I have received a ton of push back on social media asking me to explain my level of opposition to a potential Rich Rodriguez Hire. My responses, both there and in a variety of forum post comments, are fragmented. With a hire looming, I see this as my last opportunity to make my feelings known. I don't know or care if they hold any weight. I can't, in good conscious, blindly support a potential candidate that I know will be detrimental to the future of the football program purely based on faith in Whit Babcock as an administrator. Here are the reasons why I do not feel Rich Rodriguez is the right coach for the Virginia Tech Football program.
Offensive and Defensive Systems and Recruiting
Rodriguez is one of the early innovators of the spread-read option scheme. The system can generate big plays and, looking purely at the statistics, is a good offensive system. However, it requires a very specific type of personnel grouping, especially at the quarterback position. RichRod also uses almost exclusively a zone blocking system that looks to move players laterally. Much like Bud Foster's defense and Paul Johnson's offense, potential recruits ultimately get wise that the system won't teach them the fundamental skills needed to be successful in the National Football League. Opposing recruiters use the track record of putting guys in the NFL as a major talking point for players not to go play in their system. Others may disagree, and I have no direct evidence, but NOBODY can convince me that a major reason the level of defensive talent has dropped in Blacksburg is not in part because of the complete lack of defensive front seven players from VT moving on and being successful in the NFL. RichRod's best pupils were Steve Slaton and Pat White. Both were regarded as gimmick players in NFL talent evaluations and neither had productive NFL careers.
On defense, RichRod is completely in love with a 3-3-5 gimmick defense. The system had some success against teams with static, pro-style offenses because it created confusion and allowed unblocked defenders alleys to make plays. However, the same offense that RichRod was responsible for making popular, the spread option, negates many of the advantages of the 3-3-5 stack. Blitzing and stunting have to be minimized against the option. With teams in the division like UNC and Duke that use spread option schemes (plus GT's flexbone), it is a system that is doomed to fail. The 3-3-5 also doesn't attract NFL size and speed. The small front could end up getting mashed by teams committed to big sets like Pitt and BC.
For those of you who say "what if Bud stays?" I would suggest to you that you look at why Whit would want Bud to stay. 1) It is a PR win to appease the fan base who would be unhappy with a RichRod hire. 2) It would mean Whit would not be paying another coach not to coach. See the basketball program. 3) If things go poorly in Year 1-2 with RichRod, Bud is set up to be the fall guy. It is clear that RichRod believes his 3-3-5 would work. Why would he take the job and be forced to accept a D he doesn't buy into unless... you fill in the blank.
It is amazing to me that people who have complained for years about Frank Beamer's recruiting could turn around and be supportive of a potential Rich Rodriguez hire. Nothing about his preferred offensive or defensive system is attractive to recruits who want NFL futures. Even his top 15 classes at Michigan were below average hauls at a school with Michigan's national profile, tradition, and reach.
Not a Hot Name/Reputation
Rich Rodriguez is no longer a hot name in coaching circles. He wasn't able to keep top recruits in Arizona (hardly a place where traditional powers recruit) at home. A RichRod hire isn't going to generate excitement with players or fans.. He has a reputation as being incredibly difficult to play for and petulant (see players jumping ship from Michigan and his treatment of Arizona's QB after the bowl loss last year. He has burned bridges at his last two jobs, and seems to be orchestrating his exit from Arizona regardless of the status with the VT job. He received NCAA infractions at Michigan and West Virginia.
The Bottom Line
The biggest direct challenge that Whit faces with this hire is the huge amount of Hokie fan apathy associated with the end of the era. Ticket sales are down. The stadium has big chunks of empty seats for the first time in my memory. I can't speak to fundraising, but people sure seem tight with their money when Hokieclub events do raffles and blind auctions. Whit has to make a hire that causes a spike in these areas.
