2009 Big Ten Coaching Grades - RichRod, Lynch
by Graham Filler on Feb 20, 2010 2:06 PM CST
in All
Email
PrintTwo more coaches remain to be graded, from opposite ends of the football spectrum nonetheless, but each facing different kinds of pressure. Will the crucial third year of Rich Rodriguez's term at Michigan be the first of many successful seasons? Can Bill Lynch maintain the offensive success that he found in 2008?
More 2009 Coaching Grades
2009 Big Ten Coaching Grades - Hope, TimmyB, Zook
2009 Big Ten Coaching Grades - BB, Fitz, Dantonio
2009 Big Ten Coaching Grades - Tres, KF, JoePa
Rich Rodriguez, Michigan
Last Year's Overall Grade: C
Adaptability and Gameplanning: A lot of these things are cause and effect i.e. who is really to blame? Is RichRod to take blame for Michigan's soft coverage against MSU and other teams? Probably not, but he did hire Greg Robinson to teach that ineffective coverage. Who's to blame for the linebackers missing tackles all year? RichRod? Recruits not panning out? Harry Potter? The fat kid from What's Happenin'? Injuries?
One thing we can all agree on is that Denard Robinson wasn't used correctly during much of the year. It's a run, everyone knows it's a run...Let's put some of that famous ingenuity into our offensive playbook for Denard.
Discussion: Their are a lot of things that added up to give the Michigan Old Guard room to gripe. The NCAA investigation into too much practicing, the continued losing to OSU, Justin Feagin selling coke...But it's all wiped away if RichRod gets the offense rolling and the Wolverines pick up 8 wins next year.
Isn't this sad? Isn't it horrendous when expectations have fallen so low? As Bruce Hornsby and Tupac both warbled, that's just the way it is. In this microwave world, we want things now, now, now, but RichRod couldn't deliver wins that quickly. I don't believe it's a system problem and that "Big East option run schemes don't work in the Big Ten." Michigan lacked depth, defensive toughness, and an experienced quarterback. That was a 5-7, 6-6 team anyway you look at it.
One thing - for being called a snake oil salesman and other nasty things, RichRod has avoided saying tremendously stupid things during press conferences. So that's a positive.
One other thing - there is no win win situation for critiquing RichRod. If you go easy on him, you get ripped for not attacking a Michigan coach with a losing record. If you criticize him too pointedly, people stress that his system hasn't been fully rolled out yet with his own players. So I'm attempting to be diplomatic.
Season Grade: C-
...
Bill Lynch, Indiana
Last Year's Overall Grade: C-
Adaptability and Gameplanning: I thought he did an amazing job, patching up the talent mismatches the best he could and keeping the Hoosiers close against some top teams. The Pistol looked great, adapting as the year went on. Lynch used his tall receivers perfectly, letting Chappell throw jump balls and slants where the WR's could shield the defender from the ball. Knowing the Hoosiers lack of depth would slow them as the game went on, Lynch ran trick plays and pushed his offense to come out aggressive.
Discussion: The Iowa game was the best reminder that hey, Indiana football might show some promise, but it's going to take some breaks to get them back into bowl contention. Lynch's tantrum against Michigan? Some thought it was too much - stop complaining 20 minutes after the fact. I think he's put in one hell of an effort to show his players and the fans that Indiana football should be decent, dammit.
The next stop for Lynch? Avoid losing to bottom feeding ACC teams by 40 on the road. Yeah...that sounds like a concentration thing.
Season Grade: B
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lynch's grade too high
And the Iowa game was the perfect example. Coming on the heels of the Michigan game, it’s understandable why he would be upset with the refs seeming to screw him over (though one call ended up not mattering at all). But it was his complete inability to LET IT FUCKING GO, in this game as well as the rest of the season, that ultimately doomed Indiana. When you’re still complaining about a 2nd quarter call in the middle of the 4th quarter, then you’re clearly not paying attention to the game at hand. And this was Lynch’s ultimate failing – he would get lost in the call that goes against Indiana, instead of coaching them to a victory.
As for RichRod, his grade should be much lower. At some point, he needs to be held to account for his complete inability to adjust for the talent/style of play of his team. His insistence that Michigan would run a WVU run-option style offense exclusively the past two years, personnel be damned, is an indictment of his ability to actually, you know, coach. If you can only win with players who are absolutely perfectly suited to run your particular offense, and you aren’t willing to adjust to meet the talents of the players you actually have, then maybe, just maybe, you aren’t that good of a coach.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I hate to disagree with you here..
but the personnel IS important. You don’t want Todd Boeckman running a spread offense with options and zone reads.
Visit Inside The Shoe
by Ian_InsideTheShoe on Feb 21, 2010 6:10 AM CST up reply actions
Re RichRod
I somewhat disagree with HoyaGoon’s point. I do agree that a coach needs to adapt to skills/strengths of players on hand while still planning within his overal philosophy, but that is likely a year-to-year abberation. For example, Tressel has his TresselBall approach, but I think he went out a character and opened things up a bit offensively when he had the likes of Troy, Teddy, Anthony, etc at the skill positions.
