Why are we defending RR?

Submitted by helloheisman.com on

RichRod is the inventor of the spread.  He's run every type of offense through it.  You'd think there would be some gameplan that could lift us to victory over Toledo.

Just because we are giving him a free pass on the season doesn't mean he is no longer liable for losing extremely winnable games.  Talent was better than Toledo, freshmen or not.  Gameplan was crap (offense and defense).

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 11:19 PM ^

Switch your allegience to Toledo if you don't want to defend RR.

RR is the Michigan coach; we defend the Michigan coach in public.

 

Anonymous Coward (not verified)

October 13th, 2008 at 11:22 PM ^

Yeah, it's pretty much a joke that we lost to Toledo. I concluded sometime in the second half that coaching must be to blame here somewhere after we sat in a zone with a 4 man rush for the 50th straight play. We should've won and that's on the team/coaches/whatever. But plenty of coaches have crap losses vs crap teams so I'm not about to give on RR yet. e.g. I seem to recall Bama losing to ULM and look where they are now. It's inexcusable but not grounds for a mutiny

ThaLastProphet

October 13th, 2008 at 11:28 PM ^

No gameplan can lift any team to any victory at any level when your OL can't block. I challenge you, only watch the OLine on every offensive play, snap to whistle and you'll see what Brian and most others have already noted, they are TERRIBLE.

They are; A). Bad. B). Most guys are playing hurt. C). Totally inexperienced. D). And by totally inexperienced I mean TOTALLY inexperienced, not just in terms of blocking for the spread but playing time in general.

It doesn't matter if you call the most perfect of plays at the perfect time if someone whiffs on a block, you're dead. That is our offense in a nutshell. 

You can't block, you can't win. That is Football 1A. The most fundamental of fundamentals.

lhglrkwg

October 13th, 2008 at 11:40 PM ^

No question the loss to Toledo is inexcusable and we had the talent to put more than 10 points on the board so I don't think there's any sense excusing the staff for that one. I'm just trying to defend RR because people are demanding his head already. Good coaches have bad losses e.g. Saban and Bama lost to ULM 1 or 2 years ago and they are fine now.

OT: I posted like 5 comments in the past 30 minutes and none of them showed up. Anyone know why? I might have accidentally been trying to post while not logged in, but shouldn't it have just been written as "Anonymous Coward"?

aMAIZEing Blue

October 13th, 2008 at 11:42 PM ^

  1. Rich Rodriguez made the zone-read play, I'm not so sure he was the primary creator of the spread offense.
  2. The fact that this offensive system is so vastly different from the last one, to go along with the range of other changes in the program, is holding this offense back even more. On top of an immobile quarterback and an offensive line that needs desperate help, you have yourself a terirble offense at best. I don't care if you're playing Temple; this offense cannot find a way to put even a below-average amount of points on the board.
  3. The defense held Toledo to SIX POINTS. Steven Threet was Toledo's leading scorer! The offensive plan may have been bad, but I could argue against that with the square offensive system and round offensive players (get it? The players don't fit the system! ha, not funny...). Anyway, the defense played well against Toledo.

The sky isn't falling people. We have a great head coach, Mike Eeeee!Barwis, and the looks of a solid recruiting staff. Next year we will easily make a bowl, and the year after people are going to love the new high-powered offense. There.

helloheisman.com

October 13th, 2008 at 11:48 PM ^

Google Definitions

So are you saying it just wasn't likely that a coach as vaunted as RR playing with a bunch of 3*s on the OL could have beaten (1-4) Toledo?  RR is to blame for not making a gradual shift to the zone read spread but instead diving in head first.  He could have installed a more pro-style spread this year which would still teach spread fundamentals for future season.  Despite some (stupid) opinions on here, you can win games this year and still have development of the spread O.

 

Also, Defense was terrible.  TOP during key drives killed us.

maracle

October 14th, 2008 at 12:20 AM ^

I'd like one of the people complaining that we didn't shift more gradually to justify why these players running ANY offense would be better.  I don't see it.  This spread is that spread-y.  We're running a lot of pretty standard run plays, screen passes, etc.  It's not like Lloyd wasn't running plays like this.