Large portions of the fanbase REVILE Rich Rodriguez. I don't care if it is justified or not, it is a fact that a lot of people will not be happy with the hire. I appreciate that French60Wasp, lowly peon who doesn't contribute much to the program doesn't matter in that math. However, if the big money and the new money (recent graduates) are not happy, Whit is shooting himself in the foot with a RichRod hire. It would take major success over an extended period of time to win back those folks.
There is nothing that Rich Rodriguez brings to the table that 1) improves recruiting and 2) improves fan base enthusiasm and fundraising. Those are the areas where the program has to improve in order to get back to the top of the ACC. Every candidate has unknowns and worry items. However, RichRod is a known quantity. You know what you are getting. You know his offense may work short term, but long term will reflect a drop in talent. You know that his defense will not work in the ACC. And, you know when it goes bad (or goes really well), he has no problem with jumping ship. #SAYNOTORICHROD
Thank you for the forum.
French60Wasp
Comments
Spot on. Let's hope you are right.
You forgot the key dis-qualifier: he played football at, graduated from, and coached at, WVU. Only thing worse would be hiring a UVA alum. (see Stokes, Ricky)
More of an issue for others than me. But yes, add it to the list.
You do know that Whit Babcock is an alum of WVU (grad school). He has done a pretty good job so far. I am not necessarily a fan of RR (I honestly think there are much better candidates out there) but to say he shouldn't be considered because of where he went to school is asinine, in my opinion.
He earned his bachelor's degree from JMU in 1992. In 1996, he received his master's in sports management from West Virginia University.
http://www.hokiesports.com/staff/babcock_whit.html
Not sure why this needed to be written. Pissing in other's wheaties just because you can or it is the right thing to do is usually not the right thing to do. But since it was written, I would like to have seen more balance in this article. Seems very insulting to the hard work done by Whit. Very insulting to RR. Seems very insulting to suggest that anything WV is above VT. We are integrally tied together with many many of us having personal and professional relationships with folks from WV.
We absolutely expect Whit to do the right thing and he has given us every indication that he will. Keeping his buddy at the top of the list because thats what friends do. I can't see RR being in the top 5. I can't see him getting the job before Bud. Why bother pointing out the negative? Because there is some WVU driven conspiracy about to get this guy as our HC above all the others? Not buying it.
Very simple. Because if there is the slightest chance, THE SLIGHTEST CHANCE that this could happen, and I stood idly by while Babcock made a decision that would be horrible for the future of the football program when I look to that program for joy and entertainment, then shame on me.
My favorite sports team for the last 25 years has been the New York Rangers. I spent seven years (1997-2004) hating that I loved my team. The Rangers were horribly managed. I suffered through Neil Smith chasing away Mark Messier and forcing Wayne Gretzky to ride out his legendary career with no scoring wingers and two consecutive playoff misses. I watched as their management routinely overpaid players with major character flaws or bigger reputations than talent, many of whom I HATED (Eric Lindros, Bobby Holik, Theo Fleury, Val Kamensky, Petr Nedved, Kevin Hatcher), and then cringe through seasons where those guys stole paychecks. I watched as they missed the playoffs for 7 straight seasons, couldn't build a farm system, and were openly mocked as "The Ranger$." When it goes bad, it goes real bad. I know the potential impact of a bad decision by Babcock here. Given all the reasons I highlighted coupled with the fact that RichRod's history would indicate if I am wrong and things go well, he will leave anyway, Something that is supposed to be fun isn't supposed to hurt, and a RichRod-coached team would hurt me to watch.
Also, I want to be VERY clear about this, the WVU connection doesn't bother me in the slightest. If you told me that Babcock was hiring a 40-year-old Don Nehlan, I would be just fine with that. It may not sit well with some, but I want good people, no matter where they come from. I am anti-Rich Rodriguez, anti-his systems, and anti-his baggage. Period.
Definitely get the Rangers spin, being a life-long Caps fan that GMGM just about ran into the ground.
greatest trade ever..... Forsberg for Erat! lol
That's cold.
