Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Moderators: UAdevil, JMarkJohns

Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
He also stated that he thinks RR needs to go 5-7 next year to keep his job. I think he tries to be a "glass half full" type while those of us on the other side would say he represents the defeatist contingent in out fanbase that believes we should appreciate whatever we can get because "we do not deserve nice things".

In my mind... anything less than 7-5 should definitely result in a change... and 8-4 to be safe. That may be a tall order, because this mess was not created in a day and will take time to get out of. To that I would say "It is a mess he is responsible for so it is time to make up for it and over-deliver". If we are going to keep him on long enough to owe him 100% of his "retention bonus" - he better show unequivocally that he is worth it. And we will continue to be divided, but earning a 2nd conf winning record in 6 tries is not too much to ask, IMO.

There is an opportunity cost to keeping him beyond next season. The incremental $4MM (or whatever) that we give him beyond 1Q'18 is $4MM that we will NOT have to offer our next head coach. As I understand, that money is to be used at the AD's discretion.

Committing those funds to retain a coach that may have gone 5-22 or 6-21 in P12 over the previous 3 years (ohfer in '16 and 2-7/3-6 again in '17 for a 5-7 record) would be an unconscionable move from Byrne. Accelerating RR's eligibility for the retention pool was bad enough (completely unwarranted and apparently unappreciated by the beneficiary)... that would be even worse.
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Harvey Specter wrote:
Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
He also stated that he thinks RR needs to go 5-7 next year to keep his job. I think he tries to be a "glass half full" type while those of us on the other side would say he represents the defeatist contingent in out fanbase that believes we should appreciate whatever we can get because "we do not deserve nice things".

In my mind... anything less than 7-5 should definitely result in a change... and 8-4 to be safe. That may be a tall order, because this mess was not created in a day and will take time to get out of. To that I would say "It is a mess he is responsible for so it is time to make up for it and over-deliver". If we are going to keep him on long enough to owe him 100% of his "retention bonus" - he better show unequivocally that he is worth it. And we will continue to be divided, but earning a 2nd conf winning record in 6 tries is not too much to ask, IMO.

There is an opportunity cost to keeping him beyond next season. The incremental $4MM (or whatever) that we give him beyond 1Q'18 is $4MM that we will NOT have to offer our next head coach. As I understand, that money is to be used at the AD's discretion.

Committing those funds to retain a coach that may have gone 5-22 or 6-21 in P12 over the previous 3 years (ohfer in '16 and 2-7/3-6 again in '17 for a 5-7 record) would be an unconscionable move from Byrne. Accelerating RR's eligibility for the retention pool was bad enough (completely unwarranted and apparently unappreciated by the beneficiary)... that would be even worse.
Harvey I said between 5-7 or 6-6 and what part don't you get.
azcat49
Posts: 11332
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:33 pm
Reputation: 1047
Location: Gilbert Az

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by azcat49 »

If he goes 5-7 next year which means only 2 or 3 wins in conference he needs to go. You can't allow him to receive the full amount of the retention bonus for shi**y results (we have beat that horse to death on the numbers).

There is the rub, many of don't think he can get there and that this class just won't be enough to count on to help him get there (impact freshman are far and few between) so why wait on the inevitable
Last edited by azcat49 on Wed Nov 09, 2016 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Waiting at the Rose Bowl patiently for the cats to arrive
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more wildcat sports"
2019 BDW Survivor Pool Champion
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
Puerco, Good for you since you didn't bother to understand. Only thing you understand was why do I think a 7-6 record would be better for improvement. Well for starters, Were not an elite program with elite talent across the broad to overcome a 2-10 record. Secondly were coming off a possible 2-10 season. Why do you want the expectation to be high when you know damn we will failed that expectation. All we want is the RR and the staff to improve the team Next Season. 6 wins is most logic chances of success. We don't know what RR is going to do in the offseason, We know he isn't going to get fired at the end of the season. So what changes do we expect he going to do. Is he going to shake up Offense staff with Jim Michalczik and Charlie Ragle fired and bring in someone new, Is the Defense going to improve in Year 2 under Yates and Defensive Staff. Is the team going to be healthy next season. Can the staff do Better in Management the roster, Better the players development, Better the Recruiting process. All I want is improvement from them.

