Lloyd Carr Retiring - Page 4

heater · #1 11-20-2007, 01:09 AM

And fwiw Lloyd Carr had (has) the other coaching intangibles in spades.

JackWhite · #2 11-20-2007, 01:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Moeller was a drunken idiot and didn't represent the university well. There's more to being a coach than wins and losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, but I was referring to on the field record, not off the field conduct. I have a small soft spot for Gary Moeller for one reason: His first game. Early September 1990 in South Bend. UM had to replace most of the offense. New QB (Grbac) new WR's (Desmond and Alexander) and a new TB (Jon Vaughn). As an underdog we came out in a no-huddle offense, totally catching ND off guard. The Irish were totally unprepared, as you can imagine, since Bo wouldn't think of trying to trick the other team. That would be unethical.

Using the no-huddle with young, unproven offensive weapons, we went up and down the field against a good ND defense. Jon Vaughn ran wild, Desmond came of age. Then, of course, we gave the game away, blowing a 10 point second half lead. But at least once, a UM team actually tried to trick the opponent. And for that, I don't hate Gary Moeller as much as others do.

heater · #3 11-20-2007, 02:24 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, but I was referring to on the field record, not off the field conduct. I have a small soft spot for Gary Moeller

[/ QUOTE ]

You are the rarest of the rare breeds.

JackWhite · #4 11-20-2007, 02:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, but I was referring to on the field record, not off the field conduct. I have a small soft spot for Gary Moeller

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are the rarest of the rare breeds.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is probably true. However, don't you find it interesting that people defend Carr with "ZOMG how can you criticize a coach with that great winning percentage." But those same people think Moeller was a bad coach, despite an almost identical winning percentage. If winning percentage is a great tool in determining who is a good coach and who isn't..then great. Everyone should be consistent, though.

By the way, so there is no misunderstanding, I do not think Gary Moeller was a good coach. He never should have been hired in the first place, just as Carr should never have gotten the job. At Michigan, incest is best. Instead of searching the country to find the best possible coach, we must promote from within. Hopefully that mentality is gone. At least our last 2 basketball coaches were not "promote from within" hires after a long stretch of that.

heater · #5 11-20-2007, 02:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sure, but I was referring to on the field record, not off the field conduct. I have a small soft spot for Gary Moeller

[/ QUOTE ]

You are the rarest of the rare breeds.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm drunk and I think what I meant to say is u r dumb.

ikestoys · #6 11-20-2007, 02:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To show you how informed the national press is, on Around The Horn on ESPN, one of Woody Paige's memories of Lloyd Carr was that he replaced Bo Schembechler. Memo to Woody: Gary Moeller replaced Bo Schembechler and was the head coach for 5 years.

By the way, Gary Moeller's winning percentage at UM was 77%. Lloyd Carr's is 75%. Amazing that some consider Carr a good coach, yet Moeller is considered a failure. Which is the thing I always point out when a Carr apologist tells me about Lloyd's great winning percentage.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moeller was a drunken idiot and didn't represent the university well. There's more to being a coach than wins and losses.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT +

add a national championship. Carr was pure class and a very respectable man outside of football.

heater · #7 11-20-2007, 03:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Gary Moeller's winning percentage at UM was 77%. Lloyd Carr's is 75%. Amazing that some consider Carr a good coach, yet Moeller is considered a failure. Which is the thing I always point out when a Carr apologist tells me about Lloyd's great winning percentage.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was starting from here.

JackWhite · #8 11-20-2007, 03:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Gary Moeller's winning percentage at UM was 77%. Lloyd Carr's is 75%. Amazing that some consider Carr a good coach, yet Moeller is considered a failure. Which is the thing I always point out when a Carr apologist tells me about Lloyd's great winning percentage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was starting from here.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I posted that Carr and Moeller's winning percentage at UM were almost identical, it wasn't done to praise Moeller, it was done to illustrate that people who defend Carr based on his winning percentage, must also defend Moeller as a good coach. Or John Cooper at OSU, and many others who had great winning percentages.

Bottom line, imo: If you are coaching at an elite program with access to great talent, you have to be a [censored] up of biblical proportions not to have a good winning percentage. As previously stated, Gary Moeller and John Cooper had great winning percentages. Does anybody consider them really good coaches? If not, then how do the same people consider Carr a good coach based on that same criteria?

heater · #9 11-20-2007, 03:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By the way, Gary Moeller's winning percentage at UM was 77%. Lloyd Carr's is 75%. Amazing that some consider Carr a good coach, yet Moeller is considered a failure. Which is the thing I always point out when a Carr apologist tells me about Lloyd's great winning percentage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was starting from here.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I posted that Carr and Moeller's winning percentage at UM were almost identical, it wasn't done to praise Moeller, it was done to illustrate that people who defend Carr based on his winning percentage, must also defend Moeller as a good coach.

[/ QUOTE ]

People who defend Carr based solely on his winning percentage are missing out on the big picture.

JackWhite · #10 11-20-2007, 04:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
People who defend Carr based solely on his winning percentage are missing out on the big picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. You liked Lloyd because he representated the school well and ran a clean program. DVaut had a good post in this thread detailing how Carr was willing to look the other way or give a slap on the wrist to certain players who broke the law or team rules, but we'll leave that aside.

Like you, I think representing the University and running a clean program are extremely important. Ethics and integrity should not be compromised to win games, imo. However, this reminds me of an old Chris Rock routine. Rock told a story about a guy bragging because he had never been to jail. The Rock reply: you shouldn't go to jail. That is to be expected, it is not necessarily something you should be bragging about. I feel a little bit like Rock when talking about Carr on this issue. Yes, he generally has represented the school well and ran a clean program, but that is to be expected, at least at Michigan.

I'm willing to give him a little credit on the matter, but I feel uncomfortable heaping praise on someone for doing what they are expected to do: not break a lot of rules or go on drunken tirades.

I do wish him well in whatever he decides to do next. He's a nice guy (except to sideline reporters trying to do their job), I just don't think he was a top notch football coach. He was a guy probably destined to be a career assistant until fate intervened.