I can understand criticism if it is specific.  Jim Carty in his blog has mentioned a couple of specific plays that have not been working and argued that by now RR should have given up on them for alternative plays.  That is valid criticism.

What drives me crazy is vague generalities like "we should fit the offense to the players" and similar things.  HOW?  Give me a specific plan that is credible and I might agree.  If it's just a vague "we should be better" I'm not buying it.

GNM

October 13th, 2008 at 11:59 PM ^

Every loss in modern FBS football is excuseable.  This is an era of schloarship limits and remarkable parity brought on by new offensive systems.  It used to be that there were only so many 300 lb kids, and whoever got them was going to push the other guys around.  Todays game is different.  This years USC team might be the best talent ever assembled, with something like five potential first-rounders on the defense and a eventual first day picks on the roster.  They were the best team in college last year, and I don't give them points against anyone this year either.  Yet, they have lost both years.  That is just the nature of the modern game.  

ThaLastProphet

October 14th, 2008 at 12:55 AM ^

What I'm saying is if you can't block, you can't win. When you have one weak link on an otherwise solid OLine its hard enough, but we have 5 shakey links at best. I mean when you have a walk on left tackle starting a game for you something has gone terribly wrong, either with recruiting or injuries, or in our case, both.

Sure we may have a few upperclassmen on he OLine, but the only D1
college football experience they have is practice. It's one thing to
practice, it's another thing to play in a game, and they have no game experience. If you
couple that with the fact that almost all of them are fighting through
injuries and pro-style or not its a recipe for disaster.

In terms of the whole debate of should they have implemented the spread in small doses, mixing it in with the traditional pro-style michigan offense or introducing it all at once: I think Rich Rod has it 100%-without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt-correct: baptism by fire. If you introduce it in doses it just makes it that much more confusing and cripples your team in the long run, trying to teach one system is hard enough to a bunch of kids who largely have no idea what they're doing. The worst thing Rich Rod could do is try and run both systems.

  • 1). It shows a lack of faith in the players and in his belief in himself and his system.
  • 2). Cripples the team in the future. If every time something goes wrong in the spread you revert back to pro-style then WTF is the point? We might as well have Brady Hoeke. What RR is doing here is trying to get the program off the heroin that is Bo ball and if he keeps givig the kids their fix it cripples the team in the long run. I mean seriously. Is a cheap win over Toledo via dropping the spread worth sacrificing the future of the program?
  • 3). This team is awful. Either way they were going to end up somewhere between 3-9 or 5-7 so baptism by fire it is. I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe Lloyd could do a better job with this exact team. This team. Not the guys who couldmaybeifshoulda been on the team. This team. The answer is a resounding NO this team is just not good. 

 

As for the D, they gave up 6 points!! One of the field goals was a fluke one hopper off the crossbar and they were only in that position because our O handed Toledo the ball on our half of the field via a turnover. There were a few things, such as Nick Moore having 20 catches, mostly in the slot off of Stevie Brown and John Thompson, which is a huge problem, but the D played classic bend but don't break. It was a solid to good performance.

That being said, which game have we not been competative in? We've lost several heartbreakers, such as this past game, Utah, and hell even the Notre Dame and Illinios games were close in the 4th quarter until the wheels fell off. In the
words of lloyd carr, we get a few more breaks here and there and this
team is undefeated. Regardless of what several overzealous fans may think, the line between victory and defeat has been remarkably thin this year.

I guess it really comes down to what matters to you. If you're comfortable with keeping the bowl streak alive and topping out at 9-3 every year with a run at a national title once every 10 years then that's fine, but that's the old Michigan.

I could care less about the bowl streak.

OSU has I believe an 8 year bowl streak and 1 NC in that span and I think the USC has a 7 year bowl streak and multiple NCs in that span so bowls streaks are cool but shit compared to winning it all. I mean those are two perfect examples of making a tough change which hurts right away and pays off major dividends 3 or 4 years down the road. If fans can't wait that long, fine. However, don't come running back when in 3 years this team is a championship machine.