Now if you cant accept the way this season is, Then go watch basketball team because that only thing in Arizona that bring success other than football.
User avatar
Merkin
Posts: 43422
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
Reputation: 1584
Location: UA basketball smells like....victory

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Merkin »

cordera89 wrote:Then go watch basketball team because that only thing in Arizona that bring success other than football.
Baseball was pretty successful last year, and softball historically so.

But in terms of revenue, obviously only basketball and football are revenue producing sports, and at one time even football wasn't.
Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

cordera89 wrote:
Harvey Specter wrote:
Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
He also stated that he thinks RR needs to go 5-7 next year to keep his job. I think he tries to be a "glass half full" type while those of us on the other side would say he represents the defeatist contingent in out fanbase that believes we should appreciate whatever we can get because "we do not deserve nice things".

In my mind... anything less than 7-5 should definitely result in a change... and 8-4 to be safe. That may be a tall order, because this mess was not created in a day and will take time to get out of. To that I would say "It is a mess he is responsible for so it is time to make up for it and over-deliver". If we are going to keep him on long enough to owe him 100% of his "retention bonus" - he better show unequivocally that he is worth it. And we will continue to be divided, but earning a 2nd conf winning record in 6 tries is not too much to ask, IMO.

There is an opportunity cost to keeping him beyond next season. The incremental $4MM (or whatever) that we give him beyond 1Q'18 is $4MM that we will NOT have to offer our next head coach. As I understand, that money is to be used at the AD's discretion.

Committing those funds to retain a coach that may have gone 5-22 or 6-21 in P12 over the previous 3 years (ohfer in '16 and 2-7/3-6 again in '17 for a 5-7 record) would be an unconscionable move from Byrne. Accelerating RR's eligibility for the retention pool was bad enough (completely unwarranted and apparently unappreciated by the beneficiary)... that would be even worse.
Harvey I said between 5-7 or 6-6 and what part don't you get.
I think I understand just fine. I don't at all agree.

Unless you are projecting a 5-6-1 record, it is impossible to get BETWEEN 5-7 or 6-6. So getting one OR the other means you are satisfied with either result.... so you think he needs to go 5-7.

If he is retained beyond next year, he will get an additional $4MM+ in retention bonus. Going 5-7 in year 6 is not sufficient to be rewarded a $4MM bonus. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And you have you refused to comment on his 3-year conference record projection of 6-21 if he were to go 5-7 next year. So you think that warrants a huge payday? I think in years 4-6 of a regime, averaging 2-7 in the P12 warrants termination. We agree to disagree.

PS - Can I get you to write my annual reviews and determine the pay raises I will receive? I like the curve you grade on...
Last edited by Harvey Specter on Wed Nov 09, 2016 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

Merkin wrote:
cordera89 wrote:Then go watch basketball team because that only thing in Arizona that bring success other than football.
Baseball was pretty successful last year, and softball historically so.

But in terms of revenue, obviously only basketball and football are revenue producing sports, and at one time even football wasn't.
Football will produce some revenue next year but I do not expect it will be very pretty...
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Harvey Specter wrote:
cordera89 wrote:
Harvey Specter wrote:
Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
He also stated that he thinks RR needs to go 5-7 next year to keep his job. I think he tries to be a "glass half full" type while those of us on the other side would say he represents the defeatist contingent in out fanbase that believes we should appreciate whatever we can get because "we do not deserve nice things".

In my mind... anything less than 7-5 should definitely result in a change... and 8-4 to be safe. That may be a tall order, because this mess was not created in a day and will take time to get out of. To that I would say "It is a mess he is responsible for so it is time to make up for it and over-deliver". If we are going to keep him on long enough to owe him 100% of his "retention bonus" - he better show unequivocally that he is worth it. And we will continue to be divided, but earning a 2nd conf winning record in 6 tries is not too much to ask, IMO.

There is an opportunity cost to keeping him beyond next season. The incremental $4MM (or whatever) that we give him beyond 1Q'18 is $4MM that we will NOT have to offer our next head coach. As I understand, that money is to be used at the AD's discretion.

Committing those funds to retain a coach that may have gone 5-22 or 6-21 in P12 over the previous 3 years (ohfer in '16 and 2-7/3-6 again in '17 for a 5-7 record) would be an unconscionable move from Byrne. Accelerating RR's eligibility for the retention pool was bad enough (completely unwarranted and apparently unappreciated by the beneficiary)... that would be even worse.
Harvey I said between 5-7 or 6-6 and what part don't you get.
I think I understand just fine. I don't at all agree.

