Dear Coach Rodriguez,
You have now been the Wolverines coach for a little over a year. Your apologists have asked that we wait one or two more years before assessing your effectiveness at Michigan. It will take that long, they say, to know whether you will be successful. Nevertheless, as early in your tenure as it is, there are some things which are even now apparent. Looking back on your first year in Ann Arbor, there are two general questions involving your performance worth examining.
How effective are you as a football coach?
Your first year at Michigan wasn't all that successful. But that seems to be your pattern. We are assured that after a couple more years we will like what we see. And yet, no first year coach in Michigan's history (or any second year coach, or third year coach, or coach with greater tenure for that matter) has done as poorly as your 2008 team.
You say that you need time to get the players who can play by the system that you are installing? That may be true. But one measure of the effectiveness of a coach is how much he can get out of the players he has. No one expected you to have an undefeated season in 2008 - that hasn't happened to Michigan in over ten years. But neither did anyone expect a winning percentage of only 0.250. Even some of the most inept coaches in Michigan's history haven't done that badly. The players may not have been that good, but surely they were not that bad either. Other coaches at Michigan - and elsewhere - have been able to institute new offensive systems without going through such a poor initial season as you have had. I think it unlikely that the fates would have ganged up on you to the extent that you had such reduced talent.
Perhaps you will be able to post a superior season in 2009, or even 2010. If so, you will have only demonstrated that you are a good one-dimensional coach. What have you really accomplished if you need three years to implement your style, even if you make it a winning program then? Is this "spread offense" so rare? It is my understanding that many other college football programs, including several BigTen schools, have implemented variations on it. Most of them did not have to go through such a bad "rebuilding" year as the Wolverines have just done. Is your style of offense really so special that the program must take such a bashing in the first year? Further, does this mean that your successor will need three years to configure the team to his/her desires when you leave? If so, let us hope that you and all future coaches either stay on the job for considerably more than three years or are never hired in the first place.
In other words, Coach Rodriguez, it may yet be possible for you in the next year or two to show that you are a good coach in your one area of expertise. But by concentrating on only one style of offense, you have demonstrated that you do not have the flexibility or adaptability to be a great coach. Will your coaching abilities be enough to "get by" on into the future? Marginally, perhaps. You may end up winning significantly more games than losing. But that is not good enough for BigBlue.
In summary - even if you should win all your games for the next five years and bring home five national championships, you will only have established that you are a good coach ??? not a great one.
Are you a good representative of the Michigan football program?
On this issue we do not have to wait years - the returns are already in. You have chased players out of the program. You have shown disrespect for Michigan's traditions (such as the use of the #1 jersey) and to Michigan's supporters. You have downplayed the importance of traditionally important games - with Notre Dame, Michigan State, Minnesota, and especially Ohio State. Former players have criticized your arbitrary coaching and lack of respect for the program. You have engaged in name-calling of alumni and other supporters. You have acted like a spoiled brat when criticized, spewing verbal diarrhea when you are unable or unwilling to deal with a difference of opinion.
Oh, those remarks you made were taken out of context? "Get a life" only referred to those who posted hate blogs or who made obscene and threatening catcalls from the stands? "What about the economy?" was only meant to educate Michiganders who, (unlike West Virginians?) were unaware of the financial woes of the rest of the nation? In fact, there is no context appropriate for your remarks and how they applied when you said them. Even if you had won every game in 2008, you would not be justified in making these kinds of statements - under any circumstances - in any context.
We have accepted people with very different attitudes, personalities, and backgrounds into our family. The Michigan family is perhaps the largest and most diverse in the US, perhaps even the world. And we are open to change when debate and reflection indicate it is proper. But we are not open to disrespect of each other - on the part of members of the family or of those who have chosen to remain "outside" the family like you have done. Those who disrespected you were wrong. You were wrong for returning comments in kind.
If there is reason for changing a tradition, give us the reason and let us participate in the decision to change. There is an old saying, "Tradition should be a rudder and not an anchor." Apparently to you, tradition means neither.
So the two questions are answered respectively:
Are you a good coach? Maybe - partly.
Are you a good representative of the Michigan football program? No. You are an embarrassment to Michigan and a liability to its future. You are not a Michigan man, on the field or off it.