For how long have Michigan fans bitched and griped about the program being stuck in the past and unwilling to take chances? 1st down-run to the left! 3 wide right-screen! You have to bet big to win big. For once Michigan has put all its chips on the table and losing is a frightening prospect, but the last time we went all in we ended up with an unkown coach named Glenn E. "Bo" Schembechler, not a bad bet if you ask me.

This gamble will be even better.

helloheisman.com

October 14th, 2008 at 2:27 AM ^

Not saying that a sacrifice this season isn't worth it, or that it won't eventually work.  I'm looking at this one game here against Toledo.  It was a shitty coaching job.  This Toledo team was ranked according to Sagarin at around 126/130 teams in the country.  Even with our players in this spread, with a better gameplan we could have won, and should have won.

El Trotsky

October 14th, 2008 at 2:48 AM ^

As long as the gameplan didn't specifically ask for a 100+ yard pick 6, I think I'm ok with it. What exactly is this better gameplan you keep talking about?

chitownblue (not verified)

October 14th, 2008 at 8:23 AM ^

HelloHeisman,

The problem here is that you started with an assertion "RR should have beated Toledo, and the Gameplan was crap. We could be gradually going into the spread." (not exact words, I know, but I think I've got your point there). You never really gave examples as to how the gameplan was bad, why a different sort of spread would be more beneficial, and why a favored, "better" team will be successful 100% of the time. You offered no evidence, examples, or specifics to back these claims.

Then, people respond with specific rebuttals - "We can't throw very well either, what offense do you want?", "Screen passes and stretch plays are part of any offense", "the o-line, with no experience, isn't good enough for any offensive scheme to be successful".

Rather than addressing any of their specific retorts, you are merely repeating your unsubstantiated claims ad nauseum, nearly word for word.

helloheisman.com

October 14th, 2008 at 12:54 PM ^

because I'm not a coach...

and of course, your rebuttal will be "then let the coaches who know best decide."

but it's dangerous to blindly follow, accept, and never question, even if that person (the coaches) have a better football pedigree.

ThaLastProphet

October 14th, 2008 at 2:12 PM ^

Jesus H. Christ why does every single one of these "RR is st00pit" people have to turn supporting your team into a discussion on social awareness?

I will tell you why I am supporting Rich Rod and what I think of people like you:

I see the light at and end of the tunnel, and I know that comrade Rodriguez will guide the masses to the promise land.

You, SIR, are blind to the glories of the not so distant future and are a vacuous individual with no coherent thoughts of your own.

You, SIR, are willing to tear down all that is "bad" in your skewed perception, without the slightest idea how to build this program back up.

Your opinions, SIR, are invalid, as you drone on mindlessly about gameplans, and the danger of blindly following and accepting everything comrade Rodriguez does without any sort of understanding of what it means to have a social conscious.

And you, SIR, vote for the president you would most like to have a beer with.

Well, SIR, comrade Rodriguez is above those of your ilk, with your petty squabbling over gameplans, losses, tradition, and beer.

Comrade Rodirguez is too busy building toward the future while you, SIR, are still muddling in the past. 

helloheisman.com

October 14th, 2008 at 2:50 PM ^

You, SIR, are pretentious.  You, SIR, can't read a post.

Gosh we are all so stupid to squabble over silly things like gameplans and losses that should have been wins.  Whoa is me for still caring that we lost to Appy St.  If I and all others had only seen it in your view, that individual wins and losses simply don't matter anymore because we are rebuilding, then this world would be a better place.

/sarcasm.

/you suck balls

ThaLastProphet

October 14th, 2008 at 10:49 AM ^

If you're looking at just one game this year, then your perspective is out of whack. Yes, it is humiliating to lose to Toledo, no matter the circumstance, but it seems to be you are more concerned with your foolish pride than the team. I'm sure you've taken quite a bit of shit for losing to Toledo, as we all have, but its a rebuilding year, and when we kick the shit out of all the other big ten schools in the next decade you remeber all shit that has been said to you and say it right back.