Unless you are projecting a 5-6-1 record, it is impossible to get BETWEEN 5-7 or 6-6. So getting one OR the other means you are satisfied with either result.... so you think he needs to go 5-7.

If he is retained beyond next year, he will get an additional $4MM+ in retention bonus. Going 5-7 in year 6 is not sufficient to be rewarded a $4MM bonus. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And you have you refused to comment on his 3-year conference record projection of 6-21 if he were to go 5-7 next year. So you think that warrants a huge payday? I think in years 4-6 of a regime, averaging 2-7 in the P12 warrants termination. We agree to disagree.

PS - Can I get you to write my annual reviews and determine the pay raises I will receive? I like the curve you grade on...
Harvey, 5-7 and 6-6 is my prediction of next season, I didn't say he will be fired if he goes 5-7. 5-7 would be respectable to say we won more than 2 game and massive improvement. If we go 6-6 it huge improvement. What I'm concern is what he going to do during offseason.

You making this conference record a joke is discussing. Of course we haven't had a good conference in 4 out the 5. But let said this, What standings in the PAC 12 South? 4th, 5th, 6th, One of those three spot were going to be fighting for every year. Overall Standing in the Pac 12 Tie for 4th, 5th, 6th at best. Do you agree with it.

He getting paid to coach, He getting paid to win, I'm don't care how much he make or how much his buyout is . He getting paid to coach that is it. I don't bother with that. So you can bring that up every time to remind people. Just keep that to yourself.
Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

cordera89 wrote:
Harvey Specter wrote:
cordera89 wrote:
Harvey Specter wrote:
Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
He also stated that he thinks RR needs to go 5-7 next year to keep his job. I think he tries to be a "glass half full" type while those of us on the other side would say he represents the defeatist contingent in out fanbase that believes we should appreciate whatever we can get because "we do not deserve nice things".

In my mind... anything less than 7-5 should definitely result in a change... and 8-4 to be safe. That may be a tall order, because this mess was not created in a day and will take time to get out of. To that I would say "It is a mess he is responsible for so it is time to make up for it and over-deliver". If we are going to keep him on long enough to owe him 100% of his "retention bonus" - he better show unequivocally that he is worth it. And we will continue to be divided, but earning a 2nd conf winning record in 6 tries is not too much to ask, IMO.

There is an opportunity cost to keeping him beyond next season. The incremental $4MM (or whatever) that we give him beyond 1Q'18 is $4MM that we will NOT have to offer our next head coach. As I understand, that money is to be used at the AD's discretion.

Committing those funds to retain a coach that may have gone 5-22 or 6-21 in P12 over the previous 3 years (ohfer in '16 and 2-7/3-6 again in '17 for a 5-7 record) would be an unconscionable move from Byrne. Accelerating RR's eligibility for the retention pool was bad enough (completely unwarranted and apparently unappreciated by the beneficiary)... that would be even worse.
Harvey I said between 5-7 or 6-6 and what part don't you get.
I think I understand just fine. I don't at all agree.

Unless you are projecting a 5-6-1 record, it is impossible to get BETWEEN 5-7 or 6-6. So getting one OR the other means you are satisfied with either result.... so you think he needs to go 5-7.

If he is retained beyond next year, he will get an additional $4MM+ in retention bonus. Going 5-7 in year 6 is not sufficient to be rewarded a $4MM bonus. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

And you have you refused to comment on his 3-year conference record projection of 6-21 if he were to go 5-7 next year. So you think that warrants a huge payday? I think in years 4-6 of a regime, averaging 2-7 in the P12 warrants termination. We agree to disagree.

PS - Can I get you to write my annual reviews and determine the pay raises I will receive? I like the curve you grade on...
Harvey, 5-7 and 6-6 is my prediction of next season, I didn't say he will be fired if he goes 5-7. 5-7 would be respectable to say we won more than 2 game and massive improvement. If we go 6-6 it huge improvement. What I'm concern is what he going to do during offseason.

You making this conference record a joke is discussing. Of course we haven't had a good conference in 4 out the 5. But let said this, What standings in the PAC 12 South? 4th, 5th, 6th, One of those three spot were going to be fighting for every year. Overall Standing in the Pac 12 Tie for 4th, 5th, 6th at best. Do you agree with it.

He getting paid to coach, He getting paid to win, I'm don't care how much he make or how much his buyout is . He getting paid to coach that is it. I don't bother with that. So you can bring that up every time to remind people. Just keep that to yourself.
If I were to respond to this post authentically I'd be blasted as an asshole by a few others on this board, so I will respectfully say I appreciate your loyalty to our program and its coach regardless of how things are going.... we just view things differently.

