Big Blue's Big Change

Or... The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

The Good: A very solid, proven coach who will keep things rolling over the long haul (if he stays).

My prediction is that there is a 75-80% chance that Michigan fans have just gotten in Rich Rodriguez a coach who is going to have a career that matches the success of Lloyd Carr. That's not a slam at all. Any smart, sensible Michigan fan should breath a huge sigh of relief that they will have a continuation of what Bo started, and Lloyd continued. Given that anybody has a chance of screwing up -- this being a sport where every game carries a 50% chance of failure -- a prediction of 75% success is about as good as it gets.

A remarkable run of being at the top that is really fragile and easy to mess up. Ask Nebraska. Or Miami FL, or Notre Dame, or Washington or...

There is a virtually 100% chance that a loud chunk of the most surly fan base in the nation will be calling for his head within 3 years. It's Michigan. It would happen no matter who they hired. The good news for them is that it's 75% likely that -- like Lloyd Carr before him -- he will 100% not deserve it either.

The Bad: It's not Maize... It's yellow.

Some things are very likely not going to change for the better at Michigan. Wolverine fans have taken for granted the predictable discipline of a team that commits fewer turnovers and penalties than the other guys. While Rodriguez's only head coaching stop -- West Virginia -- was also pretty impressive at ball security during his 2001-2007 time there, penalties were another issue.

Check that... Penalties were an issue!

One year prior to his arrival, in 2000, the Mountaineers were the 28th least-penalized team in the nation. That's good for most, but would be modest by Michigan standards. You expect Michigan teams in the top third of the nation, if not the top ten, or top 5.

Rodriguez's first year, 2001, saw the penalties soar: 102nd best in the nation, out of then-117 teams (now 120).

And it didn't improve. 84th (2002), 101st ('03), 116th ('04), 64th ('05), 114th ('06) and 33rd ('07). Michigan fans used to seeing the other team melt down with yellow flags best get used to a different style of football.

The Ugly: MAJOR growing pains.

The spread-option doesn't need a Pat White, but it sure helps. What it can't live with is Ryan Mallet -- a guy who makes John Navarre look fleet footed. Mallet's got potential to be a decent QB, but not at Michigan. Not anymore. I don't expect him to be the starter by the end of 2008, maybe not even the beginning.

Taking less than 40% of the snaps under center, Mallet accounted for 5 of the 11 fumbles lost by everyone on the team -- including the other QB, all the RB's, WR's an KR's. Anybody who watched him could see why. The boy makes one avert their eyes if he attempts to do anything with the ball other than give it to somebody else.

But even if you put somebody else in at QB -- somebody with even less experience -- you must also bake into the equation: (1) the loss of two senior, high quality linemen, (2) the loss of Mike Hart, and (3) the potential loss of not one but BOTH of the starting WR's, not to mention (4) the everybody else including the QB learning a very different offense. Not pretty.

First season at West Virginia, Rodriguez was 3-8. It was the worst season of West Virginia football since 1978. I strongly suspect this was growing pains from imposing a very new offense on a pile of players who had been trained in and recruited for something more conventional.

Too many ugly variables. He can win with the spread at Michigan and I'm pretty sure that he will. But not in 2008. The coach with the high probability of being a great hire in the long term is also a 50-50 shot to start off as the first guy since before Bo took over to post a losing record on the season.

Short term: Mallett will not finish the year as a starter and Michigan is going to be fighting for bowl eligibility. That will be very ugly indeed for a fan base that thinks 8 wins is a nightmare season.

The "Fire Rod" website goes up before Halloween.

"No" Means NO!

Dear Wolverines:

You have rejection issues.

The guy doesn't want you anymore. He's over you.

Yes, he takes your calls. That means he cares about you, values your friendship, and hopes for the best for you. He wants to help you move on.

It does not mean that he wants to get back together. What you need to realize is that Les has a girl. She loves him. She'll do anything for him. They've had great times together, and they have big plans.

Meanwhile, you've been flaky, toyed with his heart, and left him worldly wise and better for it. He doesn't hate you. He still cares for you, but it's more pity than passion at this point. But that's as far as it goes. Don't push it.

Face it. She's hotter and nicer than you are. You can't help hating her, but that doesn't make you right to do so.

He's got memories. You have an obsession. You need to move on. Take a vacation to get your head together. Go sailing or something.

If you keep this up, you'll be in trouble. This is called harassment in some jurisdictions and you're beginning to remind a lot of us of Glenn Close, and that's really creepy. Nobody wants to fool around with the crazy chick and you're doing yourself no favors.

