Wojo at it again
I'm not sure why Detroit needs so many columnists to write the same exact thing. I'm half expecting Drew Sharp to realize this and start a Save RR campaign.
Final straw: Latest loss shows Wolverines need changeNovember 28th, 2010 at 2:25 PM ^
would you feel differently? Forget that the names are OSU, MSU and Wisconsin -- they are all top 10 teams. You didn't really expect to beat any top 10 teams this year, did you? If you did, your expectations for improvement were beyond unrealistic.
November 28th, 2010 at 4:34 PM ^
Do you really think that MSU is comparable to any of those teams? C'mon now!
While I like your taste in beer, I disagree with your argument. I expected to beat at least one of our two main rivals after three years of the RR system. I expected to be able to play a competitive game with all three. Instead, we got trucked by all three and the coach says "at least we're fun to watch" and complains that some people "might not want me to win".
Did you expect that we'd need 3 OT's and a miracle deflection to beat lowly Illinois? Did you expect that we'd need a last second bomb to beat doormat Indiana? Did you expect that Purdue would be a squeaker? Did you think that we could nearly lose to UMass (and allow them to score more against us than any of their other opponents)?
Your expectations for a third year coach are perhaps beyond low.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:33 PM ^
So did you expect MSU to be 19-5 in 2 out of those 3 years with RR at the helm? Did you also expect 3 different teams to be 10-1 in the B10 and we would play every one of them?
Could we also please stop saying that we haven't beaten our two main rivals in 3 years. Up until Dantonio took over, no one gave two shits about MSU and ND was a big rival. Then, RR got here and won 2 out of 3 against them so now it isn't a big rivalry for us because we beat them.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:51 AM ^
And what would MSU have been if we beat them each year? 16-8. Oohhh...That's scary! You know that MSU is not a great team this year. They're the worst 1-loss team imaginable. Please stop pretending that our team ran into some juggernaut. Minnesota beat Iowa. How's we do against them? We barely beat UMass. Our team is not good. Period.
As for rivals...No, I can't stop repeating that we haven't beaten our two main rivals. OSU and MSU are #1 and #2. ND is #3 (although it was bigger during my days - Fab 5 era). "No one gave two shits about MSU" prior to Dantonio? Where are you from? The moon? Everyone cares about that game; it's just that we used to expect to win it (and generally did win it) before RR came around. There's nothing wrong with having hoped RR to be the guy for Michigan. It's clear now, however, that he isn't. Rationalizing his failures isn't going to suddenly make him a winner at Michigan.
November 28th, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^
Usual qualifer: RichRod and performance aside ...
- - -
Ahem, the messenger should be flogged with a wet noodle. Then, maybe shot ...
Here's what has happened:
* DB has said he'll make a decision after the season. (Quarrel with that all you want, but that's the position he has taken.)
* Our sterling local MSM has, in their own way, practically demanded that he make a decision _now_. NOW! Drew Sharp has said that HIS LEGACY WILL BE DEFINED BY WHAT HE DOES WITH RICHROD. HIS LEGACY! :)
- - -
So, in the face of all this @#$%ing idiocy Brandon should *backtrack*? Really?
- - -
The game would change if he hadn't mentioned a timeline.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:33 PM ^
Oh man, I'm still laughing at your first line:
Usual qualifer: RichRod and performance aside ...
You can't ignore RichRod and his performance! That's the entire point. He is getting a national media beating because he deserves to be fired. He can't compete with the top half of the Big Ten. He says stupid things like "at least we're fun to watch" and "Lombardi couldn't win with these guys" which makes it even easier for the media to pick on him.
Brandon doesn't need to backtrack on anything. He can fire RR today if he wants. What's the worst that can be said:
Reporter: Dave, you said you were going to wait until after the bowl
Dave: Well, I was able to make an assessment at a quicker pace than expected and we look forward to...blah, blah, blah.