I know you do not think he should be fired if he goes 5-7; I absolutely think he should be. You want to give him credit for improving from 2-10 to 5-7... but not hold him accountable for taking the program into the dumpster in Year 5 - I find that rather unbelievable. We could save a shit ton of $$$ and pay someone else a lot less to finish in the lower division of the PAC-12 if that is indeed our destiny as you suggest.
azcat49
Posts: 11332
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:33 pm
Reputation: 1047
Location: Gilbert Az

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by azcat49 »

I vote Harvey! RR is getting way to much for what he is producing.
Waiting at the Rose Bowl patiently for the cats to arrive
"I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more wildcat sports"
2019 BDW Survivor Pool Champion
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Why hold back. Were both Arizona fan and we both love our team and we both support them. We both just our own differences. I already piss of the board so I'm just waiting for them to shut the down this thread. It all come down to what RR does in year 6 and byrnes decision on what is acceptable and unacceptable in year 6.

2-10 = 5-7 or 2-10 = 6-6
What he going to say if one of these were the result of year 6 regardless of improvement.
User avatar
Puerco
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:53 am
Reputation: 0

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Puerco »

cordera89 wrote:
Puerco wrote:Cordera, I simply don't understand why you think a 7-6 season is acceptable when we go 3-6 in conference and we have one -- ONE! -- win over a respectable opponent. Because that's what happened last year. And this year is a huge, fucking crater of a season compared to last year. So no, it's not just one bad year. It's a whole collection of them with a steep downward trend and no light at the end.

Why is that even remotely acceptable to you? Unless you're an ASU fan?
Puerco, Good for you since you didn't bother to understand. Only thing you understand was why do I think a 7-6 record would be better for improvement. Well for starters, Were not an elite program with elite talent across the broad to overcome a 2-10 record. Secondly were coming off a possible 2-10 season. Why do you want the expectation to be high when you know damn we will failed that expectation. All we want is the RR and the staff to improve the team Next Season. 6 wins is most logic chances of success. We don't know what RR is going to do in the offseason, We know he isn't going to get fired at the end of the season. So what changes do we expect he going to do. Is he going to shake up Offense staff with Jim Michalczik and Charlie Ragle fired and bring in someone new, Is the Defense going to improve in Year 2 under Yates and Defensive Staff. Is the team going to be healthy next season. Can the staff do Better in Management the roster, Better the players development, Better the Recruiting process. All I want is improvement from them.

Now if you cant accept the way this season is, Then go watch basketball team because that only thing in Arizona that bring success other than football.
You have completely misundersttod what I said. 7-6 was LAST year's result. Given how badly this year has gone, I am saying we fire RR this year. Now, even.

At the beginning of the year, I said we keep him around to see how the new defensive staff pans out, unless, UNLESS, the wheels fall off the bus or somehow the offense turns out putrid. Well, guess what, the offense is putrid and the wheels fell off a couple of weeks ago. He needs to go now. Not next year, not in two years, but now.
'A parent is the one person who is supposed to make their kid think they can do anything. Says they're beautiful even when they're ugly. Thinks they're smart even when they go to Arizona State.' -- Jack Donaghy
User avatar
pokinmik
Posts: 1660
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:06 pm
Reputation: 29
Location: Ashburn, VA

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by pokinmik »

Puerco wrote:Given how badly this year has gone, I am saying we fire RR this year. Now, even.

At the beginning of the year, I said we keep him around to see how the new defensive staff pans out, unless, UNLESS, the wheels fall off the bus or somehow the offense turns out putrid. Well, guess what, the offense is putrid and the wheels fell off a couple of weeks ago. He needs to go now. Not next year, not in two years, but now.
Completely agree.
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Puerco, Byrnes isn't going to fired him after the end of this season if you like it not. He not going to make that Conclusion of what fan really want ok. Puerco, your showing your true color on how lil spirit you have with the football program in the wake how terrible this season is. You think this team will no improve under RR and staff next season and want start all over again. RR and staff will improve this team next but not in big way. If you don't like it then go support Basketball.
BMalo
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 8:51 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by BMalo »

I originally said I'd give him until the end of this year and some of next but I've changed my stance.

