their driving off a road on Belle Isle at 3:40 am.  The mass freakout wasn't prompted by any out-of-bounds or rule-violating comment that I made.  It was a freakout about an idea; the idea that Braylon has become something of a freak himself.  With need of little more than Braylon's erratic public comments and public court records as backup.

And I observed that if mere sarcasm about a former Michigan football player whose story was at that moment appearing in every local paper was somehow inappropriate, then Brian Cook would clearly have to double-check his own Braylon sarcasm.

Sometimes, we need to recognize, board moderators have to take down topics, even appropriate ones under the Board Rules of the Road, based only on the mass freakout factor.  In the interest of Board Peace.  And I know that.  If someone took down my thread, they'd get no complaint from me.  Indeed they did that yesterday, and they got no complaint from me.

But now it seems that I've been punished for others' reactions to me.  That part's weird.  


June 25th, 2011 at 8:37 PM ^

If it's not funny, it gets blasted. Since you can't seem to see the difference between you and Brian, I'll help explain it to you. Even Brian writes objectionable things, and people, well, object. But that's not ONLY what Brian writes about...not even close to the majority. You, on the other hand, are pretty one track in your posts, and almost universally so in self created threads. If all Brian wrote about was the topics you list, 100% of the time, he'd probably have just you as a reader. Because the rest of us would be tired of that shit.
<br>It's also the underlying hypocrisy of who you take shots at. Braylon is no untouchable. But there's something wrong when as soon as I see the story ELSEWHERE, I know it's going to be you to post it. And we all know it has far less to do with him being a repeat dumb ass, but the fact that he was quite publicly negative about Rich (quite possibly carelessly so). But if he had been one of the leading endorsers of Rich, it wouldn't matter how much dumbassery he committed, you wouldn't see fit to print it. You're not posting threads on every Rich kid who flamed out, or got into trouble. It's not being a bad ambassador that bothers you. It's a free shot because his REAL crime to you isn't against the law, but the instutution of Rich Rod.
<br>You don't get that this style isn't just pissing off people who disagree with you, but annoying those that even have similar views. And worse, making them look like a fringe element, rather than those with legitimate concerns. You're not speaking for anyone but yourself. And unless you can vary the message, we've all heard it, and don't need to hear it again. Brian knows that. You don't. That's the difference.

Section 1

June 25th, 2011 at 8:50 PM ^

1.  Ignore a thread if you don't like the subject.

2.  Disagree, and say why, if you feel the need to do so.

3.  Take the thread down, if the other Board members are freaking out.  (I wasn't.)

4.  Let me know, if I have violated one of the posting rules of the Board.  (No one has done that; I am certain that I haven't broken any rules.)




Section 1

June 25th, 2011 at 9:10 PM ^

You can think and write whatever you want.  Not only have I never complained about people bashing me, but I've never even given the mods cause to discipline me in the past even when others have been flaming me and attacking me personally.  Seen time and time again.

My complaint is with how I'm being treated by the moderators.

I take that they do think I broke a rule.  What, I have no idea. 

But I am gratified, Magnus, that you agree with me that I did not  break "any of the posted rules."  I really bristle at the implication that I did something wrong to lose 11,800+ points and my status on this Board, for nothing more than an attitude of fierce loyalty to Coach Rodriguez.

NOT attacking any current players.

NOT attacking any current coaches.

NOT attacking other Board members.

But instead, making fun of the guy who is already a favorite as the biggest punchline in New York sports.  For driving off the road on Belle Isle at 3:40 in the morning.


June 26th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^

So why are you reporting whatever the latest school Demar Dorsey isn't getting into?  I'd say because it's not cool, but that's obviously not why. It's because he wanted to come play for Rich.  And if current is the only protection, then you should never object to anyone trashing Rich Rod. Because he's not the current coach. Even though it's old, and there's really no good to come of it, you should let it slide, because he's no longer here, and there certainly were some punchlines.

As for "posted rules", it probably doesn't need to be posted that you shouldn't post anything but continued flamebait, when you know everyone hates it, just because you're voice needs to be heard. It'd be the same if some guy was posting links to the Freep all the time when they were on 99% ban. People are free to do it, but it's frowned on, and if you do it again and again and again, and pretty much nothing else, you've broken the unwritten rule of not being a dick to your fellow board members and showing a disregard for their feelings. EVERYBODY says something rude, or snarky, or regrettable at some time or another.  Most probably DO regret it after the fact. If I spent EVERY post bitching about people bitching about Lloyd, or complaining about the (quickly fading) Hoke disdain, and not posting insights into other things, or just "That's What She Said" pics, people would get sick of my rant too. But if people know what you're going to write before you write it...what's the point anymore?