No one really cares if he breaches his own timeline. And none of this would be an issue if RR had put a better product on the field. Performance can't be put aside.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:49 PM ^
I'm laughing at your interpretation. The whole point of the qualifier was to acknowledge that UMich has a disaster on its hands. How on earth get "ME SUPPORT RICHROD" out of that? I was commenting solely on the methods, not the underlying issue.
- - -
You (and we) have a choice. This can go down Auburn-style or it can be done with grace and poise. Which would y'all like? DB just said that he'd wait. If he changes course there will be only one interpretation, and it will be on-target: He panicked and caved in to external pressure.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^
DB just said that he'd wait. If he changes course there will be only one interpretation, and it will be on-target: He panicked and caved in to external pressure.
Oh yeah, if he doesn't wait until after the bowl it totally means "the media made him do it"...Or...He realizes that recruiting might suffer greatly from an unnecessary and arbitrary timeline for decision. Bottom line is that RR is already done. Whatever "waiting" DB wants to do is much more about locking in the next coach. Who cares if he changes his timeline? It means absolutely nothing.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:12 PM ^
What business benefits from a shit ton of bad PR?
Sports media, and media in general.
November 28th, 2010 at 8:45 AM ^
relevant internal conversations? That leaves the media to masturbate, but then, they do it so well. I don't think he cares, and I really suspect he refuses to be driven by them.
November 28th, 2010 at 8:53 AM ^
He snuffed out the Monday announcement rumor fast enough. Now we've got the rumor that DB is waiting until after the bowl because now = $4 million and after Jan. 1 = $2.5 million. If Brandon doesn't put out a statement this week, that doesn't bode well for RR.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:48 AM ^
you're off by a year on the drop in buyout. IIRC it was at the end of his 4th year Jan 1, not the end of his third.
November 28th, 2010 at 11:03 AM ^
I also believe there is an "out" for NCAA sanctions which we did have.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:59 PM ^
I can't see Brandon using that "out" given that he's already said that the sanctions didn't rise to a fireable offense. Wouldn't he have had to fire him right after the sanctions were announced?
November 28th, 2010 at 2:52 PM ^
And I acknowledge that's a stretch, he's right about the buyout drop.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:39 AM ^
I agree that DB likely refuses to be "driven" by the media, but I absolutely think he cares what they say. DB has openly noted that UM branding is one of his biggest efforts. Branding is largely driven both internally - through marketing efforts - and externally - by the media. As such, while he may not directly make a business decision because of the media, I am sure that they are a singular input in his thought process.
November 28th, 2010 at 11:59 AM ^
Right -- and if he lets it appear that they're setting the terms and driving the decisions, it might complicate his "marketing" efforts.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:52 PM ^
Agreed..Hence, why I think they are an input and not a driver.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:48 AM ^
You'e right, we are not bought and paid for by the media, It was disgusting to see all the "Dispatch.com" signs in Ohio Stadium yesterday. No wonder they got away with all that Maurice shit.
Sleep well people, DB is in charge!
November 28th, 2010 at 10:05 AM ^
Unfortunately the negative media outpouring since RR got here has to at least a degree hurt his chances to succeed, especially with recruiting. Sad that your own local newspapers have to stoop to that. If they had stayed off his back he probably could have won a few more games and had a few less roster holes.
Kills me to think that if he gets fired they would have actually gotten what they wanted for their efforts.
November 28th, 2010 at 8:30 AM ^
I wouldn't be upset to see him go. After 3 years the program isn't where it should be. There are valid arguments for how it got so bad, but he's had enough time to show more progress, and he hasn't.
November 28th, 2010 at 8:47 AM ^
You say there are valid arguments, but ah hell just blow it up? That makes sense.
