text:
This will end well.
Rich Rodriguez "Some Michigan Players Felt Entitled"
there's a strong reservoir of sympathy out there for RichRod. Michigan came out of that one looking much worse than he did, in part due to Bacon's book, in part due to the undeniable fact that a lot of Michigan former players and others behaved VERY badly during the debacle. Better to be a little bit honest and gallant about it than chew the wormwood forever. Plus, he's a compulsive talker; if he's successful at AZ, we'll just have to live with the narrative. It fed into other unappealing things that people had said about M for a long time.
You're telling me Alex Mitchell and Ryan Mallett felt entitled? I don't believe it.
Jokes aside, why is he still commenting about Michigan? Worry about Arizona and the awful defense. Please don't make the same mistake twice, because at Michigan he was never shy from answering WVU questions, when he should have just focused on the task at hand.
He keeps commenting because people keep asking. The first paragraph of the article:
So I had to remind Rodriguez of the day we spoke after his first season at Michigan four years ago looked like it took 10 years from his life.
Once people stop asking him, he'll probably stop commenting. And since that will probably be the most prominent thing people know about him for a while, who knows how long that will be. People still can't talk about a successful Michigan basketball program without referencing the Fab Five, and that was 20 years ago.
but it's the media. It's what they do. How about this for an answer...."I'm not going to comment on Michigan or their players. Let's talk about Arizona." Eventually they will get tired of asking. or not. Regardless, he can not comment, or come off as a sour grapes guy. Totally his choice, in my opinion.
Might not be a bad way to go.
it was just an effing disaster. The further we get from his tenure, the more that unfortunate point is further cemented. The guy was simply not ready for it at that point in his career, still not.
Shouldnt he be worrying about his all-american running back who got kicked out of the UCLA-AZ hoops game last week for sneaking in without a ticket and telling the security guard "to get the fuck out of my face. Dont you know Im a fucking all-american" when confronted by him. This kid is the face of his program and has been in trouble on several occasions. I get RR was asked a question but he didnt have to answer it.
...the questions about Michigan is because RichRod has demonstrated a willingness to substantively respond to them.
It would be easy to shut down the questions. "I'm focused on what's happening here in Arizona." "I'm too busy running my current program." Etc.
If he responded in that manner, the questions would subside/stop.
This reporter is a giant douche, though. This whole article is a giant middle finger to us. He basically says Michigan, and the players, were wholly responsible for our lack of onfield success, and Rich Rod was a victim of Michigan. RR doesn't help the matter much by basically going along with it, but this article reads like a buckeye wrote it.
Our behavior was a direct reflection of his terrible performance. When your star qb jumps ship and you go 3-8 things won't be all sunshine and roses.
Probably reads this blog a lot to get that story.
Coach Hoke would know better than to even answer a question like that. And certainly wouldn't badmouth former players.
I'm not sure what you mean by "Hoke would know better than to even answer a question like that." I think I might easily agree, that Hoke's now well-known style dictates that he would probably not answer "a question like that." But is it a matter of "knowing better"?
Because I might then suggest that Rich Rodriguez would "know better" than to tell a national tv audience that Denard Robinson was fine and would be back in the second half of the Nebraska game.
With Rich Rodriguez, I rather liked the idea that as a fan, I could expect a bit more information, more candor, and more openness than the previous regime.
Again, as always, the anti-Rodriguez contingent spreading troll-bait.
Standard Operating Procedure.
Never let it be said, that Rodriguez loyalists cause trouble on this board. The anti-Rodriguez contingent starts the warring. Always. Time after time.
Wait, you're blaming Rich Rod for your behavior on a sports blog?
That is pretty hilarious.
EDIT: I misread your post. I kind of think everyone should just yawn and move on. This thread is full of "how dare he!!!" posts, leading to the kind of "no fair!!!" posts you reference.
Let it go man
You're telling me to let it go?!?!
I didn't start this thread. I didn't initiate any insults at anybody; certainly not the subjects of the thread; not any coaches or other MGoBoard members.
You've never read me, making comments about what a great coach so-and-so is, or what a lousy coach so-and-so is.
If I understand you, you'd like me to stop defending Rodriguez. Is that what you want me to give up?
Given what Michigan has to answer for, in the treatment of Rodriguez by a considerable number of Michigan grads during three years in Ann Arbor, I'd have thought that just a little introspection might have been in order.
"This blog." Speak for yourself and not others. I was pumped when RR came, I bought the "In Rod We Trust shirt" and then he shat the bed, simple as that. I hate him (as a coach, not a person) as much if not more than anyone because I was sold on him and he failed miserably as a coach and a representative of the program (getting us our first ever NCAA violation, for instance). I don't owe RR shit, and will continue to bash his coaching abilities with a clear conscience, thank you very much.
/rant over
I'm not a part of the sort of Michigan fandom you represent. I'd rather be smart, and careful, about things I write.
You can criticize Rodriguez as a coach if you wish. I think that's stupid on your part, unless you are a current elite-level NCAA coach, as Rodriguez clearly is. I don't criticize Rodriguez, or Hoke, or Tressel, or Meyer as coaches on technical grounds. I know better. I know that they all know much more than I ever will about their profession. That's one reason why I am smarter than you are.
A second reason that I am smarter than you are is that I don't say stupid things like, "[Rodriguez got] us our first ever NCAA violation..." Because Michigan had major violations in basketball before Rodriguez ever thought about coaching at Michigan, and Michigan football had previous secondary violations in football just like all major programs have had. And FWIW, Michigan's "violations" in the 2009 case really ought to have been secondary violations and likely would have, if instead of deliberately blindsiding the Michigan Athletic Department with his manufactured story, Michael Rosenberg had asked the Department about what he was looking into. We are pretty much assured that they could have been dealt with as secondary violations because Maryland was subsequently alerted to similar practice time issues and it was treated as a secondary violation.
When Michigan responded to the NCAA Notice of Allegations in Case Number M 324, the University and Rodriguez toegether contested the single count that alleged a Failure to Monitor on the part of Rodriguez. After investigation and a hearing, the count relating specifically to Rodriguez was voluntarily dropped by the NCAA. Michigan essentially pled guilty to the rest of the stuff, all of which was institutional (not alleged against Rodriguez personally, and was all so minor that the only sanctions were the loss of practice time (due to a hypertechnical violation) and the loss of graduate assistant numbers (due to one GA's having lied, and others having been confused about their job descriptions, doing hourly work for the football team).
So no, I'm not with Michigan fans like you, and I am definitely not with Michigan alums like Michael Rosenberg, Mark Snyder, Braylon Edwards, Mike Boren and Eric Mayes. There are Michigan people, like those just mentioned, that I want to condemn.
But when you try to separate me from this blog, it really is a bit funny, since my core complaints against the many anti-Rodriguez forces outlined in John U. Bacon's Three and Out are the same core complaints made by this blog's host and proprietor, Brian Cook. Brian knows it, and so do I.
You clearly "don't owe RR shit."
And you clearly don't know shit either.
Who you taking MSU or Illinois tonight
Why should RR know better? He owes Michigan nothing at this point, we pretty much treated him like shit, particularly on his way out the door (no Gator Bowl ring, fired him too late for his staff to get jobs).
He came here, did poorly, and got fired. We left on less than good terms. Why is he obligated to play nice about former players at Michigan?
It's no worse than what Harbaugh said, and we just had a blog come-to-Jesus moment about how Harbaugh is still "one of us". Why should we hold a guy we never let into the "Michigan Man" club to a higher standard?
He may not "owe Michigan", but common sense says stop commenting about it. It makes him look petty and bitter. Also it's generally not great behavior for grown man to criticize guys who were still pretty young at the time. His job was to teach them to go beyond their entitlement, not criticize them for it years later.
Perhaps Lloyd should've instilled some of that selfless attitude in those guys before he retired. We're quick to question Rodriguez's leadership qualities in handling the the guys he inherited from Carr, but unwilling to attribute him any credit for the guys he passed onto Hoke, guys who put the team ahead of themselves in another time of uncertainty.
Fair point...Lloyd definitely could have handled things better.
Rich Rod cared deeply about every player on the roster, starter or star or no. The defense quote went along the lines of "You could get Vince Lombardi in here and it wouldn't fix some of the problems we have on defense," referring to the lack of experience and leadership on that side of the ball, compounded by the fact that the defensive coordinator was being asked to run a scheme he'd never run before. The RR era may not have ended well at Michigan, but don't spread falsehoods about the man.
"fired him too late for his staff to get jobs"
The RR defenders always say this, but if he had been fired before the bowl all we would hear is "DB didn't give RR a chance to prove himself in the bowlgame." Can we just all agree that he did prove himself in the bowl game and that is why we should all move on?
Hell, even the gaps were wide open.
There is probably a more appropriate way to handle and answer those types of questions though. See the Greg Robinson article in mgolicious.
To not answer questions you are asked. A "no comment" is an acceptable answer. Lawrence Frank did an amusing job of dodging Stuckey questions yesterday on channel 4 news.
Maybe if one stops taking the bait, they'll stop asking the questions.
Also you'd think after the issues RR had with elements of the media that covered Michigan, he'd have made a point to master dodging questions or dropping the no comment.
There is the Carr school of glowering angrily at the reporter until they leave. There is the Hoke school of going "Well.... (insert touching story about high school football and learning something from his coach/something about touching the kids/something about tremendous and leadership)". By the time Hoke is done with his heart warming story or platitudes no one even remembers the question and he goes on to the next one. You definitely don't have to answer the question.
Yeah, but by answering the reporter's question all he did was make a bunch of MGoBloggers apoplectic (srs., guys, get a thicker skin). So why exactly should he "master dodging questions?" The only people he's angering are people who don't matter at all.
And in fact, I'm sure that the answer he gave totally endeared him to U of A fans, which is what everyone accused him of not doing at U of M. I mean, read the whole quote:
"We got total buy-in from the get-go here," Rodriguez said. "From the players to the support staff to everybody that was touching the program. We had some guys committed at Michigan, but we had others that weren't. Some guys felt a sense of entitlement. The name on the chest, and 'I've already arrived."