Im a caps fan too, so I kid haha
But you are serious too... which is what makes it hurt so bad. Kuzy eases the pain a little though.
yea, but it is what it is now. nothing we can do. I don't really try to worry about it anymore, more of a thing to laugh at.... but yea kuzy has been fun to watch
Please, I was born and raised in western NY. Being a lifelong Bills, Sabres, and Mets fan is way worse than dealing with the Rangers. You only think you know suffering!
Not really sure what was so insulting to Whit or RR in my "article." All I said was that a person should not be eliminated from consideration because of where they went to school whether it be WVU, UVA, VT, Harvard, etc. Although I didn't write it out, what I was implying is that Whit will hire the person he thinks will be the best for the job, no matter what his/her personal background entails.
Aren't you being a little unfair? Do we REALLY have to consider UVA candidates?
"Nothing about his preferred offensive or defensive system is attractive to recruits who want NFL futures"
Soooo onboard with this analysis. And this is the main criticism (maybe the only criticism) I have had with the Beamer era. We had great success getting the most from our unheralded recruits with an unusual scheme - and it was brilliant and innovative and we caught the world by surprise.
But after we caught lightning in the bottle with MV, and almost won it all, we should have cashed in on our popularity and shifted away from the gimmicky stuff - particularly on D, with the "smaller, faster players". 220 DEs? There are only so many Cory Moores on the planet.
We should have dumped the gimmicks. They served their purpose, and then some. But we never evolved. I don't know if it was "if it ain't broke don't fix it", stubborness, or what.
And as you say, Richrod, is just idiotic. That's just going backwards, IMO. We need to get a system in place along the lines of the NFL, and land guys that can and will produce in that system.
Exactly. Lamar Cobb and Cols Colas were never going to be Corey Moore, much to the staff's consternation.
As someone who has been on the #saynotoRichrod wagon a longtime I say well done.
I agree. Plus, to me his resume just isn't that impressive. I think though that as Beamer said he does not want to divide HokieNation he has to have some input into the next coach. I mean Whit has to have at least asked Frank, what do you think of so and so, what's the word in the coaching circles, etc etc. And if Frank is concerned about dividing HokieNation he would have to have said (hopefully) that a RichRod hire would do exactly that. Plus as you say I don't see it as an exciting hire that would draw top talent in VA at least. Plus his wins at all programs has been just ok. I mean after WVU, which was how many years ago, how well has he done?? Not good if you ask me. So I am with you.
#SayNoToRichRod
I really don't understand how anybody could want RichRod. It boggled my mind before this piece was written. I don't even know how anybody could make an argument for him now.
Preach it!
We've gone over the RichRod discussion ad infinitum and each time I hear pretty much the same things. This just rehashes the same tired arguments that come from an attitude that is predisposed to disliking the guy.
Except unlike most of the folks delivering these arguments, I have watched more than a dozen hours of Michigan and Arizona game film and Ibam telling you, this will not work in the ACC.
Careful lest thee be deemed as having irrational hate...
Aw snap
I'm not sure I understand your point. How is looking at scheme, which French is one of the best, just rehashing?
Really? You can't be serious...
Given all the tired arguments against him, remind us of the tired arguments in his favor?
The word of French for the people of French, Thanks be to French.
Thank you for articulating this so well for those of us who feel the same but are unable to express it in a logical fashion.
Building on this, do you believe this is a problem with spread/read-option offenses generally, or is it specific to RichRod's scheme? Should we be equally concerned if Fuente or Morris get the job?
I'm no X & O's guy, but I think it's RichRod's scheme, not the spread in general. Urban Meyer's spread offense has put plenty of players in the NFL. Morris put a handful of WR's an RB's in the NFL. TCU's offense when Fuente was there (I don't think they ran a traditional 'spread' offense there) produced Andy Dalton.