July 6th, 2011 at 1:03 PM ^

How is Dorsey even remotely close to Braylon? Dorsey is a kid with a tough upbringing who had some problems, classroom and personal, but appear to be making an honest effort to redeem himself. Mocking him is a dick move - period. Mocking Braylon is an activity widely accepted in every corner of the internet EXCEPT on Michigan boards, apparently.

Yes, Section1 is severely biased in a way that centers around Rich Rod. You aren't bringing anything new to the table yourself by pointing that out. But his mentality doesn't differ so much from the one so many people on here have. He simply is way more passionate (I agree to an annoying degree) about a particular thing that most others are not. The very enviornment here that shelters Braylon from criticism is also fanatical and incredibly biased, but it's become sanity by consensus.


Section 1

June 25th, 2011 at 9:29 PM ^

This, M-Wolverine, is well-stated:

It's also the underlying hypocrisy of who you take shots at. Braylon is no untouchable. But there's something wrong when as soon as I see the story ELSEWHERE, I know it's going to be you to post it. And we all know it has far less to do with him being a repeat dumb ass, but the fact that he was quite publicly negative about Rich (quite possibly carelessly so). But if he had been one of the leading endorsers of Rich, it wouldn't matter how much dumbassery he committed, you wouldn't see fit to print it. You're not posting threads on every Rich kid who flamed out, or got into trouble. It's not being a bad ambassador that bothers you. It's a free shot because his REAL crime to you isn't against the law, but the instutution of Rich Rod .

Yes, I am not picking on Braylon for the fun of it.  I was there that late afternoon for Braylonfest versus MSU.  The guy is a phenomenal talent and a historically good football player.

But he is a certifiable idiot off the field.  And he was an idiot for his damaging cheap shots aimed at Coach Rodriguez.  I have a grudge with Edwards because of his stupid and hurtful comments.  Yes sir, I do.  I have a long and a good memory, and I hold grudges. 

I don't ever pick on any current Michigan kids.  I haven't picked on any kids for getting in trouble with the law.  And unlike Braylon Edwards, I don't pick on current Michigan coaches. 

Respectfully, I suggest that when my beef with Braylon is that he showed bad judgment and insufficient Michigan loyalty during the Rodriguez years, that hardly qualifies me as a troll or as a public enemy of this Board.

But there's even more.  The mods could have said, "Yeah, we know how you feel, but the subject of Braylon is just too touchy.  We'll get complaints from Stan, and from other former players.  And Braylon is such an icon to people from that era.  So we're taking your thread down, and if you don't mind, no more Braylon comments, okay?"  Nobody said that to me.  If they had, I'd say oaky.



June 26th, 2011 at 12:02 PM ^

Braylon doesn't really need his comments on Rich to be taken down an notch...because Braylon has done a good enough job discrediting himself.  The current thing (as stated above) is arbitrary too. So, as soon as they go out the door, they're fair game? If they played for Rich, didn't like it, and say it after, then it's ok to blast them? What about the kids on the team now who act amazed as they're finding out what it's like to have defensive coaching? Should they be blasted?  Or Cox when he's tweets "DickRod"? Isn't it fair to say whether he liked Rich's coaching or not, that it wasn't the best way to go about it?

And if you don't get that you're not a "public enemy" because you don't like bad things to be said about Rich Rod, but because that's ALL you contribute to the Boards...endless defenses of Rich for all and any slights (perceived or not, justified or not), with no acknowledgement of any mistakes, ever....it gets old. And people already have heard it. Do you think all the people who think you're "trolling" are unsympathetic to Rich? Hardly. And when people on your side are telling you to take a step back...maybe it's time to start listening.  Hateful grudges against people you've never met for things they've SAID can't be really healthy. He didn't like a coach you liked, that you have no relation whatsoever to.  You can disagree with that sentiment, but there are limits to sane reactions.

And really, it's kind of a cheap conspiracy theory shot to say the Mods are getting pressure from the Edwards to take such stuff down. It completely removes the possibility that it was stupid shit, the mods thought it was stupid shit, and they're just as tired of your act as everyone else is. And are probably at the point where they figure you don't get the point, because everyone tells you the same thing, and you do it over and over again anyway. And used this, the most childish example of the never-ending rant to make the point.