It wasn't an unsolicited dig at M, it was a compliment to U of A followed by a comparison to his last job. The reason M fans get all mad is that we interpret everything as though we're the center of the universe. For Davids like U of A, sticking it to Goliath is about the best way to ensure allegiance. Dumb like a fox, I say.
I see the first part of his response as enough of an answer. "We got total buy in from the get-go here. From the players...the program. Everyone was excited to run the spread offense." You don't need to take shots at college kids you coached at Michigan in the process of answering that question. Most people will be smart enough to pick up the implication that you didn't get full buyin at Michigan and you don't have to push anyone under the bus in the process.
"Because it's not right to throw former players under the bus" is a reason I can get behind for him to shut his yap. "Because you will anger M supporters" is not. To the extent you were making the latter point I disagree, but I do agree with the former.
I never attempted to make the latter point. My only comment was about watching what you say to the media in that they'll often try to blow it up into some controversy or attention getting headline. So when you are asked a question that could set something like that up, standard practice is "no comment" or a dodge.
...when you throw former players under the bus, it also sends a message to your current and future players. Someday they'll be former players too.
So what if he's asked...doesn't mean he has to answer. Period. You're a grown fucking man, act like it.
Leave it alone, build 'Zona up to a Pac 12 powerhouse.
I wish he would stop saying, "he forgot how to coach when he got to Michigan" I think he should say, " I got to Ann Arbor and I suddenly forgot how to coach defense". The guy I hired is now the head coach of Syracuse. I hired the ex-head coach of Syracuse and he was terrible as well. This time I brought my DC from WVU to Arizona and these guys can't tackle either.
People want public figures to speak to the media, not give canned answers and speak openly. When they do, other people get pissed.
My take is that's just RR's personality and he is 100% correct.
I'll add Boren to the growing list.
But do "people" really want that? Or just the media who has to write what they say and is looking for clicks? I think most fans don't care if their coach is really colorful or says interesting things. They want to win, not make the team look bad, and in a few cases like Michigan, don't get into trouble. But I don't think the average fan gives a hoot that Saban has the personality of a dead fish. Because he wins a lot.
Bo once said he had no use for the media because if he was winning he didn't need them, and if he was losing they couldn't save him. I think there's a few who like the "keeping it real" athletes and such, but most don't care. Most of the whining is from media types.
Will this not be finished until the following three things come to pass: (1) RR passes away, decades from now, (2) every UM fan currently living passes away, and (3) Congress declares football illegal and anyone who mentions the sport gets the death penalty (by lethan nanobot injection, probably).
no politics
i don't mind him saying that. a lot of players do feel entitled. now he may have recruited those players...
they are entitled to a coach who can actually field a competitive defense and to not listen to Josh Groban at team functions...shut this guy up
How about crying over individual recruits? Better or worse than Josh Groban?
It is funny the difference in reception of the two coaches.
why can't you follow your advice for him and just be quiet. Actually, some of Hoke's early comments, specifically about the QB position being important because he touches the ball every play, were quite embarrassing.
How did you interpret Green's tweet that made you think Hoke didn't cry? Also, the irony of using "tweets can be misinterpreted" in one sentence and then using a tweet to further your argument in the next sentence, I'm guessing, is lost on you.
You realize Green tweeted that coach Hoke cried, right? I''m not interpreting anything. You are actually wildly speculating what happened. There are 2 people who know what happened on that phone call, and one of those two people told you about it. That isn't interpreting anything.
I would assume the Groban tweet was a joke considering he wanted RichRod to play Guns N Roses instead. I just found it ironic that you stated Groban was embarrassed by RichRod.
"I don't interpret tweets....until 2 sentences later when interpret a harmless tweet into a feeling of embarrassment."
Green also said this in an interview:
On telling the coaches he was coming to Michigan: I don't know if [Brady] Hoke was crying. I just said he was emotional about it. He was emotional because he was just so happy. I had all three hats on the table and he said that I scared him for a second when I picked up the Tennessee hat.
Not that it matters if he cried or not, just passing along some relevant information.
Sam Webb says he was there and that Green was just kidding.
Though I don't think crying is ever the problem. Timing might be (even in 3 & Out Bacon was hoping that Groban wasn't about to happen).
I'm actually on your side of this debate and think RR should have just said no comment, but I have been on this board a long time and I can say without hesitation, that if there was a poster I could give that same advise to it would be you. You just don't know when drop things. You m ade your point now just leave it at that. You don't need to respond to every post that disagree with you for shit sake.
Edit...this was actually a response to one of your other posts...not sure how it ended up here.
The difference in reception = the difference in wins.
Hoke has won 19 games over two years to Rod's 8.
Hoke has also been better at all other aspects of being a head coach; alumni relations, press conferences, recruiting, hiring coaches, you name it.
But make no mistake, if his record was as abysmal as Rod's, all of that would be for naught. We would be calling for his head, just like some of us are with Borges.
Is there any doubt, that whether the Michigan Head Football Coach were Rich Rodriguez, or Brady Hoke, that Bo would have demanded the highest level of institutional loyalty? That Bo would have had no mercy on newspaper reporters who manufactured a story to injure the program, or football alums who bad-mouthed the coaching staff?
Wouldn't Bo have lobbied for the much-larger budget for assistants' salaries that Dave Brandon (wisely) granted to Brady Hoke?
Wouldn't Bo have insisted that any new coach be given 4 years to get things going? Isn't that a virtual quote from Bo Schembechler, about new coaches?
There is no doubt Bo would have condemned the treatment Rod got publicly. But I imagine Bo also letting Rod know - behind closed doors, of course - in no uncertain terms that his handling of the media was pitiful and detrimental to the program and that his record was not good enough. I'd venture to say that Bo would have let Rod know that Michigan is entitled to better results. In fact, I've heard Bo say exactly that to his teams.
This is all assuming that Rod would have been hired while Bo was alive. I don't think that is true. I think we'd have had Hoke earlier, or perhaps another program insider.
Section 1, we've had this discussion before. It was all about the record. Rod didn't deliver. True, he was hamstrung. But, and you must admit this, he failed.
That's what I meant by "funny." It seems the only thing our fanbase has learned from this whole debacle is that if you win games here, you can pretty much do whatever you want. I won't get into RichRod's treatment before he even coached a game because, at this point, it doesn't matter, but our fanbase will spin everything positively for Hoke and negatively for RichRod. It's the way it is. That's the funny part. It was said here before, but Rich could cure cancer and most Michigan fans would be pissed at him for not doing it sooner
I think if Rod cured cancer, people would greatly, wholeheartedly, unequivocally feel that he is a hell of a scientist. But, people would also lament the job he did as head coach of the Michigan football team.
And I don't think the thing to take away is that winning is the only thing that matters. We want a clean program. Hell, we demand it. It's not like he was replaced by Tressel. Hoke has shown the ability to win and, perhaps as importantly, to do it cleanly. The right way. The Michigan way.
... why Michigan's alumni group of past letterwinning football players didn't want to skin Rosenberg alive. Why Rick Leach seemed so alone in defending Rodriguez. Frank Beckmann knows a thing or two, and he knows a lot of people in Michigan's football program. And he was PISSED OFF about the Free Press story.
I don't understand why Michigan letterwinners didn't feel like they had something to protect in all of that. Even David Brandon, a letterwinner himself, was blunt about it in an extremely uncharacteristic way. The master of modulated p.r.-speak, he has unloaded on the Free Press. I can't think of any good explanation as to why more football alums didn't step up. And I can think of only one reason -- and it isn't a good one -- why Lloyd Carr wouldn't have stepped up.
When the Freep piece came out, I wanted Rod skinned alive. He was the coach, he broke the rules, he was dragging our program throught the mud.
I only found out much later how much of it was bullshit. As it stands, I hate Rosenberg. I still prefer the Freep to the News, though.
And, I know we've talked about this before, but despite the fact that the report was bullshit, I (partially) blame Rod for its existence. Something like that could never have come out in Bo's time, or Lloyd's, for that matter. The players had too much respect for/fear of their coaches. And the freshmen whose quotes were butchered wouldn't have been allowed anywhere near the media. And the media wouldn't have been after them to begin with. Let it be clear that I think the blame on Rod is only a small percentage, but it is there nonetheless.
You get a B+ for remembering Stokes and Hawthorne three years later.
But they were interviewed by Rosenberg on media day. And they were sandbagged with their quotes. Even the lovely and talented Angelique Chengelis (Michigan's best beat reporter, by far) was offended by what Rosenberg did; she witnessed at least one of those interviews. I don't know how you bar the media from talking to players on media day.
And I don't know how any Michigan coach could have exerted any no-interviews rule with players who were gone from the system. Toney Clemons is confirmed; he admits he gave Rosenberg an interview. From Colorado. Justin Boren? Mike Boren ("parents" were anonymously quoted)? Ryan Mallett? How should a Michigan coach in 2009 have controlled them, when they were all gone?
I am always stunned when I hear storieslike yours, because I know that you are a good representative of the past football letterwinners. And they were all furious, at Rodriguez, because they believed what they read in the Free Press on the last weekend in August of 2009. Losing was bad, they all agreed. But major NCAA violations were intolerable. I just think that guys like you came around too late. If Brian Cook was on top of it (and he was), you could have been too. Three and Out was terrific confrimation/validation. But it was too late for Rodriguez's good name in Ann Arbor.
We were late. Of course we were furious at the report. We thought our coach was cheating.
And a lot of us still are late to the party. Until now, I didn't realize that the freshmen were ambushed at media day. I sort of assumed that they were requested by the Freep and OK'd by the department for an interview.
But, like you said, the damage had been done. Our program, and Coach Rod, were already tainted.
But he still managed to lose at a furious pace before, during, and after the Freep hit. Let's not forget that. Nor should we use the Freep hit as an excuse for our on field failures.
The first time that there was ever any mention of "crying" in connection with Rodriguez at Michigan was prompted by the abuse (that's the only word for it) of Brandin Hawthorne by Michael Rosenberg. Hawthorne was reportedly in tears, or near-tears, or worse, when he was quoted by name in the Free Press story, and was terrified that he had let down his cocah and damaged his team . And he came to Rodriguez's office in that state, and Rodriguez settled him down. Hawthorne's father was furious at Rosenberg. And in recounting his meeting with Hawthorne in his press conference immediately following the newspaper story, Rodriguez's voice cracked, and he almost broke down.
