Thank you RR
I just want to give a quick comment on what a great bunch of recruits you brought in during your short stay here. Most of the kids stayed when it would have been easy for them to bale because they didn't necessarily fit the new scheme. We have a lot of talent coming back next year which would be your first full recruiting classes senior/rs junior year and I look forward to great things from them.
Hoke and Mattison took your young D and helped shape and mold them into a very good defense. Seniors congratulations you finally got the type of season you expected when you committed to the University of Michigan. Go Blue!
November 27th, 2011 at 11:05 AM ^
Thank you Master Rod.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:06 AM ^
I agree. I actually sent an email to the Arizona AD asking him to pass on a similar message to Rich yesterday. I knew that posting on this board was pointless as I'm sure Rich doesn't read it and it would only cause a flame war if I did.
I know some people will never see it but this team was about to turn this corner anyway. It was set up for success. Mattison is truly an amazing hire and I love Hoke and they deserve tons of credit for what they've done. However, recognizing some of the fruits of one coach (RR) does not equal insulting another (Hokemania).
November 27th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^
Frankly, my biggest problem with all the praise of RR is that it comes from many of the same people who incessantly blame Loyd for all of RR's problems. While RR clearly had challenges on offense, most of his failings on D (and I'd argue special twams) were of hos own making. If rR had a competent D during his tenure, we wouldn't have fallen so far. I don't get why I need to praise someone for fixing problems that were in large part their own fault.
November 27th, 2011 at 8:49 PM ^
Where in my post did I even mention Lloyd Carr? (notice the correct spelling of his first name) I love L.C. and will always be a huge supporter of him. You are replying to my post with meaningless references to feelings that don't exist inside of it.
My reference regarding success was simply stating that I think RR was set up to succeed this year as well.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:06 AM ^
on a "team" effort by both coaches? RR certainly gets credit for having the ability to spot and recruit talent. A+ to him.
Hoke, and more importantly Mattison, gets credit for molding these kids into winners. I love Hoke because he "gets it". I also believe that RR got it eventually.
I often wonder what the team would perform like if RR hired Mattison in January?
November 27th, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^
Man.... but sometimes people come into your life for a short period of time just challenge you to change and accept new things. Sometimes that's all they were ever meant to do.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:12 AM ^
In what alternate universe would Greg Mattison have agreed to coach under Rodriguez?
November 27th, 2011 at 11:20 AM ^
It's a pointless "What if?" exercise, but presumably you can get a better coach for over $800K (whether that would be Mattison or somebody else) than you do for $200K.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
Other than seeing a qb in Denaerd his recruiting and player evaluation seems average at best - especially on defense
November 27th, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^
Thank you RR for ruining our bowl streak. Also thanks for putting the football program on probation and tarnishing it. Thanks for breaking all kinds of traditions that Michigan has like giving out that #1 jersey that means alot to the program. Thanks for putting up a good defense which is what michigan was known for. Thanks for not getting it.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:21 AM ^
It's sad to see a thread like this (and worse to see so many upvotes for it). Is a "thank you Tommy Amaker" thread coming next? Hell, at least TA had a better record.
The OP talks about these being "RR's recruits"...Funny, I thought they were "Michigan" recruits. The OP talks about Hoke & Mattison helping to shape our "young D". They didn't "shape" the D. They "made" it. They put even MORE young players on the field and produced a defense beyond anything RR could ever dream of (not that he would even care enough to dream about defense).
On the day after we broke our terrible streak against OSU, can't folks just drop all of this "I love you RR" shit? It's time to appreciate what we actually have; not what you hoped RR might eventually be able to accomplish (if only he had the right players, right AD support, right coaching support, right media, right defensive coordinator, right maturation, etc.).
November 27th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^
Pretty typical post for you ... some good, well-argued points marred by a few heaps of DOOSHiness. I think you're right about Amaker.
Would it be asking too much for you to be pleasant? You'd get more +1s!
I get annoyed by threads like this, too (really). If you're wondering why they appear so often, look in the mirror.