Maybe the scheme is fine, but RichRod hasn't recruited talented enough to players to send them to the NFL. Maybe he doesn't develop his players well. Maybe it's a combination of scheme/recruiting/development. Either way, it's a huge red flag.
Getting OT, but I'd also like to point out how balanced Meyer's, Morris's and Fuente's offenses were/are. Definitely something I'd love to see in Blacksburg.
FTFY
I don't put as much stock as French into RichRod's scheme handicapping his recruiting.
Certainly a coach needs to recruit players that fit his scheme, and most big time recruits want to see a path to an NFL payday. Outside of the o-line, the fundamentals of skill players in RichRod's scheme will map to schemes in the NFL. There are very few successful non-"pro-style" NFL QBs. NFL QBs can be dual-threats, but they have to be able to throw the football. Otherwise, it'll catch up to them (injuries, defenses will figure them out, a special coach goes back to Michigan). It's a credit to Rich Rod he helped Pat White get drafted as high as he did. It's a college coach's job to get his guys to the NFL, after that, it's unfounded to criticize him when he's no-longer coaching them. I have heard countless coaches say something to the effect of, "if a kid can play in the league, they'll find him."
I frankly don't think RichRod is a tremendous recruiter. (And I wouldn't regard him as a great in-game tactician like Paul Johnson, or Foster. He definitely innovated spread systems on a chalkboard though.) Urban Meyer, Tom Herman, Gus Malzhan, Chip Kelly, etc... all run "gimmicky offenses" from an NFL perspective. However, they all recruit well. The former two live and sleep recruiting. Kelly is a good recruiter and had the Nike Swoosh. Gus has the SEC.
My overall point is, good recruiters are going to sign great players for their scheme. If we have a spread guy and he's a great recruiter, we will get good players. If we have a pro-style guy, and he's a bad recruiter, we won't sign great players.
So many colleges are shifting to a spread/read option scheme that NFL teams have no choice into looking at some kids from those systems come draft time. However, the NFL scouts take a hard look at those guys (see Marriotta) and they usually have to overcome a stigma and have questions about fitting into the pro game. The lack of pro-style offenses in college football is one of the big reasons that offense and quarterback play is so dreadful in the NFL. We have come a long way from when I was a kid and a huge NFL fan. It seemed like almost every team had a good QB. There were all time greats (Montana, Elway, Marino, Kelly, Young, Simms, Moon, Cunningham, Easison, Cunningham, Kosar, Aikman, Favre- I apologize if I left some out) and most teams had guys who were competent (Dave Krieg for Seattle/Kansas City, Tommy O'Brein for the Jets, Tommy Kramer for the VIkings, Jim Everrett for the Rams... hell those guys would be considered top tier guys now.) Now, a significant number of teams have dreadful QB situations.
Of the spread-read option offenses, RichRod's is perhaps one of the most lacking in sophistication I have seen. Any success he has comes almost entirely from play action. In the Pac-12 (where, after watching UCLA, Arizona, USC, and Oregon this season, it is clear that defense isn't at a premium), Arizona was able to put up some impressive numbers in the passing game because play action does generate openings. However, if their offense gets behind the sticks, it become significantly more limited. Their passing game also is limited because they zone everything up front in the run game, so it becomes easier as a safety or linebacker reading keys to recognize if an OL isn't firing out hard and drop under play action. Ohio State has similar issues in the passing game, however they are less limited because they can use play action off zone read, power, and other looks so the defense has more challenging reads. Ohio State also attracts a much superior level of athlete compared to all their B1G opponents, and that papers over a bunch of flaws.
Much like the flexbone, 3rd and 6 becomes a huge issue, and in a conference with more ornate and varied offenses like Clemson and UNC that can put up huge points, you have to sustain drives to be successful. Also, after an initial boost in productivity, RichRod's recruiting dropped off at both Michigan and Arizona. Just like Paul Johnson at GT, the offense negatively impacts recruiting, and the scheme can't always overcome the lack of talent. GT last year with two NFL receivers and an NFL guard.... very tough to defend. GT this year without replenishing the WR position and having two-star freshmen OL playing... not so good.
