Year 2 (not 3) in the RR system

Submitted by doxa on August 17th, 2010 at 11:39 AM

This is year two in the Rich Rodriguez system at Michigan!?!

 

Year 1:  1990 Glenville State 1–7–1

Year 2:  1991 Glenville State 4–5–1

Year 3:  1992 Glenville State 6–4

 

Year 1:  2001 West Virginia 3–8

Year 2:  2002 West Virginia 9–4

Year 3:  2003 West Virginia 8–5

 

Year 1:  2008 Michigan 3–9

Year 2:  2009 Michigan 5–7

Year 3:  2010 Michigan ?

 

Here’s my question, does the first year at Michigan count for Rich Rodriguez (I know it counts in the record books, but is it fair)?  I find it highly unfair to hold a guy accountable for coaching a team completely inadequate for his system (see the quarterback situation).  OUR AD hired a coach to bring in a new system, new attitude, and new way of doing business (if Bill didn’t understand the massive change he was brining in, then that’s a Michigan problem, not RR).  With such a massive transition, I find it unrealistic to hold the first year against RR.  The guy had to come in and change more than an offense, he had to change an entire culture.  With that as a foundation, I view this as the second year in the RR system, because the 2009 campaign was his first with quarterbacks designed for his system, a new conditioning philosophy, and a new culture around the program.

Is this a fair p.o.v., or am I being soft on RR?

Your comments, critiques and even smart-ass remarks are expected…

Comments

MrWoodson

August 17th, 2010 at 1:00 PM ^

... has been shockingly bad, even for the Cubs. Every time I thought it couldn't get any worse, it did. And not by a little.

I am starting to really believe in the billy goat curse. If I were Ricketts, I would seriously consider getting a billy goat or two and have them attend all future games at Wrigley as offical guests of the Cubs at least until they win a World Series. Yes, I know I sound absolutely nuts, but it really is the only thing left to do.

MrWoodson

August 17th, 2010 at 2:26 PM ^

Just when people were beginning to suggest some really creative ideas, you have to bring up that whole logic thing. If everyone on here starts using logic, it will totally suck all the fun out of posting crazy shit with no factual support and flawed reasoning. People might even have to stop and think for a few moments before they post to make sure they are not just clogging up the board with inane half thoughts that will waste everyone's time. It will ruin everything. I hope you're happy.

MCalibur

August 17th, 2010 at 1:45 PM ^

I was responding to Logan88's assertion that Bill Martin didn't set out to change the culture at Michigan citing the fact that Ferentz (allegedly) and Schiano were higher on the list. My "it doesn't matter" response is to that thought, Plan A doesn't matter if Plan B was executed. Of course winning matters.

I personally think Plan B was the best plan for the long term, but obviously the pudding sucks so far. I think we start to see some payoff this year.

M-Wolverine

August 17th, 2010 at 1:54 PM ^

I think it might have been no boxes around the posts makes it hard to tell who we were responding to fail.  Because I too was responding to Logan88. And your next post hadn't come up yet (which makes a good point that even if there was not a plan to change things up, once Rich was targeted they/he should have KNOWN things would be changed up).

And while we haven't seen the results yet, even though we were flirting with those guys (and Miles too), I thought, at the time, we had gotten the best of the bunch. We just didn't know he was available till just about the time we hired him.  Now I just want him to live up to my expectations.  I mean, if we all agree he's a great coach, can't we agree (baring disastrous injuries and such...meteors...) that a great coach should be able to get any program to "pretty good" by year 3? Sometimes I think the people who defend Rich Rod for anything (not you, MCalibur) seem to have the least faith that he is, in fact, a really good coach.

dahblue

August 17th, 2010 at 12:41 PM ^

Of course his first year counts.  He chose to run the system that he ran.  He knew that he didn't have the proper parts, but that was his call and the results are his as well  That being said, I can understand that his offense was doomed with the departures of so much talent (some of which didn't want to play in that style).  The defense...ummm...wasn't that supposed to be the strong part of the team?  I'm not sure what the excuse was for that.

Then, year two (which really was year two) we saw a collapse of the team as the season progressed (both in the second half of the season and in the second half of games).  The coach owns his record.  I don't think that he'd look for nearly as many excuses as are offered for him here.

dahblue

August 17th, 2010 at 2:59 PM ^

Of course he had a choice.  He chose to run his system knowing he didn't have the parts.  He demanded that every offensive player adjust his game, but RR didn't have to adjust his at all?  Sounds like a recipe for failure...wait...it was.

There are endless offensive systems in college football.  The notion that there exists either "the spread" or "pro style" is a shamefully false choice.  There are many variations of the spread offense alone.  Don't believe me?  Maybe you should believe the coach who repeatedly stated that his "spread" could adjust to the strengths of different QB styles.

Again, he had a choice.  He made his choice.  He lives with the result.

p.s.  What's your excuse for the defense?  

MrWoodson

August 17th, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^

please...give the guy a one year break.

We already gave RR a one-year break (two actually). We gave him a total pass on a 3-9 season in 2008 and another total pass on a 5-7 season last year. In year three, he does not need (nor will he get) another total pass. Rather, in year three, RR needs to show sufficient measurable progress to prove to Dave Brandon that hiring him was not a mistake and that he is the right guy to lead the UM football program for the next 10-20 years.

I am not saying RR needs to reach a minimum number of wins or needs to beat specific teams in 2010 to survive, but I also do not believe that Dave Brandon (or most other longstanding UM supporters) will give RR another pass if the football team underperforms again for a third straight year. Moreover, while the team absolutely will be expected to win more games in 2010 than it won in 2009, winning one or two additional games in and of itself will not save RR's job. Rather, the team must show substantial measurable improvement in most if not all of the offensive and defensive statistics commonly used to track football performance (e.g., PPG, run yardage per game, passing yardage per game, turnover margin, 3rd down conversion rate, red zone performance, etc). An extra win or two due to luck or because a close loss in 2009 became a close win in 2010 simply will not be enough unless the team is improving measurably across the board.

Kilgore Trout

August 17th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^

To answer your question, you're being soft.  I know I'm in the significant minority here, but I think (and have said many times before) that Rodriguez really did a terrible job his first season, and that has to count toward determining his future.  

Your job as coach is to put the players you have in the best position to win and I don't believe he did that.  If you're paid millions of dollars to coach football, you better know more than one way to win or have the perspective to hire someone on your staff that does.  Threet could have been RS-freshmen Navarresque, and the defense should have been better. 

If people don't buy in, you have to find ways to reach them.  Not take a holier than thou, my way or the highway approach.  I have a tiny group of five people to motivate and steer every day, and they don't all respond to the same type of leadership.  

There's no way to know for sure if doing it differently would have helped, but the way he chose was a complete failure.  When you're paid that well to be in charge, you are responsible for the results.

Blue boy johnson

August 17th, 2010 at 5:32 PM ^

I don't think some of you realize how bad 5-7 would be.

5-7 means either 2-2 in non confence and 3-5 in big ten

or 3-1 in non conference and 2-6 in the big ten, that shit ain't gonna fly in AA it's just not.

5-7 means RR is LONG GONE.