By aligning yourself with people like Michael Rosenberg and refusing to concede much of anything to the pro-RR crowd (even when appropriate), you'll increase the likelihood of these types of threads being launched.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^
no problem with this post. RR played an important part in Michigan history. All other opinions are welcome as well. Go Blue!!!
November 27th, 2011 at 11:27 AM ^
...seems to be discounting that this group of defenders is a year older and isn't littered with true and redshirt freshmen. Additionally, people seem to forget how bad the B1G is, especially on offense.
I think Hoke, Mattison, and Co. have definitely outperformed the previous staff on D and ST, but allowing a horrendous O like Ohio's and such a green QB who is a poor passer to look like 2005 Vince Young suggests there is some merit to last year's D not being able to stop anyone.
If the current coaching staff had last year's roster, sure, they would've done better, but not good enough to stop people on a consistent basis. You just can't w/half the D being first year players. Even Saban at Alabama had a problem stopping people his first year, and went 6-6.
So, thank you RR for Denard, Lewan, Countess, Demens, Morgan, Ryan, etc. Thank you BH and GM for putting guys in a position to be successful and teaching them good technique. And, thank you B1G for being so weak this year.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^
One of the most encouraging things this year was the way that the team improved from week to week. The Nebraska game was a real breakthrough in my mind.
The defense improved signficantly. Tackling by the defense was excellent. They completely shut down Nebraska. I think Mattison gambled a bunch against OSU and put the game on Miller's thorwing - which turned out to be a decent (though scary) bet.
I thought that the offense also improved by the end of the year. The offense against Nebraska and OSU, both tough defenses, was balanced and strong. We put up big points against both Ds. In previous years, I thought our offense regressed at the end of the year. For example, last year we only put up 7 points against OSU. That may be b/c of external factors (outside pressure, kids getting worn out by the end of the season, coaching change rumors etc.) but that was the reality.
Even special teams improved by the end of the year (despite the fumbled punt).
I have to chalk this up to coaching. This staff has done a tremenous job. I still think RR would have done a great job in the long run and I'm not sure if I would have let RR go.
I was however a big fan of the Hoke hire. He is a great fit for Michigan. There is an untangile benefit to having someone at the helm that is in their dream job. This has to help in recruiting (Hoke must be powerful explaining to recruits that Michigan is his dream job), in coaching (he can feel these rivalry games like us and has inherent respect for all the past Michigan teams), and with the press (his statements are very believable).
Kidos to RR for some of the exciting players he brought to MIchigan that would never be there. His biggest success is Denard. He does not get enough credit for creating Denard. We should continue a pipeline to Flordia - allowing this to collapse would be a shame. I am surprised by how well RR's staff recruited under the radar guys for the D, like Ryan and Morgan - two of my favorite D players (once he finally realized several years in the importance of finding good D players to plug in). It will be interesting to see how Hoke and company do.
Cheers to the future. Hoke and his staff are clearly good coaches. If nothing else they were able to adapt their schmes to the players they have and produce a well disciplined team in all phases of the game.
The future of Michigan football is bright. Go Blue!!
November 27th, 2011 at 11:35 AM ^
Thanks for bringing us Denard, some other rad dudes, and then getting fired so we could get a real coach.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:45 AM ^
We will never know what RR and a new defensive coordinator could have done this season, it does not matter, and that's how things are,
Debate and logic are all fine, but no proof available. One of the things about decisions, like to fire RR or to Hire RR in the first place, you never get to find out how the alternatives would have worked out. Get over it, what is done is done. We have a team to be proud of at 10-2 with a bowl game coming, and we appear to have a good incoming class and a set of coaches that have done a pretty good job so far. We can see how good the coaches are as they start anew next year and start bitching about whatever it is they do wrong or praise whatever they do right then......
Next year's goal, Big Ten Championship! Let's get there!
November 27th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
I'm grateful for the players that RR brought in who perservered through all the chaos. I'm grateful for the players that Carr brought in who didn't run for the hills or the plowfields or the money even though their dreams of glory at Michigan seemed dashed. I'm grateful for RR telling his kids to stay and buy in to the new coaches.