Nothing comes close to explaining why Rosenberg offered anonymity to a bunch of ex-players who had nothing to fear from an angry coach Rodriguez (assuming that they were effectively "whistleblowers" on the program), when he did not grant anonymity to two players -- two brand new freshmen who had been with the program for a few weeks -- who really did have something to "fear," as if anybody had anything to fear from Rodriguez.
I have said many times on the MGoBoard: of all of Michael Rosenberg's perversions of journalism ethics, his abuse of Stokes and Hawthorne is in a class by itself.
Neither one of us can dispute the wins and losses.
And I don't think either one of us are wildly speculating about what we might have expected from Schembechler.
Rodriguez's team and losing record in his first year was very much unlike Bo's first year. As you know, probably better than all but your fellow Michigan football insiders, the team that Bo inherited had just been destroyed by Ohio State in Columbus. But it was not a bad team; in fact it was a loaded team that had been in the Top 10 in for a time in 1968, and was poised to do well.
Shockingly (in comparison to Rodriguez's first year), Bump Elliott never met with players who wanted to complain about Bo in his first year, but in the end that team gave the '69 game ball to Bump.
And yes, we agree that in years 2 and 3, Rodriguez was very, very badly hamstrung. By an NCAA investigation, by rumors of a firing, by press-developed distractions.
I try not to judge or criticize coaches. They have forgotten more about their profession than I will ever know. You can say Rodriguez failed if you wish. I won't agree or disagree. What I will say is that he was treated unfairly while he was here. I think that much is very hard to disagree with.
I suppose this is where we disagree. I think Rod's job was to win games, regardless of extenuating circumstances (which we agree were mostly undeserved and certainly very damaging). I'd have liked him to have an easier road, but he didn't. He lost a lot. I don't really know what you think his job was, considering you don't see him as a failure here.
I guess the best way to put it is that I am certain that a coach like Bo would have come in and immediately righted the ship. Even if Bump was against him (please don't read this as a belief that Carr was against Rod), the players were reluctant to buy in, the fanbase hated the idea of an unknown outsider coaching their program, etc. I just cannot see anything other than success in the face of failure and against long odds. Right or wrong, this is what I've come to expect from our program.
Wouldn't Bo have lobbied for the much-larger budget for assistants' salaries that Dave Brandon (wisely) granted to Brady Hoke?
When he was coach he was woefully underpaid (as were his assistants), and didn't have a contract most of time. When he was alive and Lloyd took over, Lloyd and his staff were woefully underpaid (to the extent that Lloyd took his raises/bonus money and distributed it to assistant coaches), and he never said anything. Why would he have thought it was an important hill to die on only when Rich took over?
The fact is Michigan is historically cheap, going back to Canham [Bo's assistants thought Miami (NNTM) had better facilities than Michigan when they got here], and they certainly weren't going to change that under Martin, a guy so cheap he turned off lights in buildings and told staff to take the stairs rather than the elevator. Bo being around (or in charge as AD) changed none of that.
Brandon sees things differently, and made the right call in paying people more. If he had been the guy who hired Rich, it might have been different then too. But it had nothing to do with Bo not being around. It's more a credit to Brandon that he saw the changing landscape and the need. (And to the coaches before who managed to win at Michigan on a budget).
And I think I did give credit to Brandon's wisdom in dealing with assistant salaries.
Bo was an advocate for the Stadium renovation, and as you accurately point out, Bo was an advocate for better facilities including Oosterbaan Fieldhouse as well as the building that now bears his name.
You are right about Michigan's historical cheapness with coaches; completely right. Bo did tolerate it, seemingly forever; it seems that most of the Conference tolerated it. But as the Big Ten fell behind the SEC, I have to think that Bo would have advocated for keeping up. And remember that it seemingly was not that much money (or maybe Jeff Casteel is the smartest guy in the world) that kept us from getting Casteel to begin with.
Every time Brian uploads something to the front page?
I think he is just saying that in the world of college football and at the big schools across the country there are going to be players who feel entitled. They are receiving national attention in high school and were probably the more popular kids in high school. It is foolish to think that michigan doesnt have any. As the comment says, RR even probably recruited some of them. What he and te article should be more concerned about is that he seemed to forget how to coach competent defenses. Michigan defensive ranking should be considered in this articles point that RR didn't forget how to coach. Really just a poor article tryin to argue that it wasn't RR's fault that he failed at Michigan and it tries to support its position by saying he won 8 games in his first season at Arizona. It's one sentence paragraphs really don't paint a convincing picture for people who are more educated on this subject than the average Arizona fan.
I really wish Rich Rod would stop commenting on Michigan.
I really wish people would stop asking Rich Rod about Michigan.
I really wish people would stop posting things about Rodriguez talking about Michigan.
I wish I was a litle bit taller...
I wish I was big.
I wish I was a baller.
I wish I had a girl who looked good, I would call her.
I wish I had a rabbit in a hat with a bat
I wish I was a baller....
edit: way too slow for this board (or to be a baller)
He probably feels the same way.
OTOH there were a lot of things he probably wanted to say back then but couldn't, and now he doesn't have to care who he offends (at Michigan). Also, everything he said is accurate.
If Michigan were to meet Arizona in the Rose Bowl next year, of course I would want Michigan to win as much as if we were playing any other team. If we lost it would be absolutely heart breaking. But if I am being completely honest I can't deny that I would get maybe just a little enjoyment from listening to a conversation on WTKA between Jeff DeFran and Dave from Phoenix after that game. Just a little.
I feel sorry for you if reading this truly ruined your day.
if that ruined your day you probably didn't start it off all that well.
Is this your new MGo username?
Guess that's why Denard was such a grouch these last two years.
Probably true, I really don't think Rich Rod was or is a bad guy, just didn't work out here. Oh well.
RichRod stories are like phone calls from the exgirlfriend.
An exgirlfriend you saw a lot of picture of, but never met, and who had a "husky" voice.
who COULD NOT figure out how to use skype. "It's umm, broken or something lol."
RR should shut up and coach his team.
I only comment on coaches who coach for Michigan.
Isn't that his job to knock them off that pedestal of entitlement and to motivate them to work hard?
Stop talking about Michigan Rich.
Yeah, that last second win against Nevada in the Don'tGiveAShit Bowl really sets him up for the Rose Bowl. Sigh...
We probably shouldn't be talking...at least not his year.
Right, because playing South Carolina is the same as playing Nevada.
his team still got the job done in a bowl game....no matter the opponent.
so if Arizona had played Pioneer in a bowl game would we say "At least his team got the job done, we were just screwing around with some West Carolina team! WE SUCK"
He got lucky when Nevada fulbbed the onside kick and could take on a gassed defense that wasn't very good. Arizona was getting its ass kicked for three and a half quarters by a half-decent Mountain West team. Taking anything from that bowl game as a comparitve value is beyond meaningless.
These are the same people who think beating USC last year = USC in a Rose Bowl with National Championship caliber teams.
...enjoy the sunshine and pretty girls in Zona and focus on bringing back that Desert Swarm Defense...you don't need to worry about Michigan we will be just fine.
Got in before the delete sweet.
This guy is full of them. Sounds more like a "Rich Rod" problem then a Michigan problem.
It's probably easy to do when you're at a big-time program like Michigan. People relying on the success of the past to simply propel them through the future. Just my personal bit.
I wish I wasn't moderator.
Other than the cool point total, i'm guessing it's a lot like chasing toddlers around all day. I don't envy you.
I was going to write the ironic and expected "This will end well" post but was too late in opening the thread. nm.
a RichRod thread. Time to break out the popcorn, this is going to get fun.
Probably every major college football program has guys that "feel entitled". Maybe they were big stars in high school and now have to work their butts off. Or maybe their father or uncle played for the school and were big stars and the son is living off the legacy. Like Brown Bear said, it's up to the coach to get them motivated.
Well I feel entitled and I'm not good at football.
I'm American, fergodsakes.
~Homer Jay Simpson.
Sounds like RR might have had some entitlement issues of his own... Like he didn't have the players that he thought he was entitled to.
It appears RichRod feels entitled to his opinion.
I'm at a loss to explain why what he said is causing any consternation on the board. I think it's a pretty well documented fact that the environment around the team circa 2007 HAD become one of etitlement and malaise (see horror - Sept, 2007) and that predated RR's arrival.
If you believe John Bacon it was that very sense of entitlement and Rich's attempt to end it (badly I might add) that led directly to the divisions withing the football community. He was right on identifying the problem IMO but completely wrong in how he tried to correct it.
What Rich should have said was "there was a sense of entitlement in the football program that i inherted in 2008. Unfortunately I did a poor job of trying to change it."
Than the fact he can't help himself from saying it. And what purpose it serves at this point. Maybe they needed a non-comment clause that was apparently required when Shafer left Rich's staff, to prevent this stuff.
Contrast that with Brandon, who's a marketing guy, who could have had all sorts of "rumors" leaked to the press to make Rich look bad and justify the firing, as all sorts of programs professional and college do (take a look at the character assassination the Pistons do when replacing coaches about what a jerk the guy was behind the scenes, or how he had lost the team). But they have moved on and pretty much don't say anything about him that might have appeared negative to potential hiring suitors.
Stop taking bait from media trolls like Matt Hayes is always a good start.
This thread is entitled "Rich Rodriguez "Some Michigan Players Felt Entitled"."
Listen Richard, If you want to answer questions fine but dont make it sound like it was all the kids fault..some of them didnt buy in and you also made mistakes..it just didnt work..we are both seeing other people now so lets just move on.
"Michigan won three games in Rodriguez's first season after winning 11 the previous season. "
Interesting, I didn't realize we won 11 games in 2007...Wikipedia and my memory tell me it was 9 wins. Maybe we did beat App State and Oregon to start the year...
Good point, and I could see that. Completley crap grammar if that is the case, although should I be surprised by that?
I couldn't care less about Rich Rod's opinion. UM has a different coach and he is coaching somewhere else. I have moved on.
Hey anyone notice the basketball team is the #1 ranked team in the nation?
We're entitled to that #1 ranking. We used to have the Fab Five.
If that season is considered some kind of success, as anything but a first season, then RichRod's coaching ability may not have declined but expectations of him certainly have.