Sincerely,
Appleseed (a member of the Wolverine family).
Tatiana Golovin
Kim Cloutier
Did You See That?
College Football Top 25 Review
Comments (15) Add A Comment
As a Michigan fan I understand your point Appleseed but I got to admit you lost me on the good coach, great coach argument. I know RR isn't going to win all his games over the next 5 seasons and win 5 straight national titles, but if he did he would be named a great coach. A lot of great coaches haven't accomplished that. Especially in this modern era, that would be one hell of an accomplishment. That statement you put in there threw me off a bit.
Also, no offense but if Michigan really wanted a Michigan man they would have hired one. It's clear that by hiring Rodriguez they wanted to break from that tradition. Instead of crying about it, maybe you should embrace him as the coach of our favorite team.
J. HOVA: BROOKLYN
Brooklyn, NY
Total Comments (18063)
Thanks, Hova, for your comments. You have outlined the differences between us quite well.
I disagree that a significant winning streak necessarily means a great coach. To each his/her own. ;-)
And who is "Michigan"? It was AD Martin who hired RichRod, not the students, nor the alumni, nor the other supporters. And I assume that even Martin wanted a Michigan man, since initial reports suggested that the first offer was to Les Miles.
Appleseed
Detroit, MI
Total Comments (945)
True, I did hear the Les Miles reports and honestly Les would have been the better choice.
J. HOVA: BROOKLYN
Brooklyn, NY
Total Comments (18063)
Too bad media and internal pressure played his hand back to LSU.
J. HOVA: BROOKLYN
Brooklyn, NY
Total Comments (18063)
I also think the timing of the contact with Miles (and possible other candidates) may have been bad and even in violation of NCAA rules. I think both Michigan and RichRod messed up the hiring process - and West Virginia may well have messed up, too.
I assume that if RichRod eventually comes out ahead in terms of this mess, a lot of BigBlue fans will forgive him. I am less inclined to do so. But I also feel that the AD must shoulder much of the responsibility for the mess.
Appleseed
Detroit, MI
Total Comments (945)
Les Miles appears to have played Michigan into helping him get a better contract at LSU. Good for him. It smacks of wiping his rear end with our school, though.
If Mr. Rodriguez wins, we accept him, human foibles and all. If not, he's out. Michigan is for Victors, not losers.
Wolverine98
Indianapolis , IN
Total Comments (4)
Wolverine98 - Your comments are appreciated. I am a little less tolerant of his foibles than you are. The memory of the 1989 basketball season is all too fresh in my mind.
Appleseed
Detroit, MI
Total Comments (945)
I am far from sold on the concept of hiring any "System" coach - if they get the athletes to fit their system, they look like geniuses. If they don't, they look like the 2008 Michigan team. This makes consistent success less likely.
I am not big fan of RR, but UofM got him because he was the best available after the AD hosed up the search process. They were aware Carr would likely retire - they should have already had a short list made and sitting in the top drawer of the ADs desk, and should have already contacted their preferred candidates months before Carr announced.
Carr could have helped as well, providing more lead time between making a decision and announcing... just a couple of weeks would have allowed UofM to perform the search out of the spotlight.
...and yes, Les would have been a better choice.
Prove It
Frellin Cold In, AK
Total Comments (6729)
Thanks for your comments, Prove. I think both BigBlue and RichRod messed things up from the get-go. (And perhaps Carr and West Virginia pulled some ****, too.
My issues with RichRod center more on his character than on his ability as a coach. I think it likely that he will be able to recruit the players he needs for his style of offense. While Michigan may not be dominant in the future, I think it is likely that it will be competitive.
But RichRod is a whiner. He accuses others of causing his problems. He is too sensitive to criticism. (But I do not condone personal remarks that others have made to him and his family.)
All coaches (K-12, college, other amateur, professional) in all sports (football, basketball, hockey, etc.) must take responsibility for their programs. It isn't always fair, but it is the way it is done. RichRod hasn't done that. (Neither have others - such as Florida State.)
In other words, RichRod may pile up some significant victories in the years to come, but in my opinion he will never be a "Michigan man."