I'm grateful for the new coaches who accepted the former coach's size-challenged speedsters, and were open-minded enough to take them as their own and coach them as intensely and passionately as the athletes who more fit their preferred prototype, encouraged them and allow them to compete and prove little people could play as big as the Big Ten bruisers they faced. I'm grateful the new coaches could put it all together and salvage the dreams of the upperclassmen before it was too late for them.
And I'm even grateful for the chaos of the last few years, because it played its part in bonding these great kids, helping them mature, giving them the drive to constantly improve, and making them appreciate their success in a way silver-spoon diva athletes will never understand.
I am so grateful for The Team, The Team, The Team, and all the coaching men who guided them and continue to guide them. Team 132 never pointed fingers or demeaned one coach as a way of supporting another. They never blamed, they perservered. It's all part of Michigan. And their love of Michigan can only increase our own.
November 27th, 2011 at 11:58 AM ^
I agree with the thanks to Rodriguez, but it's coming off to plenty of people as a slam to the job Hoke did. RR definitely left some things, both good (offense) and bad (defense) for Hoke to improve. Honestly I think both have taken steps forward...the offense, while maybe not quite as lightning-fast, has proven more effective against in-conference opponents, and is only going to improve as Borges figures out Denard's skill set and its utility. The defense went from the worst in Michigan history to one of the statistically best that's been around in either the Carr or Rodriguez era.
Rodriguez' downfall was his inflexibility on offense and lack of attention to defense. Hoke and his staff have changed that, while continuing the other traditions and characteristics about Michigan that Rodriguez, Carr and those before had developed and maintained
Overlooked is the choice each member of Team 132 made to stay at Michigan. And in whatever way Rodriguez instilled that in them, I am thankful. But at this point, it's to some degree water under the bridge.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:01 PM ^
Two losing seasons, massive depth problems on D-Line and O-Line that will rear their head next year (and even this year in the form of starting a walkon SDE/DT). Severe problems with DB retention. A conference win/loss record similiar to Tim freaking Brewster. The man who hired and retained GERG and his stuffed toy collection.
That era is over. I love Denard and some of his recruits, but I'd have traded the last three years for three more years of Lloyd Ball (8/9 wins and getting our asses kicked in the Rose Bowl) no questions asked.
RR is an Arizona Man now. We have a staff that moved us from 108th to 8th in scoring defense, won 10 and set us up for a BCS Bowl. Thank you Hoke. Thank you Mattison. Thank you Borges. Thank you assistants. Thank you RVB and Martin (Carr recruits) for sticking for Team 132 and making this happen.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:11 PM ^
I'm with you 'cept for one little detail. Getting 8 wins out of the '08 team would have required a miracle. Let's not forget that more stumbles that year out of an aging Lloyd Carr would have made recruiting more difficult (especially in O-H-I-O).
-
You mentioned the defensive line roster. Some people have mentioned the underrated recruits like Thomas Gordon and Desmond Morgan. That's fine, but I think RichRod is (justifiably) going to take some heat for his recruiting missteps in '09 and '10. We're going to hear "bare cupboard" some more.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:47 PM ^
If RR had gotten anything out of that defense, we could have had a better record in 08. If he'd managed 6-6, his climb all the way up to 7 wins in 2010 wouldn't have looked nearly as impressive
November 27th, 2011 at 3:14 PM ^
For being at Arizona and not Michigan.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:12 PM ^
Why do we have to keep bringing up Rodriguez?
The leaders of this team (Molk, Martin, VanBergen and Koger) are Carr's recruits. At the post game press conference yesterday Molk said (in response to a question) there was a 1000% difference between Rodriguez' and Hoke's emphasis on the Ohio game. He also said he'd do anything for Hoke and "he is us, we are him." Martin said that at first he didn't understand Hoke's comments about playing Michigan football but that he and the staff taught the team what it was by teaching them how to compete and that they learned a different mentality.