If I never hear the words "Rich Rodriguez" ever again I will die a happy man.
At best he is good offensive mind. He is a horrible leader, leadership 101 don't blame the people who work for you, they work for you and if they fail it is the leaders fault. If you blame them, make them look like crap to people outside the family they will not perform. It is always someone else that is the issue with RR. Cupboard is bare. Players not doing what they are taught. Vince Lombardi couldn't coach this defense, a defense that he could have recruited better talent for and, by the way, maybe Lombardi couldn't but Greg Mattison sure did. Now it is that Michigan players acted entitled. All excuses, who is going to fix these issues if it isn't the Head Football Coach? His job was to take care of everyone of these things.
...looking for a place kicker on the way to the game.
That's as clean a study of this as we'll ever see. That comment, vs. Hoke's "Brunettes".
The results speak for themselves.
You hired GERG!!!!!!!!!!!!
Most of us gave Rich the benefit of the doubt when he was here, and even secretly may want him to do well at Zona, but this crap may have caused me to be a little bristly about him. He needs to shut his trap, worry about Zona football and get a DC who can cooridnate a championship level defense. If he is asked about Michigan, he should simply wish us well and re-direct back to Zona. I am tried of him yapping about entitlement, lack of commitment, cultural fit. Hey Rich, no one cares!!
If nobody cares, then why does he continue to get asked about his time at Michigan? Also, if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
If nobody cares, why is this thread already at 130 comments and climbing rapidly?
Because people can't just refrain from commenting. Its like a bad horror film where the characters hear a scary sound and decide, "hey, lets go check it out." We all know how its going to end up.
That said, this has been a pretty tame thread. Most people are finally moving on, it appears. Huzzah!
Most of us gave Rich the benefit of the doubt when he was here, and even secretly may want him to do well at Zona,
I have to ask why anyone here would want to wish Coach Rodriguez anything other than success at Arizona, secret or otherwise? Except in the event that he is facing off against us of course.
So many are up in arms because Rodriguez is pointing out that he started out at Michigan in an uphill battle because many of his seniors, the ones that should've been circling the wagons to help see Michigan through this transition, put their personal needs ahead of the teams. Some are quick to lay this attitude at Rodriguez's feet as a lack of leadership on his part, but I think that's unfair.
Rodriguez's reception from his inherited team stands in stark contrast to the reception that Brady Hoke got when he took over, and I don't attribute that difference as any higher level of quality of leadership on Hoke's part. I attribute that difference to the quality of the character of the leaders on that team.
The 2011 team was successful primarily because leaders like David Molk, Mike Martin, and Troy Woolfolk refused to let the team tear apart. The 2008 team failed because those seniors didn't demand that kind of commitment from the team and quit on the program to some degree. Those guys were apathetic toward a program that had grown contented and stale over the years.
All Rodriguez did in this interview was point that out, which I don't see why that's got so many folks outraged.
I really hope the majority of posters on this site don't represent what the majority of Michigan fans are. Most of you seem extremely entitled. You whine and cry about everything. I'm so glad I live 10 hours from AA.
Boohoo RR talked about my school. Boohoo Jalen Rose wants to watch my team play. Get over yourselves. Get off your high horse, you aren't better than everyone else.
I'm glad you live 10 hours from A2 as well. It isn't a high horse or entitlement. If you had really been following this, you would know it is arrogance. Don't forget to mention Walmart Wolverines; it will always add to your credibility.
You're a moron. If you could move more than 10 hours away, that'd be great.
Most of the people who post on this site make me ashamed to be a Michigan fan. Most of you are just homers. You go out of your way to post things about people/schools you don't like. Then you make posts laughing about how others can't stop talking about you. Few days go by that someone doesn't post something about OSU ND or MSU. Hypocrites.
In all seriousness, what you point out is simply inherently a part of being a fan of a team. Other teams are always worse than your favorite and your favorite can seemingly do no wrong (or at least not a lot of wrong). Its just how the mind works, how people justify being a more-than-average fan of a team. People on this site are obviously more than your average Michigan fan insofar as we exceed the average interest in the day-to-day goings-on. If there are a few of us that sometimes say silly things or contradict ourselves, I'm not sure what to tell you. There are many, many things more serious than this when it comes to being a fan (see, e.g., justifying honoring Tressel at the 'Shoe, remaining a Joe Paterno fan, etc., etc.). If this is the worst then its definitely great to be a Michigan Wolverine.
I couldn't disagree more. Being a fan of a team doesn't mean you have to HATE your rivals. It especially doesn't mean you have to go out of your way to attempt to belittle them to show your superiority. If you know you are better than OSU, MSU, ND, why do you need to post about it?
Yesterday in the Treadwell thread, people talked about how rich people don't need to brag that they are rich. So if we are so great, why do we have to constantly go out of our way to cut down other programs?
What you are describing is a fanatic, not a fan.
Don't worry about it man, this site has a bunch of whiners. I just got neg bombed for a political coment a couple weeks ago and took my points to 0. Oh well, people find a way to complain about rich rod. I personally don't care. What he said about players feeling entitled is pretty much true, should he have said anything now, probably not, but who cares.
No politics. Is that rule so difficult to understand? Politics is the enriched uranium of a blog of highly intelligent posters such as ourselves (yes, I said it). Do you enjoy e-fighting? If so, take it somewhere else.
They didn't win 11 games the year before he started coaching at U of M as the article states. I believe they won 8 games in 2007, Carr's last year.
Are somewhat correct. After a disaster of a regular season that started with the app state and Oregon debacles, and finished with back to back losses to wiscy and Ohio, we beat Florida in a bowl game to finish 9-4 and no. 14 in the final polls
He has no class or character. He can't stop complaining, making excuses, and pointing his finger at everyone else.
So... I assume this means you're not a RichRodFan?
One thing RichRod has always been good at is saying things that are true but that - for his own sake - ought to stay unsaid.
Rich has almost no sense of public relations, or how his words are going to be perceived by the outer world, most especially his detractors. Or he doesn't care.
Going to his comment itself, I have no doubt whatsoever that his assessment of entitled players is accurate. You do not lose to Appy State in 2007 without having some element on the team believing their shit didn't stink, and he inherited however many players still on the team in 2008 with that attitude.
The problem is that making anything other than positive comments about his experience at Michigan yields absolutely no benefit for him. He didn't need to reference Michigan when commenting about the buy-in he was getting at AZ.
I don't think I've ever seen another coach care so very, desperately much what the outside world thought of him. That's why he said things like the 'Lombardi' gem about our secondary. That's why he pleaded with the assembled crowd at the football bust that he wanted to be a Michigan Man with tears in his eyes.
It doesn't make him a bad person, but it sure didn't help to make him a better coach.
His two biggest flaws, in my opinion:
- A need to explain himself / no "this is what I'm thinking, but I probably shouldn't say it" buffer.
- Undying loyalty to those who have been loyal to him. Let's call this one the Tony Gibson theorum.
Lloyd seemingly had #2 (although not as bad), had very little of #1 (save for a few comments to sideline reporters).
Brady, from what I've seen thus far, has very little of either. Only example that I can think of is the "Shitty season" thing from a few weeks ago.
Amazing what a fine line there is between a good leader and a bad one. I see that now having watched two transitions in 4 years. I admittedly got caught up in the Harbaugh love two years ago. I'm happy with what we ended up with.
Well, those are definitely flaws, but I think that his two biggest flaws are:
1. Can't coach defense to save his life (or job), and
2. Is a terrible leader / manager of a football team (this is different than saying that he is a bad coach - it is actually a stronger indictment. As leader / manager, RR sets the tone for the team and the tone that he set while he was here was not one that was positive. He also continually blames other - usually his 18-22 year old players - which is the mark of a terrible leader).
Also, a close 3rd is crappy recruiter.
Yeah, I don't like RR very much.
which I would think would dissuade any rational person who doesn't care to hear what RR thinks from clicking to read the thread. I'll just scroll down now to confirm this.
Oy vey.
Putting aside for a moment who said it and for what motivation, one objective truth is that the proposition about many on the team at that time is almost certainly true. Just sayin'.
1. Rich Rodriguez is no longer the coach of Michigan;
2. The moon landing was real;
3. JFK was assinated by aliens.
There. It's over. Let's move on.
I agree with 2 & 3 but not 1 /s. RR is like a cancer on this site which is almost eradicated, but then metastasizes.
I love how this moron keeps commenting on a team he doesn't coach anymore.
Seriously buddy, you have the worst winning percentage in program history. Brady Hoke passed your career win total here in 1.5 years.
Take a walk and enjoy arizona. They don't have any standards and don't mind swiss cheese defense.
Thank you good sir. So sick of the richrod groupies who constantly defend this idiot. I'm so fucking glad the nightmare of his tenure here is coming to an end and all the players he recruited have moved on. Lets get ready for Michigan football to be back where it's suppose to be GO BLUE!!
You're treading on thin ice.
You totally had me with you until the line about being glad that "all the players he recruited have moved on."
I somewhat share this sentiment in that I am tired of being at a serious talent / depth deficiency because of RR's crappy recruiting and retention. While we may love some of the recent players, there is no denying that some (Vincent Smith, bless his tiny little heart, for example) have physical limitations that prevent us from competing with better teams. The players that Hoke is bringing in are almost across the board more physically talented and have higher upside.
But, I think that there is a difference between recognizing this fact and being glad that players who have worked their asses off for our university have moved on. Despite some of their limitations, I respect and will hold in the highest of regards these players as I have for all Michigan players past. Also, there are certainly a few RR recruits (Denard, Roy) who will be sorely missed.
I second your point with this caveat. Guys like Vincent Smith, who were recruited to play in the spread, might have competed better had Rodriguez been allowed to stick around. For all the maligning some have done on this board over the quality of the talent that Rodriguez brought to Michigan, it's those players that have been winning games for Hoke and company, those clearly they can compete.
Now for Rodriguez to have been successful Year 4 and beyond, he would've had to address the issues with the defensive coaching staff and the serious depth problems on the offensive and defensive lines. I doubt he could've accomplished this in a time span that would've appeased any of us.
That said, I agree with your final paragraph whole-heartedly. Any player who comes to Michigan, works hard at practice, trains hard in the weight room, goes to class, and overall represents the University in a manner that we've come to expect from a Michigan football player deserves to be celebrated and our gratitude, not our scorn.
their momentum.