The 3-3-5 stack, well, I could write a book on where it can work and when it doesn't. I will be concise. 3-3-5 is really more of a 3-5-3. The design is to use your DL to keep blockers away from smaller, waterbug DB/LB hybrids who use movement and confusion to get unblocked lanes to the RB. It is built around stunts and movement. I highly suggest reading Smart Football's 3-3-5 breakdown. http://grantland.com/features/an-excerpt-essential-smart-football-birth-...
The challenge with being dependent on all that movement to win defensive match ups is that option football forces you to play base. Every team in the division minus Miami uses enough read option, and UNC/Duke/GT all excel at it. As a defense, it also tends to attract smaller defenders (also a bugaboo in Bud's scheme) and that creates match up nightmares against teams committed to power football like Pitt and BC.
#SayNoToRichRod
I can't imagine a world where the guy who hired Buzz and seems to sincerely care about Hokie Nation, would hire someone who has so polarized the fan base. In my opinion, regardless of x's and o's, RR is the anti Beamer, and I don't think Whit is dumb enough to make such mistake.
Wouldn't it be Ironic that part of Beamer stepping down was that he didn't want to divide Hokie Nation and then Whitness hires a guy that divides Hokie Nation.
via GIPHY
FIrst a disclaimer: I'm not a RichRod advocate, though I'm not that strongly opposed, either. I believe VT can do better, but we could also do worse.
But doesn't Michigan's 11-2 record in the first year post-Rodriguez indicate that his recruiting abilities are not as weak as you're suggesting? If a doofus like Brady Hoke can get 11 wins with your players, then certainly you've done something right, no?
He squandered his recruiting classes at Michigan, that's the biggest knock on him.
Rankings per 24/7:
2008 rank: 11, record: 3-9
2009 rank: 10, record: 5-7
2010 rank: 17, record: 7-6
2011 rank: 26, record: 11-2 (Hoke)
So Michigan (one of the most storied and winningest programs in FBS history) recruiting went steadily down, even with 10th and 11th ranked classes he won no more than 7 games, and then Hoke walks in and takes them to the Sugar Bowl. RichRod got good players. He did nothing with them at one of the most successful football schools in existence.
I don't think it's fair to say he squandered a recruiting class based on the record of the calendar year. There are very few kids that can play right away, mostly because they are boys going up against grown ass men. I don't judge a recruiting class until the kids have been in the program for a minimum of three years.
I agree with that, but while the W-L record ticked up slowly, topping out at 7 wins, at Michigan, with a top-20 class? I just think that's a good argument against anyone who defends RichRod with "he's a good recruiter." He had the benefit of being at Michigan, had top classes, and still by the end of the 3 years (which is when I also begin to render judgment, as well), he had a 7-6 record.
Three years is the bare minimum. I don't think it's a coincidence their wins jumped up the next season under Hoke. Without RichRod being there for year four, it's hard prove either way.
I sincerely hope we don't jump down the next coach's throat if he is treading water in year three. For as good as Ford, Hodges, Clark, etc... are, Tech's depth is still shallow as hell.
I can certainly agree. Year 3 is when I think it is fair to start judging, perhaps not pass a final verdict, but get a good sense of where we stand. If our new HC comes in and can develop some depth, show us a solid idea of scheme on both sides of the ball, and we're kind of middling, I'm OK with that as long as the vision is clear. If we're in years 4, 5, etc and still not succeeding, then I will personally be antsy.
TBH, I think that the recruiting done at Michigan under RR had a whole lot more to do with Michigan than it did with RR
Up to that point, Michigan football coaches could sit at home all year and the 10th ranked class in the country would come to them. It was a matter of rote. RichRod is primarily responsible for the damaging of Michigan's reputation as a football power that Hoke wasn't good enough to overcome. Even that 11-2 season- we saw first hand that they were not that good (frankly, neither was VT that year.)