But I have no doubt that the 35 paragraph email to Brian has already been sent, waiting in his inbox for his return from his wedding activities, complaining about the injustices bestowed on you. With probably 3 addendum emails. Even though it has to be that amount of points to prevent you from posting threads; and, it's almost assuredly not permanent. I got slammed 5000 points once, and I hadn't even really done anything that bad.  It was an attention getter. And I had a really nice convo with one of the mods (who can out himself if he wants, I don't care). The points eventually came back, and while I don't think what I was doing was that bad, it did have the potential to slide into that, and I appreciated the heads up. Maybe it's a time of self-reflection. (Though on a more technically point, sometimes the mod messages come up when you open up the screen again in a yellow box...probably is, if you're not looking, and scroll away, or if you're going into it via the App or something, sometimes it's gone before you see it.).

Section 1

June 26th, 2011 at 12:21 PM ^

All that I asked was what was my 11,880-point offense?  Which rule was it?

To wit:

Well, I know I am not allowed to ask why I have been punished, but I just can't resist.  I'd like to know what I did to lose more than 11,800 points.  Which rule did I break?  I'd like to know so that it doesn't happen again.
Section 1 



July 6th, 2011 at 12:48 PM ^

Your love of Braylon -- which stems entirely from his donation (one of the least modest I've ever seen considering the huge sense of entitlement it gave him on what goes on at Michigan) -- is also bordering on the irrational.

Since you seem to think love of University is the most important thing in the world, driving drunk, saying things that hurt the current regime at your program, getting in bar fights and just generally being a douchebag -- these things are all excused or ignored by you because he threw some cash at UM.

Section 1

June 26th, 2011 at 11:51 AM ^

That's too bad, that the original post is gone, because that was the most innocuous part of the whole thing.  People are liable to think that there was something offinsive in it, because it is gone.  When in fact, it was simply a Letterman-style Top Ten list of reasons why somebody might drive off a road on Belle Isle at 3:40 am.  Braylon's name didn't even appear.  It was pure 100% sarcasm and everybody understood it as such.

The only offensive thing to the MGoBoard membership, apparently, was that somebody (me) was still angry at Braylon for his anti-Rodriguez campaign.  And willing to ridicule Braylon for another one of his stupid escapades.

Again, the whole thing didn't come close to violating any Board rules.  It was merely unpopular among the MGoBoyz.

OMG Shirtless

June 26th, 2011 at 12:02 PM ^

If somebody started a thread every other day that essentially said, "Rich Rod got a raw deal." Those threads by themself would not violate board rules.  Eventually they would just get deleted because it's obnoxious and done for the sole purpose of getting a rise out of people.   


June 26th, 2011 at 12:15 PM ^

But he could do worse. Looking at your point total, you've had you're fair share of point docks. But you take it like a man, admit you went too far, and go about your business. And maybe learn what edges are more touchy than others. No one minds the occasional "going to far"; it's the defiant "above it all" attitude where everyone else's shit smells but never my own that doesn't preclude a lot of sympathy. (That, and while you've had your neg-bangs, you're not JUST posting stuff that caused it, again and again...it's the rarity, when usually it's a lot of funny stuff).

Section 1

June 26th, 2011 at 1:07 PM ^

Scroll down just below.  From a day or so ago.  Flamebait as to how Coach Rodriguez was the worst coach in Michigan history.  (I never responded; it didn't dignify a response.)

Or scroll up in this thread; where OMG Shirtless called me out by name in a thread I had not participated in, resisting the flamebait.

So, no; Shirtless is not my guide.  My guide was more along the lines of, "What are the rules of the Board, and how are they to be followed?" 

And still, no one has answered that.


June 24th, 2011 at 11:52 PM ^

It applies generally as well. Whenever I am in a situation when someone prefaces his comment by saying "maybe I shouldn't say this but" the proper and immediate response should be " then don't say it".


June 24th, 2011 at 10:37 PM ^

the philosophy or scheme was in recruiting all his runningbacks. RR inherited a decent number of backs, took 4 more in 2008, and 5 more between 09-10 yet the QB was one of the regular rushers even with Forcier. He pulled in 9 RBs in 3 years when there wasn't a depth problem  to begin with, and then didn't use them. The upside to the qb rushing is there's an extra blocker, but many of his backs were small. I wish I could ask him why he took so many backs.


June 24th, 2011 at 11:28 PM ^

ummm... because we needed to find one?  Name the weak spot in our offense the last couple years.  I'll give you three guesses.


oh wait...