RR openly acknowledged that he learned valuable transition lessons at UM and he has used the lessons at Arizona. So did the UM Ath Dept.
Everybody can move on until we play Ariz in the Rose Bowl. Onward.
He felt he was entitled to run his offense and his system without the proper personnel in place...while Hoke knew Denard and Co. weren't the right guys for his system he played the cards he was dealt and won a BCS game. If RichRod would have made adjustments for Ryan Mallett and others, RR may still be in AA today.
Well RR must have felt entitled to a real Michigan defense when he stepped on campus cause he sure as hell didnt attempt to improve it while he was here.
RR is correct here. He did a good job of answering a question in a forthright manner without turning it into an inflammatory comment. It is also obvious that the reporter was trying to goad RR into saying something inflammatory, as evidenced by the "wouldn't you love to play Michigan in the Rose Bowl" question that was obviously asked.
Considering the juggernaut that Ohio is assembling, and Michigan's insistence on a 20th century offense, I think Michigan and Arizona are probably even when it comes to the possibility of making Rose Bowls and championship playoffs during the next few years.
Seems to be working pretty well for Alabama, LSU and USC in the 21st century. 6 BCS titles in the last 10 years won by these 3 teams, all of whom used a conventional pro-style offense. Please try watching college football before commenting further.
Please explain this Ohio juggernaut you speak of? Is this the same juggernaut that had a hard time with the Hoosiers?
I think he's referencing the "juggernaut" that just finished 2012 without losing once and it currently compiling a good recruiting class for 2013. Not that I share the same sentiment as the OP (and not that I don't) but I think that's what he's referencing.
Enough of the "they were all against me crap". You stubbornly took a square peg and tried to fit it into your round hole of an offense. If you did what Brady and Company did, look at what you have and develop your team in the short term around that. But you couldn't do that. You had your system, and Carr's players. You were doomed to fail the minute you failed to recognize that. Enough about Rich Rod.
I'mcertain players on every team in America feel entitled. It's the coach's job to deal with those players appropriately.
I love how Michigan fans complain RR talks about Michigan. Yet these keep getting posted and Michigan fans can't help buy talk about RR. Oh the hypocrisy!
Why are you here?
2 reasons.
1. The information posted by the Administration of this site is very good.
2. To remind myself what kind of Michigan fan I never want to be.
It is extremely obvious that you aren't a Michigan fan. Your comment history is nothing but insults directed at this blog and Michigan sports in general. What I don't understand is, why fake being a fan? Why not just troll honestly?
Obvious that I am not a Michigan fan? Feel free to give me an email or cell phone number. I will send you pictures of my work desk at work. When I get home I will send you pictures of all my game tickets. I have posted one thread on this site, it was a breakdown of how Michigan could still make the Fiesta Bowl last year. Feel free to find it. Why would a non fan go that far out of his way to "troll."
It clearly isn't that obvious because I am in fact a huge Michigan fan. I just hate the common fan. The common fan is more concerned about making other teams look bad than actually being a fan of their team. Please explain why this needed to be posted? Why did someone post about the President of Ohio St. posting on twitter? Why would ANY real Michigan fan care about his twitter? No matter what it said. If a Michigan State fan says Michigan sucks, does it matter? But it would get posted here. "Keith Appling says Michigan sucks," So what? Why does ANYONE here care what Keith Appling thinks?
But people continue to post about being better than O$U, the ESSEEESEEE, little brother, etc. We post pictures of Treadwell with $305 and them comment that Ole Miss paid him to go there. Does ANYONE here truely believe that makes us look better than anyone? I think it makes us look petty and childish.
Should RR have said what he said? Probably not. But be the bigger man and walk away.
We are not in the public eye. We on this blog are all just nameless fans of a team. RR is a paid Division 1A NCAA football head coach. He is in the public eye, and people do report on what he says. So there is a difference between us fans shooting the shit on comment threads of a blog and RR talking publicly to the media essentially calling out 18 year old kids who played for him. Do you really not get the distinction?
Also: "Should RR have said what he said? Probably not. But be the bigger man and walk away."
Where should we have walked away from? It's not like any of us are calling RR up and threating to kick the guy's ass. We are discussing it in a sports blog thread.
Walk away from even having this discussion about what he said. Just simply answer this. What good did it do to post this link? Was it at all informative? Did you learn anything? Other than the mention of Michigan, is it REALLY Michigan related? Don't come back with he talked about Michigan so its Michigan related. Charles Woodson played for Michigan, everything he does is NOT Michigan related.
Public eye or not, if we want to believe that Michigan fans are better than OSU, MSU, or ND fans, then we should strive to be better them in all facets, not just in the public eye. I would be willing to bet that most of their fans laugh at the fact that we fight over RR. A running joke amongst Wisconsin fans is this. "Want to see Michigan fans turn on eachother? Say RR was a good coach." Opinions are going to differ on this subject, that will never change. But if we aren't posting about it, then you wouldn't have these discussions now would you?
Please, don't feed the trolls.
post on here defending an ex-coach rather than the University for which this blog was created.
Insulting the ex coach is not defending the University for which this blog was created. It is childish banter. Grow up.
ENOUGH! You're acting more childish than the people you complain about. Knock it off.
What am I being childish about? Because my opinion is in the minority? People are directly calling me names, and I need to knock it off. Yes, that makes sense.
Now I'm going to sound childish, but its true so here goes: You started it. You come into the discussion with guns blazing, calling everyone hypocrites and then not expect a harsh response? Your initial posts are the definition of "flamebait" in the moderator tab and it would have been nice if you had gotten the first few hints. Of course, you're also right in that people didn't need to respond in kind, but you probably should have seen it coming. Okay, I've said my peace. I was just trying to nip it in the sapling (I missed the "bud" stage).
I don't think that is childish at all. It is true. I did start it. I knew I would get a harsh response for telling people the truth. Few people want to hear or can accept honesty. I just meant why are you only coming after me and not the rest of them? On the other hand I suppose if I wasn't posting then you wouldn't have to go after them. I am sorry you are a moderator sir.
I am partially posting this just to see if you are so compelled to get the last word in that you respond.
Let me guess? At this moment you are sitting there thinking: damn, I am not going to respond, because that would only prove this guys point. Ha. But, I do have what I believe to be a good response. And how will he know that I have this response if I don't post it. Ah, screw it, I am going to post it. But wait, if I do, he is proven right. But if I don't, he may think that he got me. Damn!!!
Does that about sum it up?
LAST WORD! AHAHAHAHAHA. I digress, I have no clue what you were saying.
The douche is strong with this one.
With comments like this, who would ever believe we are better than anyone else? If you were not a Michigan fan, the rest of us would be better off.
Nothing like having someone else prove your point for you.
Thanks for playing.
Just remember RR haters. He is still a more accomplished coach than Hoke. I can only imagine how fast this fan base will turn on Hoke if he doesnt win a Big Ten title in the next 3 years.
He has the lowest winning percentage in program history, and Hoke passed his win total in half the time rr was here.
Yeah really successful.
Newsflash, FOOTBALL IS PLAYED OUTSIDE OF MICHIGAN. Hoke has more wins as the head coach of Michigan than Les Miles too. Yes Miles is still more accomplished.
RR lead his teams to 2 BCS games. He won 1 of them. He didn't coach in the 2nd. He also won BCS conference titles. Something Hoke hasn't done.
are what we call a "fatard.".
Newsflash, Brady Hoke has only coached in 1 BCS game and won it, so right now his winning percentage in BCS games is 1.000. Rich Rodriguez is at .500, so your logic is a little askew. Yes WVU won conference titles, but only 1 outright, the other three they shared with someone else.
.500? What BCS game did he lose? He didn't coach in the game. The team won all the same. He is either 1-0 or 2-0. However you would like put it
You clearly don't know what you are talking about.
Shared conference title is still a conference title. Or are you suggesting Michigan take down the Basketball banner from last year?
My mistake I misread the WVU stats online. But you're the one person claiming a coach who won 15 games in three years using Lloyd Carr's players is more accomplished than the coach who has won 19 games in two years using players Rich Rodriguez recruited.
If I am the only one who thinks that RR has accomplished more as a Division 1 Football coach than Brady Hoke has, then I SERIOUSLY question the intelligence of everyone posting on this website.
You sir should not speak for everyone.
I'm not speaking for everyone, I'm speaking for myself. A 3-9 record at Michigan is an embarrassment no matter who the coach is. Rich Rogriguez's stint at WVU was all well and good, but he couldn't get the job done here at Michigan and so far Brady Hoke has.
What job has Brady Hoke gotten done? According to your signature, he is failing just as RR did. Michigan is not reaching its goals.
That being said, I was talking about their overall accomplishments, not just their tenure at Michigan, which is why I referenced his achievements at WVU. So as a whole RR is more accomplished than Brady Hoke. To dispute that is silly.
I don't care what RR did at WVU, he was responsible for 3 of the worst seasons in UM history. Brady Hoke came in and fixed the worst defense in Michigan's history and made it relevant again. He's beat MSU, Ohio, and won a BCS bowl game. RR failed at Michigan plain and simple.
That may be, but you responded to my post that said RR is a more accomplished coach than Hoke. You could have responded with, "Squirrels climb trees." That would have been true, but its not relevant to what I said, Nor is what you did respond.
Fact: RR is a more accomplished coach than Hoke. Their careers at Michigan alone are not enough to debate that. Try again.
Won outside of Michigan? I only care how much a Michigan coach wins at Michigan. The fact that Gary Moeller sucked at Illinois doesn't bother me a bit. The fact that Tommy Amaker went 68-55 at Seton Hall doesn't excite me.
So then why do you care about what the Coach of Arizona said? I didn't mean to cut down Hoke at all. I think he is a great coach. But to sell out RR like he is a terrible coach is unfair.
i liked rich-rod but what is he doing? he's five fucking time zones behind his own ass.
Take a long hard look at Steve Fisher before you open your yap Rich Rod. RR should have pulled a Steve Fisher and won a NC. You didn't see my boy Fish talking about entitlement and bare cupboards. Fisher went out and produced with what another State of Arizona traitor, (Bill Frieder), left him.