We're on the brink of going winless in conference this year in YEAR 5. That's unacceptable. As someone who invests time and money into this program, like many of you, I have a right to not be satisfied and withdraw some of my support until things turn around. I certainly won't be going out of my way to watch/attend games.

Next years class won't produce many contributors and if it does it's more due to necessity than anything else. Our recruiting trajectory isn't on the way up...it's the same as it's always been under RR. We have three 4-star commits and who knows if their pledge sticks. We certainly aren't killing it in recruiting.

I'm ready to move on and start digging our way out of the hole RR has put us in. Waiting to fire him only prolongs the time it's going to take to get ourselves out.
Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

BMalo wrote:I originally said I'd give him until the end of this year and some of next but I've changed my stance.

We're on the brink of going winless in conference this year in YEAR 5. That's unacceptable. As someone who invests time and money into this program, like many of you, I have a right to not be satisfied and withdraw some of my support until things turn around. I certainly won't be going out of my way to watch/attend games.

Next years class won't produce many contributors and if it does it's more due to necessity than anything else. Our recruiting trajectory isn't on the way up...it's the same as it's always been under RR. We have three 4-star commits and who knows if their pledge sticks. We certainly aren't killing it in recruiting.

I'm ready to move on and start digging our way out of the hole RR has put us in. Waiting to fire him only prolongs the time it's going to take to get ourselves out.
I agree with this sentiment, and do not really understand why so much has been made of this recruiting class. I think that, as in the past, folks are paying too much to the class ranking - which is artificially high now (as it always is at this point because we filled the class so early) and will fall considerably as other programs fill out their commitments.

The class is marginally better than last year, probably the 2nd best one of his tenure but in the same range as the rest. That assumes it stays in tact, which will be awfully difficult after the season we are having.
Drew77777
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 7:59 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Drew77777 »

After this last weekend and the absolute trouncing that we took up in Pullman...I would not have been sad if they would have just left Rich Rod behind up there. I was all for giving him another year based on the new defensive staff. But to be honest the Defense system is the same under the new staff and the 3-3-5 just needs to go and never come back besides when it is supposed to be used on 3rd and long. I also tend to agree with Harvey and I do not see how our next class is going to make that huge step. We have a very similar class to several of our past classes under Rich Rod 3 Four stars and a few high Three stars and then too many kids with offer lists from the MWAC. I just don't see this team making a huge leap next year with the talent we return and the class we have coming in. I would love to be wrong and would happily eat crow. But I am just not seeing the turnaround next year under Rich Rod.
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Drew77777 wrote:After this last weekend and the absolute trouncing that we took up in Pullman...I would not have been sad if they would have just left Rich Rod behind up there. I was all for giving him another year based on the new defensive staff. But to be honest the Defense system is the same under the new staff and the 3-3-5 just needs to go and never come back besides when it is supposed to be used on 3rd and long. I also tend to agree with Harvey and I do not see how our next class is going to make that huge step. We have a very similar class to several of our past classes under Rich Rod 3 Four stars and a few high Three stars and then too many kids with offer lists from the MWAC. I just don't see this team making a huge leap next year with the talent we return and the class we have coming in. I would love to be wrong and would happily eat crow. But I am just not seeing the turnaround next year under Rich Rod.
Their was a debate on whether or not RR was going to canned the 335 in favor of new scheme then yates was hired and he ran a 425 scheme at BSU and so far his first years we haven't seen nothing of the 425 on our defense.. If yates is slowing implementing his 425 within 335 or he been forces to run 335. As far as recruiting goes? Were not a world beater when it come to recruiting.
Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

cordera89 wrote:
Drew77777 wrote:After this last weekend and the absolute trouncing that we took up in Pullman...I would not have been sad if they would have just left Rich Rod behind up there. I was all for giving him another year based on the new defensive staff. But to be honest the Defense system is the same under the new staff and the 3-3-5 just needs to go and never come back besides when it is supposed to be used on 3rd and long. I also tend to agree with Harvey and I do not see how our next class is going to make that huge step. We have a very similar class to several of our past classes under Rich Rod 3 Four stars and a few high Three stars and then too many kids with offer lists from the MWAC. I just don't see this team making a huge leap next year with the talent we return and the class we have coming in. I would love to be wrong and would happily eat crow. But I am just not seeing the turnaround next year under Rich Rod.
Their was a debate on whether or not RR was going to canned the 335 in favor of new scheme then yates was hired and he ran a 425 scheme at BSU and so far his first years we haven't seen nothing of the 425 on our defense.. If yates is slowing implementing his 425 within 335 or he been forces to run 335. As far as recruiting goes? Were not a world beater when it come to recruiting.
I would have to believe RR is the guy demanding that we continue to run the 3-3-5... he has insisted on that disastrous scheme through 4 DC's over 8 years at 2 different programs with abysmal results.