For right now, take your lumps with the team and tough it out with the rest of us. Its really not that bad, because afterall we do have prescedent in last year's team for the unmitigated horror and awfulness so this shouldn't even be a blip on your scale of OMG end of the world football disasters.

If you have a legitimate gripe, that's fine, but it  seems to me your problem is, "the team lost to a Toledo and now have a record of 2-4, so this reflects poorly on me as a human being, and I am getting shit from everyone I know. Make it stop!".

Chrisgocomment

October 14th, 2008 at 1:22 PM ^

Ok, then, your question is: "Why are we defending Rich Rod?"

Your answer: because MGoBlog is the place for logical fans to come and talk logically about Michigan Football.  Being logical fans, and knowing that the transition from the Bo era to the Rodriguez era will be difficult, we find it is our duty to defend Rodriguez as over the next two years he will be criticized and bashed as much, if not more than Lloyd ever was.

Other Chris

October 14th, 2008 at 11:18 AM ^

When the coach has to keep drilling fundamentals -- blocking, not fumbling, keeping the ball out of the stratosphere, not throwing off the back foot, wrapping up on tackles -- how tricky do you think the gameplan can be?  How can he adapt an offense to exploit another team's defensive weakness when he needs to be maximizing the three? four? two? things our offense can do moderately competently?  Which of course makes the other team's defensive scheming that much easier.

bballa6290

October 14th, 2008 at 11:39 AM ^

the game was awful, no doubt about it...it had to be the worst football i've seen since 6 days before when i watched the lions game.  the play calling has been horrible...they throw a screen every other play and do that option hand off to mcguffie the other plays....maybe he doesnt have faith in his quarterback(s), who have given him no reason to trust them...once he gets his guys in there that he can run the system with, none of the trash like we saw on saturday will happen anymore

imafreak1

October 14th, 2008 at 3:58 PM ^

First, there are many gameplans that could have beaten Toledo. Such as the one Michigan used. However, that gameplan was unsuccessful largely because Michigan's QB threw a 100 yard pick six, then got hurt, leading to the backup QB throwing an INT that gave Toledo the winning FG, but not before Michigan missed a chip shot to tie.

The problem is RR needed to come up with the "play like crap and replace your QB with a walkon at half time and still win" gameplan. This team is not good enough for that gameplan.

 

El Trotsky

October 14th, 2008 at 5:17 PM ^

Seriously, until I see a document proving we called "Throw INT in End Zone, don't bother tackling return man, on 3" on that play, I'm not going to sit here and criticize the gameplan. You know how Lloyd/Bo always harped on execution? If the players executed like they did on Saturday under them, both of those guys would have lost too.

ThaLastProphet

October 14th, 2008 at 11:30 PM ^

I've read your posts and I have come to the conclusion that you have no idea what you are talking about. As chitownblue said, you have stated your opinion and many have responded with several lengthy points of contention, to which your response has been nothing. This leads me to believe that you don't want to talk about michigan football, but would rather bitch about how its hurting you, you you, and not the team, the team, the team. Losses hurt but were your expectations so high that you thought we would go 9-3 or something? Everyone with a brain knew that each game was going to be a struggle this year. Understanding and accepting your circumstance, rather than throwing a hissy-fit after every loss is not blindly following RichRod. It's called common sense. 

Team with new coach + radically new system + mostly freshman + upperclassmen with little experience + lack of talent at several key positions + injuries to several of your best players and at key positions which were already thin + turnovers + shocking lack of fundamentals even though the coaching staff has done nothing but emphasize fundamentals + poor execution = losses like the ones we have witnessed so far this season.

Where were you when we beat Wisky? Watch that game and watch this game and tell me if the game plan was any different. Well, it wasn't, the only difference is execution. With that being said, you still have yet to provide us with a single way you feel the gameplan could have been improved. Until you do so, your opinion is crap.

If you make an assertion, you must back it up with facts and examples. You have done neither. I'm sorry if I'm coming off as a bit harsh but why do you fail to understand this?