If RR had any sense of decency he would have stuck around for a 4th season.
You never heard RR mention walking from West Virginia to get the Michigan job did ya? Did ya? No. Of course not. RR never bought in to what Michigan is all about
All you ever got/get from RR is: This Michigan has an undue sense of entitlement fergodsakes. THE NERVE!!!
Fine, I'll close the bold tag.
I could not care less about his opinion.
between being the new leader of a team with a history of winning than a team with a history of losing. Sounds like RR may have learned something from that. If RR thinks the senior class at Michigan in 2008 wasn't with him it's because he lost them, not the other way around.
Rich Rod threads are like terds that never flush.
"terds" I see what you did there.
Rich, You raise me up, so I can stand on mountains; You raise me up, to walk on stormy seas; I am strong, when I am on your shoulders; You raise me up... To more than I can be.
Miss ya buddy.
To some competent coaching maybe.....
always stirring the pot. Bastards
I like this approach to the discussion the best. Lets all join together in hating the media instead of fighting amongst ourselves!
Look at the NFL talent on Carr's teams and look at the wins. They were lazy
You do realize that Carr is in the College Football Hall of Fame, right?
Why is it necessary to tear Carr down in order to defend RR?
Who is tearing Carr down? He's right. We have/had superior athletes, yet didn't win the B1G since 2004, went 1-4 in the Rose Bowl, and lost to App St. His teams late in his career were entitled and lazy. Played when they wanted to, which is why we lost to App St. then beat Florida.
This man has not learned. He keeps touching the stove that burns him. I defended him while he was here and even rooted for him this past season but I am done. I don't care if what he said was true. Like many others have said, it's very easy to give a no comment. I can't root for a petulant child. Good riddance.
to "Rich Rodriguez: When Keeping It Real Goes Wrong"
I was excited when RR was hired. I hoped that Michigan's offense which consistently underperformed under Carr would rise to the be the top ten unit their talent indicated. Say what you will about him not having the budget Hoke had to hire assistants, but correct me if I'm wrong but it was his desire that the DCs he hired run the 3-3-5. The 3-3-5 is essentially a prevent defence. For three years he ran a prevent defence from whistle to whistle and they were the worst defensive units I have ever seen wear a Michigan uniform. The fact that Hoke came in and year one had such a dramatic turn around with the same players shows just how worthless the 3-3-5 is as defensive system. I don't care what you say about people within the program not supporting RR or any other excuse for why he was unsuccessful at UM because ultimately he failed because he ran a defence that conceded yards on a regular basis. He says some players felt entitled? Entitled to what? A chance to succeed? A chance to win? Because on the defensive side of the ball they had no chance and as a coach he failed them. Anyone who buys into the 3-3-5 as a legitimate defence is of questionable intelligence. The fact that RR still runs the 3-3-5 at Arizona shows how he refuses to adapt. As I finish writing this I realize that this got off topic but no matter the excuses the RR apologists come up with, ultimately he failed and Michigan failed because he ran the most asinine defensive system I have ever seen. I fucking hate the 3-3-5.
(Someone should force him to watch the defensive tapes from 2010 compared to 2011. He might learn something. Or not he seems like an idiot)
Anyone who buys into the 3-3-5 as a legitimate defence is of questionable intelligence.
Why are you questioning Brady Hoke's intelligence? Or Brandon, for that matter, the guy who hired a coach running a 3-3-5?
Hoke doesn't run the 3-3-5 as his base system, he runs a 4-3 and likes to mix it up. Martin hired Rich Rod, Brandon fired rich rod. I wasn't questioning Hoke's intelligence, I was questiong RR's and how he was surprised that some players weren't buying into his failed defensive system.
Hoke did run a base 3-3-5 in San Diego with Rocky Long. Brandon hired Hoke immediately after running that system in the Mountain West, and Hoke has been quoted more than once saying that the 3-3-5 would work just fine in the Big Ten.
To elaborate, the problem RR had wasn't "the 3-3-5". His problem was a position coaching staff that apparently had no clue what it was doing, two coordinators who were (allegedly) forced into running an exotic scheme they were unfamiliar with, and a combination of attrition, injuries and busts that left the talent level on the field at a way suboptimal level. Blame these on Rodriguez as you like, he certainly deserves at least some, but the problem isn't the scheme itself.
I'd take a look at highlights from a Rocky Long coached defense or Casteel's defense in his later Backyard Brawl games to see how agressive a 3-3-5 can be.
At SDSU Hoke brought in Ricky Long, a 3-3-5 coach, and they ran from Hoke's first season to now a 3-3-5.
Guess Hoke has questionable intelligence?
I dont know why anybody gives a crap about RR anymore. The guy did a terrible job here and deserved to be fired. The team was embarrissing on the field, and he was embarrissing off the field.
is embarrassing.
What he says may be true (probably is), but isn't his job as a coach to get the players all on one page? It's sort of childish to say well, the players wouldn't do what I wanted them to, and that's why I failed.
One of the reasons why he might be successful at Arizona is because he wasn't successful at Michigan. A lot more is learned from failure than success. He may not see it this way, but his experience at Michigan was valuable and positive. You're welcome, RR.
Whenever you succeed a popular, successful person (in any line of work) you're going to encounter resistance, especially when you introduce new changes. That's just reality. You have to find a way to get those guys on board.
At Arizona, RR's job was aided by the fact that his predecessor was unpopular and unsuccessful. There, he didn't have to sell himself - the players had quit on the old coach and were ready for new leadership. (This same dynamic worked in Hoke's favor at Michigan, particularly on defense.)
I think a lot of factors went into his failure here (and recent success there). Partially the players, partially the Michigan culture and everything that goes along with that, partially the fact that he came in unprepared, having done virtually no homework on the roster and the culture. He's a smart guy and he learned from all of it. There's no way he went into Arizona with the same mindset he had in 2008. And yeah, Arizona's expectations are much different from Michigan's. Less pressure, more open to RR as a coach who can shape the program and instill his own philosophy, rather than having him fit into theirs.
I can almost guarantee Hoke wouldn't have gotten any resistance, since Lloyd was there and was in the AD, and I can absolutely guarantee Miles wouldn't have encountered it either, being a Bo guy and coming off a NC at the time.
Rodriguez didn't name names and spoke the truth from his perspective about the past. I don't know how anyone can look back on the Rodriguez era and say that he had the full support of the athletic department. With that said, when you are hired to a big time program in an environment that has always been hostile to losing, you better deliver results. Ultimately it is the losing that cost Rodriguez, and no excuse is acceptable for the absolute disaster and abortion that was the Michigan defense.
He's obviously talking about Jordan Kovacs.
the problem is, he was a terrible fit in Ann Arbor. Congrats on a good season and good luck down the road.
And, if we ever meet up in Pasadena...we'll kick your ass. Have a nice day.
I couldn't have written it better myself
Guys on my high school's football team felt entitled. Same with high school soccer, basketball and baseball etc. It goes with the territory of sports "stars".
I for one prefer he remains like he is. I don't get anything out of Rich Rod learning to keep his mouth shut. He's got an informed opinion on the players he coached, and he's not the first person to make an accusation of this kind at certain returning players in 2008. We're passed the "this is news to us stage." As a fan I'm just happy at least someone's willing to be honest about which players weren't the most committed.
I don't see it changing anytime soon. While he may have learned from some of his mistakes while here in Ann Arbor, he still doesn't seem to have any apprehension in continuing to be candid with the media. I imagine as the coach of a lower profile team like Arizona, he'll want as much publicity as he can get to attract recruits to this program. And as long as media-types want to talk to him, they're going to ask him about Michigan. This isn't the last comment we're going to hear from Rich Rodriguez about the University of Michigan.
The only thing Michigan lacked when RR was in A2, was leadership. I mean leadership from a competent coaching staff.
Weak minded coach is still showing his hand. I'm glad he's gone.
Everyone involved in RR at UM lacked "leadership". It was a bad match, but let's not act like the guy who won 100 college football games and has shown an ability to turn around a number of programs is an idiot.
really got out of control quickly didnt it.
It didn't work.
Blame Michigan for not accepting him, rolling out the financial red carpet..oh wait, he got more money for recruiting, got the facilities, got the total treatment to succeed from Michigan.
Blame AD Staff and support staff... You mean to tell me they didn't show up to do their jobs every day? You mean to tell me they talked bad about him and didn't support the guy running around like a bull in a china shop saying you guys don't know how to win in football, I do in a place that was very highly successfull for a very long time. Wow, color me crazy... cause if it was that bad, tell me why those support staff people weren't fired? I'm waiting.
People outside but former players, coaches and alumni didn't support him? Are you kidding me? How many supported Bo when he walked in the door and turned the world upside down with what was considered a good team for Bump coming back? Nobody except his AD until he beat ohio st.......
Rich... He hired 4 db coaches to run the defense. Fired all of Lloyd's assistants (his right), assasination style...which burnt alot of bridges immediately, his right though..., We saw tons of players leave, 36 by my count that first yr total, but Rich kept saying we will win with them and we are going to install our system now and not worry about who is here. He put out the single worst defense in school history. He put out the lowest win total in a 12 game season in school history..........., it was that bad....
Rich ran off the players he needed to win, his recruiting never took shape as half of his classes were having about 30% never make it in or gone by the end of their freshman year.
So, you can blame anything you want on Michigan, but the fact is, just like Bo, the tools were there, were given to Rich and he didn't get it done. Had Rich worked harder to endear himself to everyone as they claimed he is a genuine people person, then maybe we would be more forgiving....but the fact is, 2 wins against nd, msu and osu and multiple blow out losses, and 3-9, 5-7, 7-6 records and 6 total bigten wins in 3 yrs got him fired. Not one person who did not like him or support him caused that, or made Dave Brandon fire him.
Rich didn't get the "total treatment".
His assistants were some of the lowest paid. I believe Gerg was paid 600k less than Mattison. If the AD opened up a bit more in the funds Rich would've gotten Casteel so someone would actually know what the hell a 3-3-5 is and how it works.
People need to let go of this idea that Casteel is a Mattison-like game changer. Arizona had him this past season and their D was horrific.
He didn't put together top defenses at West Virginia for a decade or anything. And look what happened when he left! They were worst than Gerg defenses!