November 28th, 2010 at 11:53 AM ^
you do realize that next year will be the first where he has an upperclass QB to run the offense right? you cannot tell me the offense has not gotten better every year. progress no? We all know how bad the D has been this year but i ask, did you know in the middle of the season last year that Cissoko would be a complete bust? Did you know that Warren would jump ship way too early at the end of the year? Did you know that Turner would leave? Did you know that Emilen would never completely recover from his knee injury in high school and would leave? How about the fact that the most talented DB recruit in the class would not get admitted? were you aware that Woolfolk's ankle would implode? Or that the only upperclassman we would have in the secondary would be a senior converted from WR playing his first year at CB?
The point is simply that we had a lot of issues on D and RR is actively trying to address that. I didn't even ask you about some of the other defensive woes we had. He should not and does not have an infinite amount of time to get it right but firing him now is not the solution.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:26 PM ^
you do realize that next year will be the first where he has an upperclass QB to run the offense right?
Is this really an argument in his favor? He inherited two scholarship QBs (actually three, if you count Cone) from Carr, and watched as both transferred within 12 months of his taking the job. A big part of the reason why we're so young is the horrendous rate of attrition we've suffered under RR's watch - and even his own recruits are frequently leaving. I'm starting to have flashbacks to the Brian Ellerbe years, when Ellerbe's players constantly left, leaving us with young teams that got blown out on a regular basis. It's the coach's job to ensure that he doesn't have to be starting freshmen all the time.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:29 PM ^
And you believe that this offense was going to be truly effective with those scholarship QB's? We are not used to this kind of attrition because we have not had this kind of a philosophy change in 40 years. I'm not saying it doesn't suck. Can you tell me that since getting QB's who can actually run the offense effectively that the offense has not improved? Is it perfect? no, but it's a far cry from being bad and is still going to get better. I have to believe that a defense with so many young players getting significant time this season can only get better despite whether Gerg is a good coach or not. I'm not against making some changes but I do think firing RR is the wrong move right now. Ensuring that you don't have to be starting freshmen is not something that can happen overnight. I certainly dont think RR has said," Hey guys, why don't we get rid of all these players so we can start true freshmen all over the defnesive backfield! sound like fun?" obviously he knows his job is on the line and obviously he knows the issues his has on defense. It takes time to build the depth that we are sorely lacking on the Defensive side of the ball.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:54 PM ^
Maybe it would have been better to switch the offense some than lose all the QBs. One or the other is more important, but the way it went hasn't worked "yet" by your own admission.
November 28th, 2010 at 3:06 PM ^
I actually said it isnt perfect. too many mistakes are still being made by our QBs and other skill position players. that said, if I were a head coach i really wouldn't want to see our offense very often at all. And it is only going to get scarier as a unit.
November 28th, 2010 at 4:29 PM ^
When you say "this" offense, do you mean the one that RR chose to install even though he knew he didn't have the personnel to run it anywhere near effectively? And then you say that we had so much attrition because of the 40-year philosophy change. How does that account for defensive attrition? Did we change our philosophy there too?
In defending RR, please don't skip over fact. He has lost just over 25% of his defensive recruits (and that number doesn't include injuries). What does that have to do with the offensive players that he inherited? Nothing. The problem is not the players inherited, but the coach hired. RR didn't re-recruit players and is losing many that he recruited. It's a big reason for his difficulty now.
November 28th, 2010 at 11:10 PM ^
I hate the argument re: Dorsey. You don't think RR has the responsibility to understand the academic standards of our school and recruit proper players who can meet them? The Dorsey fiasco is all on him.
November 28th, 2010 at 8:58 AM ^
This may be (really) difficult, but try to put Rich Rodriguez, his performance, and his tenuous job security aside for a moment.
- - -
I think Wojo is panicking. He is (understandably) worried that RichRod won't keep his job and he doesn't want to be publicly on the wrong side of history.
That's fine. I'm just disappointed that he's being so simple-minded about Jim Harbaugh. It's not that "Jimmy" wouldn't be a logical and intriguing candidate. But, assuming that he'll drop everything and rush back to Ann Arbor to "save the program" seems unreasonable at this stage.