Appleseed
Detroit, MI
Total Comments (945)
Like you have eluded to but didn't want to flat out say, the "offensive transition" had next to nothing to do with last years failures. There are 3 major factors that accumulated into their 3-8 record
1.) They play soft
2.) Rich Rodriguez could not have handled personell worse
3.) Their playcalling was ridiculous
I'll elaborate on those now. Michigan has become soft, it has become a trend since 2007, they've gotted progressively softer, they've been getting beaten up by MSU for the past 2 years, and Ohio State has man handled them, if RROD wants to change anything, he needs to bring toughness back.
Rich Rodriguez couldnt have made worse player choices, Sam McGuffie? Really? Not only should he not have been on the field, he shouldnt even be at a D1 school playing football. Nick Sheridan? No explanation needed. Even back to recruiting, instead of going after Starr Jackson and other dual threats, he just went all after Pryor, and failed.
And the playcalling was atrocious, you cant run 40 times a game in the big ten and expect to be on top of the conference, yes that includes MSU, they got Massacred by PSU and OSU. And the bubble screen is not that special, they need to get over that and install a downfield passing attack.
I believe those were 3 of the biggest factors. The offensive wasnt the reason, they were still playing football, 11 players, 5 blockers and 5 skill players with a QB, its still based on wether or not you can beat up the other guy. Its football not chess, coaches schemes really arent that important. If you want confirmation, USC has all of 10 passing plays, and they install it in two days.
Sweatervest09
Farmington , MI
Total Comments (1)
sweaterbest09 - Thanks for your comments. I agree with much of what you say. The characteristics you mention were instrumental in the dismal year for BugBlue in 2008. And I agree that the problem started before RichRod came to town. The trend at Michigan toward "softness" has been going on for some time. (But note the exception in the 2009 Bowl game.)
But RichRod was hired - in part because he was supposed to be a disciplinarian. He wasn't. I suspect that the poor personnel choices he made were motivated by his desire for his offense - but he didn't have the personnel for that. I also suspect that the play-calling was motivated by RichRod's same stubborn commitment to his offensive style. I have nothing against the spread in any of its forms. I think any team with only a one-dimensional offense will soon be pulled up short by its opponents.
Certainly, quality of players is the single most important factor. I do feel, however, that it is the coach's job to arrange things so that the players can perform at their best. And I do not feel that RichRod has done this.
So I do think we are on the same page for the most part.
Appleseed
Detroit, MI
Total Comments (945)
Appleseed. RichRod only had 1 returning starter last year, Schilling. Also, it's not unusual for players to leave a program when a new coach comes in (i.e. Tennessee). Mallett was the heir apparent to Henne but he didn't fit the system so of course he left. He saw the writing on the wall. Offensively the cupboard was bare so he didn't do as well as previous first year coaches. Did the previous first year coaches have so many upperclassmen go pro?
I'm tired of seeing my beloved Wolverines get blown out by speedier teams. RR is recruiting heavily in Florida and the southeast as a whole. We will have speed.
A decent QB would have given us another 3 wins or so but that wasn't in the cards.
Anyway, I disagree. 5 national championships in the next 5 years would make him a great coach. Give him a chance...
GO BLUE!
rjreed97
Colorado Springs , CO
Total Comments (1)
Thanks for your comments, rjreed97. But I think there is more to coaching a Michigan team than just piling up the wins.
I hope he does, but more importantly I hope he grows up to represent the best in sportsmanship that should characterize a "Michigan man."
If he does, I will be his most ardent supporter.
Appleseed
Detroit, MI
Total Comments (945)
Interesting letter and responses. I agree Michigan's talent (QB) was a factor in many losses as was the play calling. Looking at RR @ WV it seems success is determined with a QB that can run his system. We will see this year and I hope for a Bowl game, but if that doesn't transpire the Blue faithful will start to get restless. I think you have to give a NCAA D-1 coach four years to see if the program is on the right track, but this is year two and 6 wins should not be that difficult if RR is a good coach.
A's Steel Wing
Schaumburg , IL
Total Comments (36)
I'm sorry, but other than the QB position, I think we had enough talent to compete better than we did. A good coach can adjust to the talents of their team. How well will the spread work in rainy, snowy, cold weather? Going small and fast will get us beat down in the Big Ten!
The Performance Guru
Cedar Hill , TX
Total Comments (1)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.