Part I.  Part II.  Part III.  Part IV.

Rapid balding makes him look older

All of the viable top-tier HC candidates are off the table, and now I'll review a few coordinators and NFL-types.  I'll finish with some fringe candidates.

Tom Herman, OC Ohio State

• Track Record: B. Herman's offenses have been successful at every stop. He has never coached defense at any level.

• Michigan Ties: D+. Born in Cincinnati. Went to college in California and, until 2012, coached in the south and west. Does he have any love for Michigan?

• Recruiting: B+. Known as one of the best recruiting assistant coaches in the country.

• Chances/Loyalty: C. Would Herman leave Meyer to coach against him? Does he have ANY desire to coach at Michigan?

• Demeanor: B. There are still a lot of unknowns with a 39-year-old assistant coach. Highly-intelligent (Mensa member) but is not the most polished public speaker. Still, seems like an honest, smart, and motivational coach.

• Three Phases: C+. Spread offense has adapted to some very different personnel types, highlighted by using a power running game with Hyde. Not sure there are many better OCs in the country. But...defense? Special teams? Who knows.

• Roster Fit: B. Was surprisingly successful making use of Ohio State's “old” roster as they transition to Meyer's preferred space players. I think he could find a way to win with whatever he's given.

• OVERALL GPA: 2.57 (B-/C+). Of the non-HCs, Herman may be my favorite option. He's a gamble, as he would need a GREAT defensive mind as his DC, and who knows if he can manage a program. But I think he's a rising star and will be a very good HC someday.

Scott Frost, OC Oregon

• Track Record: C+. Not much to go on here. Has only been the OC for a season-and-a-half. Coached WRs at Oregon from 2009-2012. Before that, coached defense for two years at Northern Iowa. Has been successful and risen quickly through the ranks.

• Michigan Ties: D+. Born in Nebraska, graduated from Nebraska, won a MNC (or a half of one) at Nebraska. Played at Cleveland and Green Bay in the NFL.

• Recruiting: B+. Has a strong reputation as a successful recruiter.

• Chances/Loyalty: C. I think Frost wants a HC position. I also think he wants it at Nebraska, and would take that job over any other.

• Demeanor: B+. Frost is known for integrity and authenticity. His players love him, and he is another of “second father” type.

• Three Phases: B-. Has coached both sides of the ball. His first season as OC at Oregon, the team set the school record (at Oregon!) for offense and scored 45.5 pts/gm.

• Roster Fit: D+. Spread option demands a QB we don't have. Skill players are meant to be fast, not big. O-Line needs to be nimble. But the defense might be okay?

• OVERALL GPA: 2.33 (C+). Frost seems like a good man and a very good coach. But I don't want a guy that is just itching for his chance to get to Nebraska—a chance that will probably come after Pelini has one bad season.

IMPORTANT METRICS: THIRD DOWN DIFFERENTIALS AND YARDS PER PLAY

As it is a bye week and I’ve been lax in my diary production for the last month or so because of various professional reasons, I think it is about time we took a look at the progress of Michigan on third down differentials and yards per play and how that relates to scoring margin as these things are rather highly correlated to overall team success generally.

First, some historic averages for third down differentials and scoring margin:

Granted, these are teams across three different coaches, so direct comparisons of these numbers are tricky at best, but what should stand out to you, I think, are the more successful years in this period – 2006, 2011 and arguably 2007 (although it began…let’s not discuss how it began) and 2012 to some extent despite Denard DOOM at Nebraska.

Why do they stand out? If I am answering that, I would say that you see the better defenses getting stops and giving the offense every opportunity to score, but of course that offense has to function as a unit as well. For an interesting example of these stats being decoupled, look at this year – statistically, a better differential on third downs than last year, but the scoring margin is barely positive.

Here’s what the table above looks like graphically:

YARDS PER PLAY DIFFERENTIAL:

This one is intriguing this year, I think. When I’ve done this in the past, typically you will see scoring margin and this statistic more or less follow one another, although in close games the predictability lessens somewhat. This year, there is a bit of lag in the last few weeks between the two.