Why do we have to keep bringing up Rodriguez?
The emotional center of this team has been remade under Hoke, something that seemed all but lost under his predecessor's leadership. The whole Michigan Man and Michigan football themes (that so many derided as the enemy of the future during the Rodriguez era) have been restored. Playing football at Michigan is once again a transformative experience, just like Desmond talked about when they honored him this season as did Jake Long yesterday. I have no doubt that many of the Rodriguez recruits will one day talk about this experience, thanks to Brady Hoke and his staff.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:13 PM ^
Coaches don't make teams win games. Players win games. They always have and they always will.
Jim Caldwell went to the Super Bowl in his very first year as an NFL head coach. Two years later his team may not win a game. Did he just get way worse at coaching?
Jim Harbaugh went 17-20 in his first three years at Stanford. Then he won the Orange Bowl. Did he just get better at coaching every season? And if so, David Shaw must be the best coach ever because he had to replace Harbaugh and two coordinators, yet still magically went 11-1 this year.
When Rich Rodriguez got to Michigan we lost a four year starter at QB and the school's leading passer to the NFL draft, we lost a four year starter at RB and the school's leading rusher to the NFL draft, we lost the number one pick in the NFL draft at OT, we lost two starting wide receivers to the NFL draft, we lost the team's leading tackler and leader in INTs and PBUs, and we lost the team's second leading tackler who had posted an astonishing 28.5 TFL on the season. All off a team that went 8-4 in the regular season, got smoked by Oregon and Wisconsin, and lost to a 1-AA team. And that is before the attrition kicked in. It is also before former Michigan players started telling kids to commit to Michigan State.
Out of that crater, his teams got better every year, winning two more games than the season before. Still people bitched and moaned that we were headed in the wrong direction. They said his players were too small to even compete in the Big Ten. They said he recruited thugs and criminals. They said that player attrition (by guys who have since proved they never would have seen the field at Michigan) had doomed the team to a massive future rebuilding project (while conveniently ignoring the rebuilding project that existed from day one of his tenure). They said he didn't recruit a single good player on defense. He said we were just about to turn the corner but nobody believed him and he got fired. Then he said "I still think this team is about to turn the corner" and everybody freaked out and said he was a liar who was trying to undermine the new coach (despite the fact that he told all his kids to stay together and win for Michigan and each other) by raising expectations to a level that was simply unattainable by any mortal man with this collection of dreadlocked, illiterate midgets he had brought to Ann Arbor.
Yesterday, those "little guys", the ones who ALL STAYED, ran for 294 yards against Ohio State. Those untalented players beat the team that Henne, Hart, Long, Manningham, etc. never could. That defense without any players on it held Brandon Herron to 2.5 ypc. With another win in January this will be the most successful Michigan football season in over a decade. And almost all of those tiny, undisciplined, untalented players come back again next year.
"They" were fucking wrong. Rich Rodriguez didn't break Michigan football, he walked into a broken program and when he left it was even better than it had been before. The least they could do now is admit it and say thank you now that they get to reap the benefits from all the hard work and effort that Rich Rodriguez put in to build a championship caliber program at Michigan.
November 27th, 2011 at 12:58 PM ^
Post of the year. Thank you Purple Stuff for providing the necessary dose of perspective. I'll take this roster of players over any of the past decade and a half.
November 27th, 2011 at 1:01 PM ^
You'll take this roster over the '97 national championship squad???
November 27th, 2011 at 1:51 PM ^
that the win yesterday would help us move on, but apparently some aren't quite ready to let it go. And though this won't help, your commentary was so wildly misleading it could be a political commercial.
To say "out of this crater, his teams got better every year" is a lie. We were 9-4 before he got here, he went 3-9 his first year of coaching. He was the crater. 3-9 is not better than 9-4, no matter what universe you live in.