IMO, RichRod’s offensive philosophy was so far different than the traditional Wolverine approach, UM’s officials had to know there would be a philosophy-skill set gap when they hired RR. They should have known what they were getting when they hired him. Maybe not. The Wolverines should have been able to face the reality that they would be in ‘suck mode’ for 3-4 years, until Carr’s players were flushed through the system and RR had the time to recruit & develop “his” players.
On the basis on RR’s onfield results so far, I’d agree that ‘C-’ is too high. On the basis of longer term, RR and UM’s administration get an ‘Incomplete’ after two years. I thnk that in 2 years, after RR’s philosophy, recruiting, development and results have not shown substantial improvement, then the UM-RR experiment would be Total Fail. By substantial improvement, I mean a Big10 championship, program back in top 10 rankings, and a win over tOSU.
Granted, I don't know what down it is..
One discussion piece
RichRod didn’t run a spread option/run focused game during year 1 at Mich. He ran a muddled combo of pro-form and shotgun sets because the cupboard was bare. Year 1 definitely deserved an incomplete grade. Year 2 showed much more intriguing things. For instance, there was emphasis on conditioning in Ann Arbor. This led to some weird results; some players praised the workouts, claiming they were better/faster/stronger. Some were embittered by having to work so hard and came out against RR when the Detroit Free Press was “investigating”. And then some of these younger players, their bodies broke down early in the season.
So if there was ever an impossible grade to truly give out, it’s RichRod.
by Graham Filler on Feb 21, 2010 10:14 AM CST up reply actions
Point taken, graham.
I don’t see much difference between 2009 and 2010. You’re right about 2008 offense being a “what the thell do you call it” hybrid of piecing together what they think might have worked at the time. I guess you try to bolt something together with the pieces you have and hope for the best.
The Barwis effect is an intriguiing point, indeed. Frankly, I’d give Barwis an “I” as well, since I don’t think a fitness program can be judged for effectiveness so soon. Frankly, I the “workout-gate” ado is much about nothing. My take is that it was administrative snafu. You have the anecdotal evidence about the effectiveness, both pro and con, but that’s pretty subjective, I’d think.
Just for the hell of it, I went under premise that 4th quarter scoring (fer and agin) is a measure of fitness. In the 4th qtr, UM was outscored 66-92. In the three cupcake games, it was 10-21, so I attributed some of that to UM playing scrubs late in game and giving up garbage points.
So, I guess after two years, RichRod’s evaluation is ’Hell if I know?"
Granted, I don't know what down it is..
One more thing
HoyaGoon makes an excellent point with one caveat. The personnel on Michigan’s team in 2008 wasn’t well-suited to run any offense. Realistically, Nick Sheridan couldn’t have started for any D-I program in the country. Steven Threet can’t even wrangle a starting job at the school he transferred to (Arizona State). The QB position is just a microcosm for our personnel woes that year.
I do agree, though, that Rod’s apparent lack of flexibility does illustrate some kind of coaching deficit. But in terms of both 2008 and 2009, you must start installing your offensive system at some point to get the current players “in the system”. You’re not going to change your approach entirely up until you get your type of players in.
Bill Lynch deserves at least a B+ in my eyes
I mean, you see how far he threw that gum?? I think it hit a kid in the crowd!
Visit Inside The Shoe
by Ian_InsideTheShoe on Feb 22, 2010 7:13 AM CST reply actions
Good Grade for RichRod
I really enjoy reading Graham’s posts because he always fairly criticizes/praises his own team as well as the rest of the Big 10.
I don’t think I’ll ever understand Richrod leaving Denard in for the final drive @ Iowa.
by RickTheBloggerMartel on Feb 22, 2010 2:11 PM CST reply actions
WHERE IS REPEAT WHERE IS TATE FORCIER THE WORLD WONDERS
WWII ref.
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Feb 22, 2010 6:17 PM CST up reply actions
i dont want to talk about it
I forgot about that drive, thanks for the depressing reminder.
Denard had just run and short passed UM down the field. Then RR puts him in and has him throw deep.
I played high school football and I’ve seen some pretty bad end game scenarios. That situation felt like RR got caught up in the game a bit and forgot Tate had the endgame magic…and Tate was hurt too.
by Graham Filler on Feb 22, 2010 8:08 PM CST up reply actions
I shudder
what an embarrassment that was. Chalk it up to one of (now many) the bizarre, seemingly backwards coaching moves Rod has made over his Meech tenure. Going for it on fourth down against Illinois for no reason, then failing to convert, then watching Illinois subsequently roll us was a personal favorite.
That’s an interesting point, Greg, which I think builds on one of Graham’s comments in the body of the article, which was ‘??’ coaching moves, particularly with Denard Robinson. As an OSU guy, I was thrilled to see him enter the game; the play was going to be a run, most likely to the right.. When the team is struggling, you need to do a better job of keeping your opponent off-balance than that.
What is your guess for 2010; does "Shoelace stay at QB or move to some other position?
Granted, I don't know what down it is..
In college, we believed that C- was the worst grade you could possibly get
D means you didn’t try, and F means you didn’t show up to class. C- means you actually tried, and failed miserably.
Brunettes not fighter jets
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