I dunno, they had that one guy that was really pivotal in the Sugar bowl. I don't remember his name, but he was the one in the black and white striped jersey.
Actually, the guy in question was up in the booth...may or may not be wearing stripes.
and yet...you got the joke
I've argued for RIchRod in the past not because I felt he was a great candidate, but because I think the majority of people were letting their hate for a rival overwhelm the stuff that actually matters while making unfair character attacks. These are some strong points though, and I'm on board. #SayNoToRichRod
I'm not a Rich Rod fan at all. And I do think Tech can and probably will hire a more fitting HC. But I do agree with Joe that it doesn't really matter what scheme you run offensively or defensively as long as you have a great recruiter that can get the talent he needs to run his scheme. And with respect to Urban Meyer, someone correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure he runs the exact same offense at Ohio State as he did at Florida. So I'm not sure the point of "he's only been so successful at Ohio State because he recruits much more talented players than his B1G counterparts" is accurate. Let's not forget what he did to his SEC counterparts with the same scheme. And also what he did to Alabama last year with the same scheme.
Actually, Tom Herman was very pivotal in evolving and changing Urban Meyer's spread option attack. Here's an interesting read I found on how Herman changed Meyer's philosophy when he was hired as OC at OSU. Essentially, Meyer's offense at Florida was a spread single-wing attack that revolved around QB power runs and gap blocking. Herman shifted the offense to zone blocking and built the whole attack around the inside zone run. Pretty interesting read:
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/college-football-playoff-ohio-state-or...
It makes me sad when every time someone brings up an interesting article, it's from Grantland
Yes, BUT his still mixes it up. If you watch Houston, it also has elements of that spread single wing and uses QB power/power as key components.
With Rich Rod, it is varieties of the zone read... BUT it is almost exclusively zone read or inside zone with the tailback lead blocking for the QB.
Agreed. I just find it interesting that Herman helped to convince Urban Meyer to let his offense evolve beyond just using the QB as a battering ram all the time. It may seem like his offense at Florida and now at OSU are essentially the same, but there have been some pretty significant additions.
I'm not on the "Say No to Rich Rod" campaign, but I do agree there are better candidates for Virginia Tech out there. WVU fans are willing to accept Rich Rod again with open arms, despite giving him and his family several death threats at the end of the 2007 season, and he is from WV. If Dana Holgerson is fired, I think we will see Rich Rod back at WVU and he won't even be a concern of ours.
The reason I'm not a part of the anti-Rich Rod campaign, though, is because his track record isn't as atrocious as it's made out to be. Don Nehlen ran WVU into the ground in his final years. When Rich Rod took over WVU in 2001, he took very little time to be successful. He took them from 3-8 in 2001 to 9-4 and ranked in 2002 (includes a win over us on the road). Then in 2003, WVU nearly beat Miami, hammered us when we were ranked #3, and ended up sharing the Big East title with Miami. In 2004, they once again shared the Big East title, and in 2005 they won it outright, losing 1 game all year (to us) and winning the Sugar Bowl. That was followed up in 2006 with an 11-2 season, and then his final year where a win over Pitt would have put them in the National Championship.
At Michigan, he recruited well, better than we are right now. This could be correlated with the higher level of talent to recruit close by, contrary to WV. Unfortunately, that talent never translated to wins, and I'm not exactly convinced his staff helped him.
When he got hired to coach Arizona, it was a below .500 program. They have finished above .500 every season since he got there, upsetting someone every year. Recruiting is a concern, but Arizona, being a basketball school, having to recruit against the likes of USC and UCLA in the So. Cal. talent pool is an uphill battle. Bottom line, he recruited well when he had the talent pool at Michigan, and managed to turn around WVU and Arizona despite the recruiting handicaps.