So lets say they open the bank and give Casteel 800k a year.....Rich still hired 3 other db coaches to run his defense, and you think Casteel would fix that?
Not one true dline coach among them. You think it's an accident our 2 most talented position groups on defense Dline, then lber were the most under performing and led to a defense giving up the most points in school history consecutively, yearly for 3 seasons?
Oh, Casteel better then Shafer? Yeah....get back to me when you figure that one out.
You do realize that Casteel was the LB coach while he was defensive coordinator at West Virginia, right?
Bruce Tall, yeah, that was a booboo. However, you cannot deny that Casteel fielded top defenses year in and year out, and would have been worlds better than, yes, Scott Shafer. Not saying Scott is bad or anything, but Casteel actually knows what the hell a 3-3-5 defense is that Rich wanted to implement.
How many supported Bo when he walked in the door and turned the world upside down with what was considered a good team for Bump coming back? Nobody except his AD until he beat ohio st.......
Bump Elliott himself publicly offered his support for Bo Schembechler while he was assuming command in his first season. Bo himself credited Coach Elliott with smoothing the path with all the doubters early in his tenure at Michigan. Rich Rodriguez pretty much had nobody advocating for him when things got rough out the gate, so suggesting that we gave him the star treatment is a bit of selective history.
In almost any line of work, it's not a great idea to bitch about how hard/unfair your old job was. Just move on.
I seem to remember discussions here about a certain Mr. Boren acting fairly entitled around that time......
I know he hasnt said much on the old job. And he shouldnt, its a fraternity of sorts and most coaches get fired or move on. But there was some entitlement issues in the late Carr era locker room. It is probably part of why we lost to App State, and couldn't get over the hump vs. OSU.
All reports back this up. And Rich wasn't the coach to get them all in line from the outside...
So the man who left with the lowest winning percentage ever recorded by a Michigan football coach is still pointing fingers, I see.
Well, that's a bit reductive. He also inherited a pretty rough situation, and he obviously won at every other stop he made. Hell, had he made a bowl game his second year I think he's still the coach, and probably fielding some good teams. It didn't work out, but pointing to winning percentage based on 3 years as some proof that his well-founded opinion that some kids on the team acted entitled is invalid seems pretty stupid to me.
RR was the first Michigan coach since the 19th century to record a career winning percentage under .500.
Sure there were problems he faced, but let's not kid ourselves here: laying an egg of such Titanic-sized proportions doesn't happen unless the coach screws up...a lot. I'm not sure how Mary Sue Coleman, the Freep and a bunch of entitled seniors in 2008 translates directly into the, what was it, 110th ranked defense in 2010, but I am pretty sure I know how bad defensive recruiting and an incompetent defensive staff does.
Best of luck at Arizona, but stop pointing fingers and learn to field a defense.
None of the players even liked rich rod. He was terrible. Thanks for setting the michigan program back and have fun at Arizona getting 40 ppg scored against you. I could have won more games than him the first year. It was embarrassing to say the least
Just call it a day before you hurt yourself.
He's probably right. But it didn't work out, and that sucks. The fact this keeps coming up, though, probably tells you all you need to know about how every party involved handles these types of irrelevant controversies.
The Daily Wildcat reports that Carey was removed from last Thursday's Arizona basketball game against UCLA after a "verbal confrontation" with both event staff and police. According to a police report on the incident, Carey and his cousin, Hakeem Adams-Johnson, were asked to move from their seats multiple times because they didn't have tickets.
That's when Carey allegedly pulled the "Do you know who I am?" card.
When the officer asked both of them for their tickets, Carey responded, "Get the f— out of my face." He then asked, 'Do you know who I am? I'm an All-American."
Get your own house in order Rich.
I would agree with that and part of what Rich was doing was coming to bust up "The Country Club" mentality...and yes, there were players who had that entitlement feeling...it was posted on the interweb message boards all over including mgoblog....scout, rivals all of the boards.
But not hiring quality coaches, hiring 4 db coaches instead of hiring the coordinator and letting him build a staff along with his goal for a defense, and not being willing to work with the talent he had and recruit that talent to him cost him year one and ultimately led to year two debacle as well and by then it was pure survival mode.
No athletic department, Lloyd Car support, former player support was going to save him from then on out and anyone arguing otherwise has their head burried in the sand.
I wish him all the best at AZ, but I really don't care what he says or does. I was was excited when we hired him. I understood that he did not have a quality OL or QB (the spread version) and this made his first season a disaster. I thought he deserved four or five years to turn our program around when we first hired him. However, the way the defense digressed by year 3, I knew it was time for him to go, no matter how well our offense may have been playing. He was the HC, he was responsible for hiring the DC that would mesh well with his friends on the coaching staff. IMO...this never happened and with a poor to average defense, 7 to 8 wins and middling bowl games was the ceiling for him here at Michigan. The road to B1G championships and NC is a stellar defense. I think Brady Hoke gets this!
Am glad we are where we are now. I don't want to go back. I don't want to rehash, revisit, or talk about the RR era. I wish him well. I hope he succeeds at Arizona and that he proves every doubter of his said talents wrong. But not for one second do I regret him not being here any longer.
Rodriguez has never said, "it was all a conspiracy used against me."
And he's never said that same thing, in any slightly different phrasing.
And there's the part where the owner and proprietor of MGoBlog -- and not Rodriguez -- tore the Free Press allegations against Rodriguez to shreds, and where John U. Bacon did that same thing a couple of years later in a book. I don't recall any use of the word "conspiracy," but there were a lot of other words that found som good use.
So, yeah, there's all of that.
You're welcome.
I love you.
All I know is that in November of 2010 I sat in the stands and watched the Wisconsin Badgers relentlessly grind out yardage en route to a 48-28 pounding of a Wolverine team totally unable to withstand Wisconsin's incessant on-the-ground onslaught. Wisconsin was a good team that year, but not that good.
2010 was RR's third season as M head coach. For such a woeful defensive effort he had no one to blame but himself. If that was what the program was to expect after 3 years, RR had to go. Brandon knew that but for good reason waited until after the bowl disaster to make his move.
It's nice that RR has found a modicum of success at Arizona. He's apparently happy he's there. We're ecstatic that he's there.
Alright you guys, against my better judgment I read most of the comments on this thread and had to reallllly channel my inner zen to not respond to them individually. I'll say a few things though, mostly because I'm bored at this conference in Philly.
Y'all know how I feel about Coach Rod (still) and I make no apologies for how much I love him. I don't feel like I need to prove my Michigan fandom or allegiance and I don't feel like I need to make apologies for being an Arizona Wildcats fan. They aren't mutually exclusive.
My problem with this whole thing as I tweeted yesterday is that this happens over and over—Coach Rod gets asked a question and answers it. Michigan media picks up on it, spins it, generates 93409583490 page clicks which generate 90348594 angry comments and then our fan base fights and bickers and it becomes RR vs. Hoke on every level—coaching, recruiting, execution, assistant coach salary money availability, relationships with former players, relationships to Lloyd Carr etc etc etc. It's legit exhausting, you guys. But I have to say if the fan base were truly over it, this would all be inconsequential. RR will be RR—he very well may always answer every last question he's asked. He's not a "no comment" guy and I very much doubt he ever will be; it's part of his charm in my opinion because he's a real person and not a stoic coach. That said, at some point we need to stop acting like the ex-gf who doesn't want him back but doesn't want him with anyone else either. If you were over it, you'd be indifferent. I got an e-mail from a close friend (and huge Hoke supporter) yesterday that said, "I hope RR FAILS." Really? It's come to that? Oh, and the point about calling out players who didn't work hard and felt entitled—off the top of my head I'm thinking about BWC and Tate. I don't know Tate but Will has admitted this over and over and over again. Coach didn't say anything that wasn't true.
I will add one more point that I made on Detroit sports talk after the Outback Bowl loss. Coach Rod and Brady Hoke finished with the same record this year. When I pointed that out on Twitter, M fans FREAKED OUT. "What are you trying to say? What's your point? We won the SUGAR BOWL last year…" My point was this—at the end of this past season the biggest number widely reported was the win percentage of the teams who beat Michigan. "YES we lost to these teams but OMG THEY WERE AMONG THE WINNINGEST TEAMS IN AMERICA!" This is quite different from the RR years when the narrative was, "ONLY WINS MATTER. NOTHING ELSE. YOU HAVE TO WIN." So when Coach Rod was HC only wins matter but now that Hoke is here and exceeded expectations last season we're able to be okay with 8 wins because our losses were against really good teams? Either ONLY WINS matter or there's more to the story (and I'm obviously on Team There's More To The Story). I'm tired of this fan base changing the narrative to serve their personal opinions on who's good and who's not, who's a "Michigan Man" (a term I HATE) and who is not.
Ultimately what upset me most is that people were unkind to each other on this thread. I know, how girly of me to be upset that someone was mean to someone else on the internet. But honestly, I think we should really try to be kind to each other on here, in real life and everywhere. The universe keeps teaching me about the fragility of life and while there are trolls, many of us love Michigan so very much for no logical reason except that we don't know how not to. We can disagree and be offended and all of that but we should be kinder to each other because we're all ultimately all in the same boat. Have a good day you guys! Be well and be great!
Too bad that fool couldn't play a lick of defense.
Good riddance rr.


text:
Celebrities Unite for the Toilet Strike [VIDEO]
Last month Matt Damon held a "press conference" to announce that he's going on a toilet strike. It's part of a campaign to raise awareness about the importance of clean water, and to get people to donate in an effort to get clean water to people worldwide. It's a fantastic cause, and now other celebrities are joining in the effort. Jason Bateman, Jessica Biel, and Josh Gad are all vowing to join the toilet strike and not go to the bathroom until everyone in the world has access to clean water.
In the video you'll learn more than you ever wanted to about Biel's flatulence and we find out how Bateman is dealing with the strike. If you want to get more information about the strike and how you can help, head to water.org and join the fight!
See celebrities join the strike:
Click here to see Matt Damon's press conference:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel has rejected a request to certify the popular name and ballot title of a proposed measure that would legalize medical marijuana in the state.
McDaniel on Friday rejected the request from Arkansans for Compassionate Care 2014, citing what he called ambiguities in the proposed measure.