There's lots of nice boys out there. You need to look yourself in the mirror and figure out what you want, who you are. That obsession with the thug from New Jersey was just acting out. We understand that, but you're damned lucky he didn't say "yes." (They don't call it the Big East for nothing -- you never know what you'll catch!)

Take a few months or a year off if you need to. Date one of the local boys on an interim basis. You've been in one long-term relationship after another for 40 years (save for that bruiser who picked the fight with the cops -- he was all wrong for you.) It's silly to think you could just flip a switch and hit the dating circuit like Paris Hilton with Anna Nicole Smith's credit cards.

Relax. Stop making a fool of yourself. Good things will happen.

Sincerely,

Mad Toothfish.

Huck Sin

"Nominating Mike Huckabee for president or vice-president, would constitute an abject rejection of the free-market, limited-government, economic conservatism that has been the unifying theme of the Republican Party for decades." -- Club for Growth


The above is what you'd call a bad character reference. The authors should be the guys friendly to an underdog candidate overturning applecarts in the GOP presidential race. The Club are the boys you go to when you want to know where the next Ronald Reagan is hiding.


So why the sudden upsurge in his poll numbers? Well, he's funny. And he's the religious right's chosen man. That seems to be it: Rhetoric over record. Is the social stuff really all that religious conservatives care about? They'll prove it if they push this guy over the top.


Yipes.


Here's the man who would be President:

• Immediately upon taking office, Governor Huckabee signed a sales tax hike in 1996 to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism.
  

Outstanding. Great priorities. No sooner does he plant his (then) immense rear end in the seat and he is inking his name to a tax hike for the toy department of state government.

• He supported an internet sales tax in 2001. He opposed a congressional measure to ban internet taxes in 2003.

Translation: He'll quite literally tax anything that isn't nailed down. No transaction is safe from this man. None. All of you Fair Tax nuts who believe in this guy, please gaze upon the above. He wants to impose a sales tax on the stuff you buy over the internet from other states. He likes your sales tax ideas because he likes taxes, period!!!

• By the end of his ten-year tenure, Governor Huckabee was responsible for a 37% higher sales tax in Arkansas, 16% higher motor fuel taxes, and 103% higher cigarette taxes according to Americans for Tax Reform, garnering a lifetime grade of D from the free-market Cato Institute. Huckabee's substantial tax hikes far surpassed his modest tax cuts, with the average tax burden increasing by a whopping 47% over his tenure.

Hrmmmm.... Free-market experts... tax reform fighters.... More of these ominous character references. Huckabee is to your wallet what Michael Jackson is a to a cute 9-yr old boy. In both cases, one should not be trusted with the other.

• Under Governor Huckabee's watch, state spending increased a whopping 65.3% from 1996 to 2004, three times the rate of inflation. The number of state government workers rose 20% during his tenure, and the state's general obligation debt shot up by almost $1 billion, according to Americans for Tax Reform.

See there? He's like the Cylons in Battlestar Galactica. He's waging war on your money because he has a plan for it: More government and more government workers.

• Instead of talking about the well-documented economic benefits of free trade, Huckabee has taken to talking about "fair trade," while focusing on what he believes to be the negative consequences of free trade. Make no mistake about it: These are not the words of a free trader.

No. Those would be the words of a trade warrior, protectionist, Democrat. Those are the words of a man who would destroy this nation's economy. Bill Clinton -- both as candidate and as President -- was light years better than this on trade. The Democratic electorate, with the chance to nominate some of those trade warrior Democrats in 1992 (Bob Kerrey, to name just one), turned instead to Clinton. Who promised and delivered on passing NAFTA. With Al Gore's help.

Got that? Huckabee is talking far worse on trade than both Clinton and Gore -- as candidates. Bad signs. Bad, bad, bad...

This is the mindless, populist, crap that helped bring on the Great Depression.

• Huckabee has continued to support big-government measures as a presidential candidate, including his support for a federal ban on smoking in the work place, and his oft-heard call for a federally mandated arts and music curriculum in schools across America.

In other words, a Nanny State Health Nazi.

So, the question here is... What if this were Hillary Clinton trying to drive her version of how to live down your throat? Her version of federal arts and music? And what happens if he creates all of these programs for arts and such, and then a new President shows up and hands the steering wheel over to Nancy Pelosi's pals in San Francisco?

If you're a cultural conservative, get ready for your kids to bring home some really interesting art projects from school.

High taxes and a bigger government that's empowered to tell you how to live. This is the power the liberals always dreamed of. Mike Huckabee could be their Trojan Horse.