Where Rich Rod does not appeal to me, though, is that stupid 3-3-5 scheme. He would have to let Bud do what Bud has done since 2004 for him to be hired, in my opinion. If Rich Rod is dumb enough to take control away from one of the best defensive coordinators in college football, that's terrible. He also hasn't created the family atmosphere at Michigan or Arizona that he seemed to create at WVU, and if he is hired, Whit will certainly make it a point to him that he has to create a family atmosphere.
One of the more appealing things about Rich Rod, though, is his offense. Contrasting French's opinion on this website probably isn't the best move, but I think his offense is exactly what Tech needs. After watching the team's success over the years, all of those were done with potent running games. Football has changed, though, and the power running game isn't as prominent. Rich Rod runs a run-based spread. At West Virginia, where he was most successful, his teams ran the ball at least 70% of the time in 5 of the seven seasons, which includes 2003, 2005, 2006, and 2007, his four most successful seasons. Rich Rod will no doubt run the football, but it will be more modern. Getting a quarterback like Marquise Williams might have happened under Rich Rod, and recruiting running backs will not be a problem. The zone blocking scheme, like French said, might create issues, but zone blocking is something Loeffler has implemented anyway since he got here and Searels has done a good job recruiting offensive linemen, so it's not impossible.
While I probably just came off as the biggest Rich Rod advocate on this website, he is still not my favorite candidate. I worry that he will try to override Bud, maybe getting rid of him altogether, and he will struggle to create the family atmosphere. Those are two huge "ifs" that I don't see Whit taking the risk on. With that being said, I support Tom Herman or Justin Fuente. Two up and coming coaches with high energy and a proven track record, similar to Frank when he came in.
French, would it be fair to say you don't want RichRod as Virginia Tech's next head coach?
via GIPHY
via GIPHY
#JustSayPleaseToTomHerman
The Problem with RichRod is that if you say VT is the number 2 attractive p5 opening and all you bring is RichRod, I will be highly disappointed.
VT is in a position to do great things. Open position at a football hungry school. Solid Ath Dept. Strong Alum / Students base. I hope Whitness does not squander this opportunity to progress the program for 25 years like Beamer did.
thanks for expressing what i couldn't in opposition of hiring RichRod.
i just didn't want him because (1) he coached WVU and (2) was given the job to coach a blue chip program (Michigan) back to greatness and couldn't do it. sure, he's had minor success with 'Zona but i had already written him off before he took that job.
I agree with your final point, he's divisive and shouldn't be the choice.
However, I disagree about your insinuation he would bring the 3-3-5 with him or only choose Bud because he was forced to. Much of the early momentum of this combination was due to a rumored mutual respect between Bud and RichRod. There is, IMO, a #4 to your list: He wants Bud Foster as his DC.
I also don't buy that if it doesn't go well, that Bud is the fallguy. I would propose the contrary, that if it doesn't go well, RichRod is the fallguy and Bud is there to take over.
I agree he isn't a great recruiter and that his system isn't well suited for bigtime recruits. I don't care about how he treats his players (easy to find players whining about coaches) or the NCAA issues. I personally like him, I find him entertaining and refreshing.
That said, I am firmly against him being the next HC because he's so divisive. Not high on my list, but I would prefer Bud or even Shane. It would be divisive to hire Shane, but there is at least the potential that Shane can grow into a great recruiter and his offensive system may be more NFL oriented. I don't want Bud or Shane as HC, but I prefer both to RichRod just due to the divisiveness issue.
I'll ask this as nicely as I can. If you really don't care how a coach treats his players why do you follow college football?
You are on fire with the literalisms this week. I don't care about the reports, if you've played a sport you know that every locker room has players who will complain about a coach. Every single locker room.
So a guy saying "he curses too much" literally means nothing to me.
It means something to me. At some point, EVERY player will tune out a guy who goes to the whip, either physically or verbally, too often. I didn't care if a coach used bad language. However, it bothered me when a coached screamed and bellowed and insulted you instead of TEACHING you what you did wrong. If he was teaching and happened to call me a peckerhead in the process, no harm no foul. If he spent 10 minutes hurling euphemisms calling me worthless etc. etc... to hell with that shitbox.