- - -
Aside: Is anyone surprised that some MSM tool (like Gregg Doyel / Tom Dienhart / Matt Hayes) hasn't publicly asked Harbaugh about the Michigan job? There must be umpteen shameless hacks that would stoop to that level. Why hasn't it happened?
November 28th, 2010 at 9:10 AM ^
yep, I am surprised we have not a seen a repeat of the Les Miles fiasco yet. I am very surprised one of these tools has not asked Jimbo about the job and he has to call a press conference to calm the waters.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:19 AM ^
They talked about it a littlle bit during the Stanford-Oregon State last night. The announcers said Harbaugh refused to talk about the 'Michigan Cloud' as they called it, saying 'What cloud?' and that he's in a 'football bunker' just focused on winning football games etc.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:11 AM ^
He was asked during Cal week and said he was focused on beating Cal. He didn't deny anything but he gave it no credence either.
I am glad it hasn't been pushed by the media because that can tend to blow situations up. The idea is to have him locked in before you decide Rich's fate.
I totally agree that there won't and shouldn't be a coaching search here. There is only one man for the job if it isn't Rich, and that is Jim Harbaugh. Don't sack Rich unless you have Harbaugh.
No one will ever say it, but that is the way it will be done.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:32 PM ^
I think Wojo is panicking.
All Wojo is saying is what basically everyone else in the media, probably most of our fanbase, and pretty much every impartial observer is thinking. If you are still loyal to RR, I respect that. But you need to let go of the idea that it's irrational to hold the opposite view.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:14 AM ^
The rags are not worth your dime. Use your talent of observation and your ability to read depth charts, you will be unhappy for this year but optimistic as to the next year. That will be the telliing year, we must be successful. The roster should be set, the schedule is better fvor us, and all of the offensive playbook should be implemented. For know lets see where we are going bowling and what the team does in that setting. Happy Holiday's to all.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:34 AM ^
November 28th, 2010 at 9:42 AM ^
people are just sick of the losing...who isn't? 15-21 in three seasons isn't getting the job done anywhere. He hasn't beaten MSU. He hasn't beaten Ohio State either (to be fair, Lloyd Carr lost his final 4 games against the Buckeyes). I love the Wolverines as much as the next person, but how much longer can we afford mediocrity? We are not a viable Big Ten team right now and with Nebraska coming into the Big Ten next season, it just makes it that much harder.
I am just glad I am not Dave Brandon, because he has a tough decision to make; and when he makes his decision may be the hardest part of it all.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
The article is clearly an opinion. It doesn't claim to report anything as fact. As a columnist, it is his job to write columns with his opinion. He did so, pretty fairly. It is not just the same old column either - it reflects the 37-7 beat down we suffered.
There are some hard facts to be faced here - we are zero and six against OSU and Sparty, we are 15-21 over three seasons, our defense is horrible, we are NCAA probation, I don't even want to know what the Big Ten record is over the last 3 years, etc. You may look at those facts and find reasons why those don't matter or can be explained. But, you can't pretend that someone who looks at those facts and comes to different conclusion is a bad guy or a fool. The way to get different columns from these guys is to start winning The Game.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:47 AM ^
With all due respect to those on both sides of the "keep RichRod" and "fire RichRod" aisles, this is one of those times where both sides have merit to their positions.
Regardless of which side you support, it has nothing to do with your love of Michigan football. We just have different approaches to getting to "yes".
Those of us who follow Mgoblog have been educated about the personnel issues. At the same time, maybe our current coaching staff isn't doing the best they can with the people they have.
Personally, living near Columbus, I found yesterday's loss to be humiliating. We simply did nothing well. There was no facet of the game that worked, at least as I saw it. The bright spot, Denard, fumbled and got hurt. The same pattern that has dogged him all year (and last year too if I remember as far as putting the ball on the ground). He is such an incredible talent, but may be too small or injury prone to play an entire year. Look at the size of spread QB's at Auburn and Oregon. They are big guys. Denard isn't. He can't get taller and he can only bulk up so much without compromising his running skills.