The consensus last year was that he needed to stop meddling, hire a competent DC, and give him the keys to the D. It appears he did not do that... the guy calling the D did not change - only the guy following orders from the man calling the D.

That would suggest those hires were window-dressing... and a change was made for appearance's sake - not schematically. That suggests the offseason hires from this past season should buy him zero "extra time" to "turn things around".
Last edited by Harvey Specter on Thu Nov 10, 2016 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Harvey Specter wrote:
cordera89 wrote:
Drew77777 wrote:After this last weekend and the absolute trouncing that we took up in Pullman...I would not have been sad if they would have just left Rich Rod behind up there. I was all for giving him another year based on the new defensive staff. But to be honest the Defense system is the same under the new staff and the 3-3-5 just needs to go and never come back besides when it is supposed to be used on 3rd and long. I also tend to agree with Harvey and I do not see how our next class is going to make that huge step. We have a very similar class to several of our past classes under Rich Rod 3 Four stars and a few high Three stars and then too many kids with offer lists from the MWAC. I just don't see this team making a huge leap next year with the talent we return and the class we have coming in. I would love to be wrong and would happily eat crow. But I am just not seeing the turnaround next year under Rich Rod.
Their was a debate on whether or not RR was going to canned the 335 in favor of new scheme then yates was hired and he ran a 425 scheme at BSU and so far his first years we haven't seen nothing of the 425 on our defense.. If yates is slowing implementing his 425 within 335 or he been forces to run 335. As far as recruiting goes? Were not a world beater when it come to recruiting.
I would have to believe RR is the guy demanding that we continue to run the 3-3-5... he has insisted on that disastrous scheme through 4 DC's over 8 years at 2 different programs with abysmal results.

The consensus last year was that he needed to stop meddling, hire a competent DC, and give him the keys to the D. It appears he did not do that... the guy calling the D did not change - only the guy following orders from the man calling the D.

That would suggest those hires were window-dressing... and a change was made for appearance's sake - not schematically.
Yeah and bad part about is he didn't adapt to situation were he fired Casteel and old staff and 3-3-5 should of went with it. But it his stubbornness that going to fuck him over because failed to do simplest task.

One more thing. Our defense would better off in 3-4 or 4-3 scheme. Because Yates isn't getting full control of RR defense to run Yates 425 or Is yates transitioning 335 to 425 or he just hand cuff to run the 335.
Gladiator Cat
Posts: 1211
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 5:12 am
Reputation: 0

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Gladiator Cat »

[/quote]

I would have to believe RR is the guy demanding that we continue to run the 3-3-5... he has insisted on that disastrous scheme through 4 DC's over 8 years at 2 different programs with abysmal results.

The consensus last year was that he needed to stop meddling, hire a competent DC, and give him the keys to the D. It appears he did not do that... the guy calling the D did not change - only the guy following orders from the man calling the D.

That would suggest those hires were window-dressing... and a change was made for appearance's sake - not schematically.[/quote]

Harvey,

I know we have beaten this horse to death, but it still bears restating its significance to put a proper perspective on the situation.

Here we are in year five with a trend that is in a downward trajectory, when under the most basic of situations the team foundation should be relatively sound, if not above average, but yet, here we are in year five with a team of RR signees manning the slots and we are possibly fielding the worst team from top to bottom in the 100 years of UofA football history.

I know the best/worst debate is open ended and not clear cut and can be manipulated in many ways depending on the era, but for sure this is one of the worst three teams in our history and the talent pool that has been constructed is almost unwatchable at this stage.

To put it into further perspective I have stated that next years class is average by any objective standard. The national rating is completely over hyped and exaggerated. A full 90% if not more of the incoming class will need to reshirt. Outside of the three 4 **** stars in Burmeister, Tilford and Johnson this is a class of average MWC talent of there ever was one.

Adding an additional layer of pain to equation is this last 2016 recruiting class. Think about this; we may be fielding the worst or next to worst teams in history and only a handful of last years class can even make the depth chart. The players that we will go to war with next year will be the current active players (bad), and a group that are RS'g that couldn't beat out a team that may only win two games.