One can forgive him for struggling that first year, and you mention the challenges he faced. But it is not ironclad that any coach would have gone 3-9 that first year. I would remind you that this year, Hoke and Mattison took a defense ranked 108th and made them worlds better. While last year folks marinated in the excuse of "youth," Mattison & Co managed to accomplish their turnaround this year with two freshman lbs and a true frosh corner, and they turned out to be among the best players. Good coaching can do wonders, and to gloss over that disaster of a first year is either a sin of omission or a blatant attempt to deceive.
There is nothing to admit about RR. Seems like a good guy, did some good recruiting (though there was plenty of bad, and plenty of attrition, all of which Hoke & Co. managed to overcome). It will be interesting to see how he does in Arizona. But he did a poor job coaching here. Any simple review of his work on defense and special teams would leave even the most casual observer to that conclusion. That is what needs to be admitted, and no amount of spin is going to change that
November 29th, 2011 at 1:37 AM ^
Players cartainly win the games. We agree on that. The rest of your post, however, is complete and utter nonsense.
Players must be caoched. Every day. Every. Day. That can't be hard to understand, can it?
Why doesn't the #1 recruiting class always win the National Championship? Because some promising players turn out to be bad, and some under the radar guys turn out to be great. And coaching is a huge part of that.
Yes, players do win games, but every single play that is run during the course of a game is called by -- wait for it -- coaches. So, coaches can win games. They can certainly lose them (with bad calls). But that's not the point. That's too obvious.
Coaches teach the players to play every day. Quarterbacks spend hours and hours on how to properly drop back. That's it. Nothing about reading a defense, knowing your offense, or throwing the ball. Just dropping back. They have to be coached to do that. It is not something that a person just knows how to do. Almost no high school QB is any good at it. But it is important. And it is coached.
The same can be said for every position. Do you think lineman know how to pass-protect naturally? Do you think Jake Long would have been the first pick in the draft if he was coached poorly for 5 years? Of course not. He was a great player, but his greatness was attained with the help of coaching, which I'm sure even he will admit.
A lot of our current defenders have talked about this being the first year they were really coached. Roh said something to the effect of he had never heard he was doing anything wrong before Mattison got there. Martin credits Hoke with teaching them to play Michigan defense. These were good players last year, but they weren't at their peak because of lackluster coaching. I think we can all agree that GERG was a disaster.
Your notion of "players" as independent from coaches is nonsense.
Comparing Caldwell and the NFL to college football is asinine, and you must know it. College coaches have to develop high school kids into NFL players before Caldwell ever gets them. And still, with as many as 5 years of college coaching and tremendous athletic ability, some guys turn out to be Vernon Gholston.
All that being said, yes RR did get some good players. Yes, he brought us Denard, who is going to be a legend at Michigan. Yes, he left the program in pretty good shape. But he was terrible while he was here, which is more important.
November 27th, 2011 at 1:43 PM ^
Why do people keep posting about RR? Its always a divisive topic, digs up a bunch of arguments we've all seen here a thousand times, creates hard feelings, etc.
I seriously think this all goes back to people wanting to prove how right they were (whether original "supporters" or "haters"), and its pathetic that people just won't let it go.
The three years are a black mark on the program no matter who was to blame (and there was a lot to go around, to RR, the administration, former players, etc). You would think a 10 win season would be enough to turn the page, but apparently not. The greatest win in years is just another reason to dredge up another littany of RR threads.
We get it - he's got a new job, we all support him 100% (or not), Arizona will be all of our new second favorite program (or not), and his recruiting had some positive effect on our recent 10 win season. Let's move on.
November 27th, 2011 at 2:55 PM ^
Because pretending Coach Hoke built this season up from nothing is utterly delusional. The fact remains that he inherited 9 starters from a great offense and a (frightfully, painfully) young, but talented defense. Could RR have coached this team to 10-2? I suspect not, simply because the defensive improvement under Mattison was astronomical. But to accept the media narrative that Coach Rod firebombed the program and Coach Hoke single-handedly rescued it in year one is to ignore the reality of the situation.