I started the season feeling so good. Last year turned into this year. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. At some point, the coaching must be accountable. For me, that is right now.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:59 AM ^
There are reasonable arguments on both sides. There's obviously a lot of youth and inexperience and it's easy to play 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' with all the drops, fumbles, poor special teams play and the like.
You can make a logical argument that a lot of that will get better with experience. You can also make a logical argument that athough they'll be more experienced, there are still precious few difference maker caliber athletes on defense, and even offense for that matter, outside of Denard. Rght now I see a small, slow defense. Some of the size will take care of itself with age and time in the weight room, but the speed will only improve incrementally with the current personnel.
I think RR needs to tweak his philosophies in recruiting a bit otherwise the struggles against bigger, more physical teams will continue. I even wonder if some of the problems with injuries this year are a byproduct of smaller bodies continually running into larger bodies.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^
What column did you want him to write? I understand that people cling to RR here, but nowhere else. Should he have written that even though we've never beaten a team with a winning Big Ten record...that RR should be retained? That even though we're 0-6 against our two biggest rivals...that RR should be retained? That we'll get better purely because we're older? That's it's ok to finish last, last and seventh in the Big Ten? That RR was never given a fair shake even though he's had 3 years, a stadium expansion and millions of dollars? That the cupboard was bare? That a new DC will help us turn the corner? That he beat the Big East champion? That he reserves the right to add additional excuses as they become available through discovery?
The fact is that it's a great stretch to make an argument for keeping RR. His biggest supporters live in the hometowns of our rivals. It's time for the ardent RR-supporters to put the team ahead the coach. RR might be (and probably is) a really good guy, but that doesn't mean he's the right guy here. He will be fired and deservedly so. Writing about that is not a bad thing. Instead, it's what DB (and potential recruits) can expect to see every day in both local and national media if he doesn't pull the trigger soon.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:10 AM ^
Wojo is a solid writer- that I have no doubt. For everyone who wants to fire RR I can see their point of view and it wouldn't surprise me if he was let go.
<br>
<br> But I say give him one more year. Let's exercise more patience. We still have a bowl game where players can get healthy and develop their skills. It won't surprise me we'll see a much better team that will execute with aggression, discipline and be sharp. If anything the bowl game will be a foreshadow of next year with 15 extra practices.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:16 AM ^
gives a shit about Drew Sharp? As for Drew,
November 28th, 2010 at 11:04 AM ^
'you are what your record says you are'. Many here state you can't decide a coach's future based on one game or one season. All true. But the three-season snapshot tells a fairly ugly story. We all have read/written the same details; no wins against our chief rivals, not competitve against the top teams in the conference, and all the wins in the conference are against the weak sisters, the bottom feeders of the conference. That is not just this season with the freshman-laden defense, that's the last three years.
If you look at where the program was when RR took over and now, there is no overall progress, and , arguably a great decline. The offense shows some promise, against weaker teams, regression against the conference elite. The defense is abismal. The recruiting is nothing to get excited about on the grand scheme, mostly 3-star players, one 5-star in three years and he's switched sides of the ball.
You can say there's potential for this team, the problem is who's going to lead them? The defense is a mess and no obvious fix for the near future. The offense lives and dies on it's QB, who takes a beating every week. And it's all run by a guy who admits to not be a defensive coacoach.
If transforming the program was his goal, he has succeeded. The program laden with tradition and a history of stifling defenses and offenses that generally got the job when needed is all gone. We have an offense that sometimes is stellar and other times leaving you you scratching your head. And a defense and special teams that just leaves you sick.
As things stand today, there really isn't any iron-clad proof that things will improve, the schedule gets tougher next year and the same defense now will be a year older. The offense could improve, but against the best of the conference, it has nowhere to go but up.
There needs to be a change somewhere and DB's legacy hangs in the balance. There are many $$ to keep or lose with this decision and none of them are on the field.