The proposal would allow patients with qualifying conditions to purchase marijuana from nonprofit dispensaries. However, unlike a separate similar proposal that McDaniel certified this year, it would allow certain patients to grow their own marijuana.
A similar measure narrowly failed in the November 2012 general election.
McDaniel has to certify the name and ballot title of the proposed measure before the group can start gathering signatures in an effort to qualify for a spot on the 2014 ballot.


text:
From WWD.com
Cooking With Gas: L'Oreal and Diesel in Major Fragrance Deal
By Jennifer Weil
PARIS L'Oréal is revved up about Diesel, its newest fragrance license.
The French beauty giant has signed a long-term deal with the Italian denim firm, which is famous for its strong youth appeal and edgy advertising.
While specifics of the license were not disclosed, L'Oréal and Diesel executives told WWD their expectations for the new business. The first Diesel scent is due to hit perfumery and department store shelves at the end of 2007.
"We think Diesel has the potential as a brand to be in the top 10 of fine fragrances worldwide," said Marc Menesguen, president of L'Oréal's luxury products division. While Menesguen declined to offer specifics, it is generally understood that for a fine fragrance brand to land a top 10 position globally, it needs to generate about $365 million.
Renzo Rosso, Diesel's chief executive officer, and Menesguen agreed the synergies between their two companies are manifold.
"I chose L'Oréal because it is very close to my mentality. The most important thing is to build something new, something different, something strong."
Renzo Rosso, Diesel
He said the two companies share a passion for their work, too.
Explained Menesguen, "The first reason we signed with Diesel is because it is a huge business, and the second is that it is perfectly complementary with our existing brand portfolio. We have Giorgio Armani, which is Italian; Ralph Lauren, which is American, and Lancôme, which is French. With Diesel, we touch a new area of experience in fragrance."
The billion euro, or $1.2 billion, Diesel brings a demographic reach different from that of L'Oréal's other prestige brands, which include Viktor & Rolf, Parfums Cacharel, Paloma Picasso and Parfums Guy Laroche.
"Diesel is an icon among young people in all countries," said Patricia Turck Paquelier, international brand president of L'Oréal's prestige and collections division.
"We were amazed at how huge and exciting the brand is," Menesguen said of Diesel, which was started in 1978. "It attracts men as well as women."
L'Oréal was also lured to Diesel for what Menesguen called its "unique point of view."
Rosso characterized it as "unpredictable," "brave," "simple" and "trendy."
L'Oréal and Diesel share other common visions, said the executives.
"Renzo Rosso wants to be the coolest of the biggest; we want to do that in fragrance," said Turck Paquelier.
She likened Diesel's provocative advertising campaigns, with themes such as revolution and self-identity, to L'Oréal's vision of the beauty business.
"We believe fragrance is about story and about positive emotion," she said.
"Diesel is a lifestyle brand that definitely goes beyond jeans," continued Turck Paquelier. "Today, it perfectly complements a luxury wardrobe."
L'Oréal's luxury wardrobe has been expanding. Diesel is the second fashion brand the French beauty giant has added in four years. In 2002, L'Oréal inked a deal with Dutch design duo Viktor & Rolf, whose first fragrance Flowerbomb has been a hit in the select doors that carry it. According to Turck Paquelier, Flowerbomb ranked number one in Selfridges in 2005 and in Saks Fifth Avenue since its launch there.
For Diesel, the deal with L'Oréal is to "build something stable, not just a partnership for today," said Rosso.
His brand formerly had a fragrance license with Germany's Marbert Holdings, which ended in 2004. None of the scents created through that partnership are on the market today.
The Diesel license bolsters L'Oréal's global leadership position in the fine-fragrance arena. Already, the company has three best-selling brands Lancôme, Giorgio Armani and Ralph Lauren in the category.
Lancôme women's scent Hypnose has ranked in the top five of feminine fine fragrances in most European countries since its launch in the fall. And Giorgio Armani's fragrance business ended 2005 with double-digit growth worldwide, despite a flat market, said Turck Paquelier.
In the U.S., Ralph Lauren's Polo Black and Polo Blue came in among the top five men's fragrances last year.
Such turnouts have kept L'Oréal in pole position.
"The L'Oréal Luxury Products division is number one in fine fragrances worldwide," said Menesguen.
Yet the race for first place has become increasingly competitive.
In a WWD interview this summer, P&G Prestige Products global president Hartwig Langer claimed Procter & Gamble was a "close second" to L'Oréal in global fine fragrances. This largely is due to P&G's acquisition of Cosmopolitan Cosmetics.
Another contender for the gold is Coty Inc. As reported, when asked why he bought Calvin Klein and the rest of the Unilever fragrance business, Coty ceo Bernd Beetz retorted that he wanted to become "the world fragrance leader."
It's a dream for the Estée Lauder Cos., as well. The company has long been the biggest seller of fragrances in U.S. department stores. And in the past, Lauder has let it be known that it is eager to grab a greater share of the European fine fragrance market.


text:
Catalyst Europe AG, in conjunction with Akzo Nobel, holds a member roundtable in which attendees discuss the topic of men and masculinity in the workplace with other local thought leaders, and learn about Catalyst's research on creating male champions as well as the work of MARC (Men Advocating Real Change) in Europe. This event will feature internationally renowned author and MARC blogger Lars Einar Engström as a panelist. Contact [email protected] for details.
Amsterdam Member Roundtable: Engaging Men/MARC
In Person
Invite Required
Catalyst Event
Date & Time
28 May 2013
28 May 2013
10:00 a.m - 12:00 p.m. CET
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Price: Free
1 Reader Comment
Caroline Pickard says:
5/27/2013 07:07:55
Please note the event will begin at 11am and finishes at 2 pm. Lunch will be served at 12.30 - 1pm


text:
A Twin Cities man was looking for a challenge, so he decided to celebrate his 30th birthday by running on a treadmill for 24 hours straight. B.J. Van Beusekom covered about 80 miles before he stopped running at noon Tuesday. He promptly went to the nearest chair and rested his obviously stiff legs.
The 6-foot, 175-pound Van Beusekom took breaks only to use the restroom and change clothes.
He accomplished his feat at Athletic Performance Inc., a training center in Brooklyn Center. To keep him motivated, API provided a dance with a disc jockey, a slumber party and a big screen television.
For the rest of his birthday, Van Beusekom says he just wants a nap and a massage.
Van Beusekom's effort also raised just over $3,000 for the American Lung Association


text:
Full Episode
In this episode, the quirky Hyundai Veloster gets the turbo treatment, then it's a sleeker, more aggressive-looking Toyota Avalon. Plus, first impressions of the Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid and the Audi S7. Also, advice on retrofitting your car with LED lighting, and unique ways to explore America's cities.
Visit the Website: http://www.motorweek.org


text:
WASHINGTON – The blood clot that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton suffered is inside her skull but did not result in a stroke or neurological damage, her spokesman said late Monday.
The clot was discovered during a routine MRI on Sunday as Clinton was recuperating from a fall and concussion, a statement from spokesman Philippe Reines and Clinton's doctors said. The doctors predicted a full recovery.
"The scan revealed that a right transverse sinus venous thrombosis had formed. This is a clot in the vein that is situated in the space between the brain and the skull behind the right ear," the statement said. "It did not result in a stroke, or neurological damage."
Doctors Lisa Bardack of the Mt. Kisco (N.Y.) Medical Group and Gigi El-Bayoumi of George Washington University said they are treating Clinton with blood thinners and that she will remain hospitalized until her medication regimen is established.
"In all other aspects of her recovery, the secretary is making excellent progress and we are confident she will make a full recovery," the doctors said. "She is in good spirits, engaging with her doctors, her family, and her staff."
It was not clear when Clinton, 65, planned to return to work, or whether she will travel overseas again as secretary of state. She had planned to return to work after the New Year holiday, and at least one farewell trip was expected in January or February.
As a result of her fall and concussion, Clinton did not testify before Congress on Dec. 20 about the Sept. 11 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. She also did not appear at the White House on Dec. 21, when President Barack Obama introduced Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., as his nominee to succeed her.
Clinton has had at least one previous blood clot, in her right leg in 1998. At the time, she was treated with blood-thinning drugs.


text:
More than 443,000 votes were cast nationwide throughout the month of April for Walmart's Fighting Hunger Together campaign and as a result, St. Mary's Food Bank Alliance will be receiving part of a $3 million grant.
The grant money will go towards helping community programs including local backpack programs that provide vital meals to children when they are out of school and community gardens that teach families how to grow their own healthy foods.
St. Mary's Food Bank Alliance is one of 40 different Feeding America member food banks that are each receiving $45,000, totaling $1.8 million. The remaining $1.2 million will be split between 60 partner feeding agencies who will each receive $20,000.
The Fighting Hunger Together initiative is part of a $2 billion commitment by Walmart and Walmart Foundation's through 2015. Their commitment is to pledge more than 1.1 billion pounds of food from Walmart stores, distribution centers and Sam's Club locations valuing $1.75 billion. In addition there will be $250 million in grants to support hunger relief organizations.
If you would like to know more information or to participate visit http://www.walmart.com/hunger.
Copyright2013 CBS 5 (KPHO Broadcasting Corporation). All rights reserved.
Online Public File
All content © 2018, WGGB/WSHM; Springfield, MA. (A Meredith Corporation Station) . All Rights Reserved.
For more information on this site, please read our Privacy Policy, and Terms of Service, and Ad Choices.


text:
Traffic signal stop leads to drug arrest in MerrimackSTAFF REPORT
August 21. 2014 9:03PM
MERRIMACK— Police said Richard Flerra's first bad choice was to run a red light on Camp Sargent Road, by Dobson Way, at 12:03 a.m. Thursday.
An officer who noted the action and activated his blue emergency lights reported Flerra did not pull over immediately and when Flerra did start to pull over, he allegedly tossed an item out of the driver's side window.
The officer located the item in the roadway and identified it as a small bag of marijuana.
Flerra, 29, of 1 Arbor St., was then arrested.
Flerra is charged with falsifying evidence, possession of marijuana and transporting marijuana.
He was released on $3,000 personal recognizance bail and scheduled for arraignment Sept. 10 in Circuit Court-Merrimack District Division.