November 27th, 2011 at 3:24 PM ^
No, the reality of the situation is that the current staff just won 3 more games than the last staff with the same team, plus an extra year of experience. All of the losses were close while only two of the wins were close.
<br>
<br>Most importantly, the team got better as the season went on, which certainly can not be said for the last 3 years.
<br>
<br>So you can keep fighting a fight that most people don't give a crap about anymore to satisfy your own football brilliance, but me and most other people here are going to look forward to a bowl game and a bright future for this program.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:46 AM ^
It isn't fair to say Hoke brought this team up from the ashes. He inherited a good offense, and a great QB.
But the defense was awful. Not just frightfully and painfully young, but AWFUL. And he made them good. Not just average, but GOOD. So, although he may not have totally built his team up from nothing, he certainly did build the defense up from nothing. Perhaps from less than nothing. The 2010 Michigan defense was worse than that of the Utah State Mocs. I would count that as a negative starting point.
That being said, you have forever disqualified yourself from ever accusing Lloyd Carr of leaving the cupboard bare. He simply left RR with a (frightfully, painfully) young offense and a pretty good defense.
Can't have it both way, bud.
November 27th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^
Thanks RR for the memories, you are a good man and a good coach, and you had some tough luck, but thankfully and rightfully, you were replaced by a better Head Coach in Brady Hoke.
Hoke is a better coach than RR. If you don't believe me, then just listen to the seniors on team 132 talk. Not very hard to read between the lines and these players have far more insight than most anyone.
November 27th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^
Thanking RR for this season is like thanking the guy who buys the groceries at a four star restaurant
November 27th, 2011 at 2:41 PM ^
I'm happy he recruited guys like Denard, Vincent Smith and Odoms, who probably wouldn't be here otherwise. At the same time, I'm thankful Hoke is now the one coaching them. It's time to turn the page.
November 27th, 2011 at 4:07 PM ^
Not the OP's point, but what this thread has devolved into is nothing but wasted energy arguing over the same points that have been hashed and rehashed ad nauseam. I wanted Rich Rodriguez to succeed, but the fact is, he didn't, at least not enough to keep his job. He did leave behind a bunch of great kids, some who he recruited and a few that Carr did who didn't bolt after Carr retired. To his credit, Rod told every player to a man to stay and play for Michigan.
Regardless of who is to blame for all the BS that RR had to deal with, and there's plenty to go around, he didn't win enough games in a short enough period of time to persuade the athletic director that keeping him would be in the best interest of Michigan football.
We now have a head coach who loves Michigan in his soul, not because he took a job, but because he knows how special Michigan is. So let's leave the Rodriguez era to Michigan football history and look forward with hope that the Brady Hoke era will rival that of the Schembechler era in success and duration.
November 28th, 2011 at 8:17 AM ^
I just finished 3 and Out, and I have to say that it felt very biased to me towards making RR look better than he really was. You could essentially write a book like that about any coach that goes in with high expectations and then doesn't deliver (they will all have their what ifs). There were just too many excuses from Day One and nobody wants to hear excuses. One point hugely missed in the book is that at almost every opportunity RR went about explaining how he really didn't realize how bad of shape the program was in until he arrived. This is no way to garner support from Carr or his former players. If I were Carr I would have been pissed to have the new guy come in complaining about how little he was left with. He could have said it so many different ways (i.e. It will take some time for me to install my system here) that would have been better than blaming the Hall of Fame Coach with a stellar record and pretending he inherited a broken mess. He created a broken mess and his teams never got better during the season, only worse, even on offense.
We should not be thanking RR at this point. I wish him success at Arizona, but any fool who appreciates his 3 years at Michigan and feels that somehow the Michigan Program was broken when he arrived was not a true Michigan Man or fan of Michigan Football.
Thanks to Hoke and all he brought with him, but I'm just glad that it is now about Michigan Football and the players and not as much about the Coach.
November 28th, 2011 at 1:03 PM ^
I hate falling back into this argument, but if you read Three and Out, you should understand that Lloyd didn't just leave a bare cupboard, he helped empty the cupboard. He told Ryan Mallett to leave, he told Justin Boren to leave, he told all of his players after Rich was hired that he would sign transfer papers for anyone who asked.