And, correct me if I'm wrong on this, you are not familiar which of the two is RichRod. He could be a peckerhead teacher or a worthless shitbox.
I have no clue. Hence why my talking points were focused around players leaving the program at Michigan because of the atmosphere and the documented treatment of the Zona QB following the bowl loss.
I was responding to the comment "you say 'he cusses to much.' means nothing to you." I was sharing that it would mean something to me as a player. At EHC, I played for Fred Selfe. If I had played for some of the other coaches that I have been exposed to either as a player or second hand, I would have not played. It wasn't directed towards RichRod. His well-documented track record is secondary to his system and recruiting flaws for me.
I'm not even arguing that you are wrong, that there is so much grey area here that it is impossible for us to discern. I played for many coaches who were tough and cursed. Some guys heard the teaching and tuned out the cursing. Some guys couldn't hear the teaching, just the tone and the cursing. Often, but not always, it was the weaker players who couldn't handle a rough coach but sometimes good players struggled with it and bad players responded better to rough coaches.
It is a very likely scenario that RichRod ran off players when he got to Michigan, like most coaches do, and they used the "he curses too much" to defame him on the way out. It's tough to say if he was too tough and an ass or just a hardnosed coach.
That said, after watching some Beamer tribute videos today, the contrast between the picture painted of RichRod (by the fleeing Michigan players) and Beamer is quite stark. No matter who we end up with, the difference will be felt.
see McElwain, Jim
He seemed to get it done just fine this year. Was pretty fun to watch him continue to coach that team into a winner after hearing everyone crying about it the Monday after.
So, I am not in the business of spreading scuttlebutt and I don't KNOW any of this. However, if you are a head coach with a history of using specific systems, there is a reason you use those systems. Specifically, you believe that they are the best bet for you to win football games. Right or wrong, RichRod believes in the 3-3-5. RichRod brought Jeff Casteel to West Virginia, and even though Casteel didn't follow RichRod to Michigan, he did follow RichRod to Arizona. There may be mutual respect between RichRod and Bud, but using logic, it is clear that RichRod believes in the 3-3-5 and Casteel. Even if Bud is retained, that is such a clear point of potential conflict that it can't be ignored.
RichRod without Bud is a different animal for a lot of us than RichRod+Casteel and his 3-3-5.
one more comment about 3-3-5 and VT's branding. You get next to nothing from your DL in terms of pass rush in a 3-3-5. It makes can make linebackers look really good (see Scooby Wright III, a two star recruit and one of Casteels first gets at Zona), however the Commonwealth has gone awhile without producing any big time linebacker talent in the high school ranks.
Even when Arizona does well on offense (see Utah win), the big takeaway I have from watching the film is that if the defense challenges the run and plays man on the edge, the passing game can work. Against zone coverage, RichRod's QBs are really clueless. No site checks. No sitting down in soft spots in zones.
RichRod's peak, and perhaps the Hokies best all-around team since 1999. Watch, draw your own conclusions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnMiN9IRbT4&list=PLwsGbrHuvj3joqlg9Y4UOG...
That Miami loss will forever stick in my craw.
Darryl Tapp's forced fumble on the second drive against veer triple option... man what a play.
WARNING-ABC USED NICKELBACK IN THEIR PACKAGE TO EXIT TO COMMERCIAL-WARNING
Damnit it Greg Stroman!
French, I just want to thank you for this. I don't want RichRod, specifically because I think we can do much better and I think that he would tear apart the fan base rather than unite us. I have been waiting for this type of cogent anti-RichRod argument, but until now have been seeing mostly wailing and gnashing of teeth. I just wanted some good football reasons to help confirm how I was already leaning. Thanks for spelling it out from a more technical perspective.