To add further fodder to the discussion, my personal opinion is Anu will never regain his freshmen level play as he has taken too many shots and is now a one dimensional player and a shell of his former days. Additionally in my opinion Nick Wilson is very close to being done. Nick is a warrior, but the pounding has broken his body IMO. Next year will be more of the same as he will fade as his career come s to a close. That's just two player right off the top of my head to discuss in that light.

I can't believe I'm saying this but mike Stoops recruits saved RR ass, and in a twisted sort of a way they may be his undoing as well. It is stunningly obvious now to me that RR is a very average to poor recruiter in the big scheme of things.

A couple of diamonds in the rough he has pulled, but overall the finished product is ghastly in quality.

RR's best players in his era........Scooby, Alsedek, and Wilson and a whole bunch of Mike Stoops troops. That is not a $4 Million dollar windfall payday caliber coach by any standard even if grading on a forgiving curve.

Sorry folks, them's just the facts.
cordera89
Posts: 1802
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 9:30 am
Reputation: 1

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by cordera89 »

Gladiator Cat wrote:
I would have to believe RR is the guy demanding that we continue to run the 3-3-5... he has insisted on that disastrous scheme through 4 DC's over 8 years at 2 different programs with abysmal results.

The consensus last year was that he needed to stop meddling, hire a competent DC, and give him the keys to the D. It appears he did not do that... the guy calling the D did not change - only the guy following orders from the man calling the D.

That would suggest those hires were window-dressing... and a change was made for appearance's sake - not schematically.[/quote]

Harvey,

I know we have beaten this horse to death, but it still bears restating its significance to put a proper perspective on the situation.

Here we are in year five with a trend that is in a downward trajectory, when under the most basic of situations the team foundation should be relatively sound, if not above average, but yet, here we are in year five with a team of RR signees manning the slots and we are possibly fielding the worst team from top to bottom in the 100 years of UofA football history.

I know the best/worst debate is open ended and not clear cut and can be manipulated in many ways depending on the era, but for sure this is one of the worst three teams in our history and the talent pool that has been constructed is almost unwatchable at this stage.

To put it into further perspective I have stated that next years class is average by any objective standard. The national rating is completely over hyped and exaggerated. A full 90% if not more of the incoming class will need to reshirt. Outside of the three 4 **** stars in Burmeister, Tilford and Johnson this is a class of average MWC talent of there ever was one.

Adding an additional layer of pain to equation is this last 2016 recruiting class. Think about this; we may be fielding the worst or next to worst teams in history and only a handful of last years class can even make the depth chart. The players that we will go to war with next year will be the current active players (bad), and a group that are RS'g that couldn't beat out a team that may only win two games.

To add further fodder to the discussion, my personal opinion is Anu will never regain his freshmen level play as he has taken too many shots and is now a one dimensional player and a shell of his former days. Additionally in my opinion Nick Wilson is very close to being done. Nick is a warrior, but the pounding has broken his body IMO. Next year will be more of the same as he will fade as his career come s to a close. That's just two player right off the top of my head to discuss in that light.

I can't believe I'm saying this but mike Stoops recruits saved RR ass, and in a twisted sort of a way they may be his undoing as well. It is stunningly obvious now to me that RR is a very average to poor recruiter in the big scheme of things.

A couple of diamonds in the rough he has pulled, but overall the finished product is ghastly in quality.

RR's best players in his era........Scooby, Alsedek, and Wilson and a whole bunch of Mike Stoops troops. That is not a $4 Million dollar windfall payday caliber coach by any standard even if grading on a forgiving curve.

Sorry folks, them's just the facts.[/quote]

Long story short. Make and break next season in 2016.
User avatar
RazorsEdgeAZ
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:31 pm
Reputation: 0

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by RazorsEdgeAZ »

I still think UA can pull off a win still. Maybe two. Keep in mind this is a pretty down year in P12. UA still not very competitive. It's mind boggling how fast this happened. I just don't think it's only recruiting. Big factor, but it has been a collapse.

Recruiting wise, think the start of the decline was after the 2012 season. When long-time assistant Tony Gibson left for WV. Gibson now DC at WV who could very possibly be named DC of the year this season running the 3-3-5.

RR's recruiting classes have never been spectacular in his career but commonly known that Gibson was the best recruiter on his staff. Made the classes not utterly lacking. The Old Guard defensive coaches relied heavily on Gibson to fill their void. Couple examples that Gibson identified and brought to UA, Scooby and Will Parks. Both now in the NFL. I think what we're seeing now on the defensive side is that difference of mediocre to Poor recruiting and evals.