November 28th, 2010 at 11:14 AM ^
Anyone who looks at the numbers 3-9, 5-7, and 7-5 and says there has been "no progress" automatically loses all credibililty, at least to me, and makes me pretty much stop reading right there. Commenter, poster, or columnist, or reporter: it doesn't matter. Anyone who sees "no progress" in this team is allowing their FRDKRODNOW agenda to override their ability to use the most basic of logic.
Michigan could very well be undefeated going into the Nebraska game next year. They will have almost everyone back, they will be more experienced and physically bigger, and have a second-year starting QB. Each year under RR, the team has gotten a "level" better. This year, they improved enough to beat Purdue and Illinois. Next year, if the improvement continues, they will improve enough to also beat MSU and maybe Iowa. If they improve that much, they will start 9-1 or 10-0 by simply taking care of business.
If there's one thing Michigan has shown under RR, it's that they consistently find a way to beat teams that are not grossly better than they are. The only teams that have beaten Michigan this year clearly had superior talent on the field. Michigan gets almost everyone back, and their opponents lose a lot of seniors; that shouldn't be the case next year with anyone.
Nobody predicted MSU or Wiscy to go 11-1 this year. Michigan could be the "surprise 11-1 team" next year. Do the FRDKRODNOW people really want to risk blowing a great opportunity to reach double-digit wins next year by bringing in another offense just as the players running the current one begin to mature enough to really do damage with it?
Sadly, though, even if Michigan goes 11-1 with a loss to Nebraska that keeps them out of the first BTC game, there will be a segment of the fanbase that says "RR couldn't even win the Big Ten; he should be fired."
I love Michigan, but it is becoming easy to dislike a large portion of the fanbase.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:18 PM ^
If there's one thing Michigan has shown under RR, it's that they consistently find a way to beat teams that are not grossly better than they are. The only teams that have beaten Michigan this year clearly had superior talent on the field. Michigan gets almost everyone back, and their opponents lose a lot of seniors; that shouldn't be the case next year with anyone.
This is exactly right, and something that can't be said enough. Thanks for saying it. +1.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:09 PM ^
Anyone who looks at the numbers 3-9, 5-7, and 7-5 and says there has been "no progress" automatically loses all credibililty
We're better than we were in 2008 (not that that's saying much), but when you consider that last year's team went 2-3 in games decided by single-digits (losing one in OT), and that this year's team went 4-0 in such games (winning one in OT), it raises the question of whether we actually progressed as a team (which includes more than just offense), or whether this is just statistical variance. Flip the outcomes of the two OT games (2009 MSU, 2010 Illinois), and our records, both overall and in conference, would have been the exact same in 2009 and 2010.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
Well said.
November 28th, 2010 at 3:03 PM ^
If there's one thing Michigan has shown under RR, it's that they consistently find a way to beat teams that are not grossly better than they are.
2008 Notre Dame, TOLEDO, Purdue (and Northwestern could be argued "grossly")
2009- MSU, Illinois, Purdue
2010 - Iowa, Penn State
These are all teams he's lost to that aren't grossly better than us. Teams he's beat who ARE that much better? 7-6 Wisconsin in 2008, just because we completely sucked. THAT'S the problem...that we lose to a bunch of teams around as bad as we are, but beat NO ONE who's better than us.
November 28th, 2010 at 10:52 AM ^
that demand excellence NOW. god, EVERY team in the league has had down seasons... some have had ones resembling these EXACT ones for the EXACT same reasons: injuries, underclassmen starting, etc., all under the same coaching staffs that turned in 10-2 seasons, etc. i really just didn't think our fanbase was going to turn itself into an OMG WE DIDN'T WIN 9 GAMES ARGH.
it was a fun season. we lost games we wish we hadn't and won the games we should have. we have a young team that will be truly special in the next two years. just because you can't go racing into your buddy's house and go HURRHURR MICHIGAN WON UR TEAM SUX doesn't mean you have to fricking voice frustration 24-7