Lloyd never supported Rich, either publically or privately. He let players come to his office and vent about Rich. Unlike Bump Elliott, who told his players to quit whining and not to come to him with their complaints when Bo was hired. When asked in interviews, Lloyd never said "I support Rich Rodriguez", he said "I support the program". That was not true anyway. He did nothing to quiet the dissent. Thank goodness Brandon made him "retire" when he was helping another DI school find a head football coach while on Michigan's payroll.
So when Rich said the talent wasn't what he expected, he was right. He lost at least two offensive starters who would have made a huge difference in 2008.
November 28th, 2011 at 1:20 PM ^
Let's just ignore all facts, assume that the people (i.e. Bacon) who investigated just made it all up in apologetic fashion, and stick with our presuppositions. Can't go wrong that way.
You'll find my footprint on your lawn.
November 28th, 2011 at 8:27 PM ^
Sort of like how Bacon made up parts about the Purdue game and the parts about how Lloyd didn't require class attendance during the week of the Ohio State week?
November 29th, 2011 at 2:02 AM ^
I'm not gonna trash Bacon or his book, but come on.
If you were embedded in the program for 3 years, don't you think you'd be a bit sympathetic? It's natural. You'd have worked with the guys every day. You'd have personal relationships with them.
I'd imagine its something akin to what former players feel for their coaches. People have feelings. Bacon quotes Molk as saying, "I loved Coach Rod", but just yesterday, he said the same thing about Hoke. When you are in the battles together, you start to love the people around you. It's not surprising, it's inevitable.
So of course Bacon is biased. To pretend he isn't isn't being realistic, either.
Now, I'm not saying his bias led to false claims or anything. Just that he painted his picture with certain brushstrokes. A small thing was his assertion that Carr allowed players to skip class during Ohio week. That is patently false. But it fit his story, and he didn't care enough to check up on that claim. There is no reason to include it in the book. It doesn't pertain to Rich at all, other than making Lloyd look like an asshole. And because of that, because that is the only reason for it to be in the book, you can tease out Bacon's intent. It's not something a guy who was unsympathetic to Rich would do.
He also blames Lloyd for letting Boren go, shortly before telling of how much of an asshole Boren was. The asshole part of it fit Rich's side of the story, who says that he never talked to Boren so how could he complain about Rich's family values. Bacon tried to have it both ways on that one. Would he rather Carr kept the problematic asshole around to poison the new coach's regime?
That's the stuff I mean. Bacon has a strong enough case without some of the stuff he includes, but he includes it to make a stronger case for Rich. And that's not surprising.
Again, I'm not bashing him. For the reasons I stated above, I understand him.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:13 AM ^
Why should anyone take the word of people on this board over Bacon? As you stated he was in the thick of it for three years. None of you were. So who has better facts the book or people on this board?
November 29th, 2011 at 1:10 PM ^
And the point he's making is Bacon was in the thick of one side of it for 3 years, so that naturally creates bias. The other side didn't want to have anything to do with him, quite apparently. And considering the end result, probably for good reason.
November 29th, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^
I didn't say anyone should take an mgoblogger's word over Bacon's. Why do you make false accusations? We seem to be talking about two different things.
I just said that one cannot honestly believe that Bacon is unbiased. I used a few examples to show what I mean. Neither of those examples is damning to Bacon. I even said he has a good case without those errors. My only problem with Bacon's book is that he tries to play it as an objective report, when it simply cannot be.
Maybe if he had spent 3 years embedded in Carr's program before being embedded in Rich's, he could be objective. He would have spent as much time building personal relationships with one staff as he did with the other. But as it happened, he is only close to one side of it. Again, I'm not blaming him for anything. He wrote the only book he could have written (with a few silly errors).
I don't think I'm being unreasonable. Bacon has written a damn good book -- a must read -- but we can't claim he doesn't have a certain slant.