Doesn't explain the offense. I just think it's taken RR too long to realize his old model undersized recruiting won't work any longer. Game is different in that his offensive schemes are now common in CFB. No longer unique to throw teams off. Ragle in a tough spot because RR never allocates many resources to ST, but deserves criticism.

I know Chris Singletary new to the program as recruiting coordinator. Maybe he will help in future along with new Defensive coaches. Too early to tell. I'm not sure he's doing evals or not. But he was a pretty good football player. So he 'knows' football technically. Matt Dudek? I not really certain of his role any longer. I know he's GM Player Personnel. I think that means less time on recruiting and more time with "roster management" (whatever that involves) and NFL liaison.

Same heavy-handed influence that RR has on defense is more so on offense. Undersized lineman, undersized WR's etc. It's what brought glory days to RR at WV and a weaker BE. Those days are Long gone. I think RR beginning to realize that. It could be too late.

I think most of us bleive if the financial and contract numbers were different, RR would be on a hot seat and possibly fired this season. They're not. Also think Byrne has loyalty factor with it being his hire. At least for awhile.
User avatar
Chicat
Posts: 46652
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:19 pm
Reputation: 3986
Location: Your mother's basement

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Chicat »

Keep RichRod....

Ditch RichRod....

Frankly, I don't care that much. But if next year he's still here and they make another "are you ready for some awesome Arizona football?" video with him in gladiator gear or as James Bond or doing some American Ninja Warrior shit while wearing a loincloth and a V for Vendetta mask, I will absolutely lose my shit. No one wants him to spend even one second making videos. When he's not eating, shitting, or sleeping, he should be working on recruiting.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
Harvey Specter
Posts: 2140
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:35 pm
Reputation: 17

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Harvey Specter »

Chicat wrote:Keep RichRod....

Ditch RichRod....

Frankly, I don't care that much. But if next year he's still here and they make another "are you ready for some awesome Arizona football?" video with him in gladiator gear or as James Bond or doing some American Ninja Warrior shit while wearing a loincloth and a V for Vendetta mask, I will absolutely lose my shit. No one wants him to spend even one second making videos. When he's not eating, shitting, or sleeping, he should be working on recruiting.
Come on, Chi... I am willing to give him some free time for some conjugal marital activities.

PS - Where are all the posters who raved about all the positive exposure his cool vids got our program? Or how it would step up recruiting activity because it showed how FUN our staff is?

In other news... has there ever been a staff member whose contributions have been as overhyped as Matty D's? Lots of sizzle, very little steak. Have not seen one of his "Don't dare question our OKG strategy, we are the experts" tweets in a while. Needs for his bite to catch up with his bark...
User avatar
Chicat
Posts: 46652
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:19 pm
Reputation: 3986
Location: Your mother's basement

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Chicat »

Harvey Specter wrote:PS - Where are all the posters who raved about all the positive exposure his cool vids got our program? Or how it would step up recruiting activity because it showed how FUN our staff is?
Right here.

They didn't work.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
User avatar
Puerco
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:53 am
Reputation: 0

Re: Keeping Rodriguez: Pros, Cons, and Back of Envelope Math

Post by Puerco »

cordera89 wrote:Puerco, Byrnes isn't going to fired him after the end of this season if you like it not. He not going to make that Conclusion of what fan really want ok. Puerco, your showing your true color on how lil spirit you have with the football program in the wake how terrible this season is. You think this team will no improve under RR and staff next season and want start all over again. RR and staff will improve this team next but not in big way. If you don't like it then go support Basketball.
Nope, I'll stay right here, cordera, thanks. One of the many things you don't seem to understand is that it's a fan's duty to supprt THE PROGRAM. If a coach is harming University of Arizona Football, then we need to protest against him as loudly as possible. We have reached our peak with Rich Rod football, and that was 10 wins, two of which came on hail mary prayers. We are about to find how deep down into the shit hole he can take our program, and given the average 2017 recruiting class he's put in place, there's no sign the Rich Rod is capable to start pulling our program out of that stinking hole.

It's time to find someone who can. For the sake of Arizona Football.
'A parent is the one person who is supposed to make their kid think they can do anything. Says they're beautiful even when they're ugly. Thinks they're smart even when they go to Arizona State.' -- Jack Donaghy
Post Reply