Note that only once so far have we been outpaced by more than a yard per play on average, and despite losing to Notre Dame in a morbidly spectacular manner, we outgained them by a teeny tiny bit. Teeny tiny. OK, say it was basically even.

THIRD DOWN DIFFERENTIAL IN 2014:

This follows the more traditional course when it comes to expectations – losing the third down battle makes it very difficult to win the game, of course, although it can be done. Indeed, if you look below, we did it against Utah.  The opposite can also happen as well, as a matter of fact – you can lose the third down battle quite badly and still somehow win the game. Those of you who were, like I was, at the Akron game last year have seen this phenomenon in person.

Here is this year’s chart to date:

CONCLUSION:

For many reasons, this is a really weird year statistically for Michigan. More to come as the season ends, I am sure.

Can he beat his former employer (Meyer)?

David Shaw, HC Stanford

• Track Record: B+. Jim's OC all four years at Stanford. Seems to have maintained the success there, though this year will probably be his worst, record-wise. Is currently 38-9, 25-5 in Pac-12.

• Michigan Ties: D-. Nothing there. Coached with Jim. Has coached in NFL at Philly, Oakland, and Baltimore.

• Recruiting: B+. Had the #5 class (Rivals) in 2012, but otherwise has been solid but not spectacular (22, 64, 14).

• Chances/Loyalty: D. Why would Shaw leave his alma mater for Michigan? Money would be the only conceivable reason, and I think Stanford would match.

• Demeanor: B+. For a 42-year-old, he seems polished and is certainly used to operating in an arrogant, highly-educated environment.

• Three Phases: A-. MANBALL offense that has had sustained success combined with aggressive, highly-ranked defenses and good special teams.

• Roster Fit: A. Hard to imagine a better fit in terms of scheme for our players; he recruits basically the same guys.

• OVERALL GPA: 2.76 (B-). Shaw seems like a great fit, except I don't believe he has any love for or desire to coach at Michigan. I think he is among the most unrealistic names on the list.

Kevin Sumlin, HC Texas A&M

• Track Record: B+. 60-25 as a HC at Houston and A&M. Was 11-2 in first season at A&M, then 9-4, and looks to be on his way to no better than 9-4 this season. Can he excel without Manziel?

• Michigan Ties: C+. Coached at Minnesota from '93-97, then at Purdue (his alma mater) until 2000. Since then has been in the south, where he was born.

• Recruiting: A-. Sumlin has been killing it on the recruiting trail. Rivals #6, #11, and #15 classes the last three years. '15 class is currently at #6.

• Chances/Loyalty: D+. Sumlin has some midwest ties, but has been in the south for a long time now and has no good reason to leave, unless he wants to escape the SEC West. Makes $3.1 million.

• Demeanor: B+. 50 years old and presents well. Would fit the Michigan culture, IMO.

• Three Phases: B. Is Sumlin just an offensive genius? The first thing I'd want to know if we hired him is, “Who's your DC?”

• Roster Fit: C. Would need a significant roster overhaul for his style. We don't have the speed he likes at almost any position.

• OVERALL GPA: 2.71 (B-). Sumlin seems like a quality person capable of turning just about any athlete into a Heisman-contender at QB...but can he coach a defense?

Butch Jones, HC Tennessee

• Track Record: B. Maintained and even built on Kelly's success at Central Michigan, going 11-2 in 2009. Cincinnati was 12-0 in Kelly's last year (2009), and 4-8 in Jones' first year there in 2010. Did rebound to 10-3 and 9-3. Is 8-10 so far at Tennessee.

• Michigan Ties: B+. Born in Saugatuck, played at Ferris State, and has coached at Ferris and CMU. Coached with Rich Rod at WVU.

• Recruiting: B+. Was okay at Cincinnati (but, Cincinnati), staying near the top but not at the top of the Big East. Has been dynamite at Tennessee so far, with the #5 class last year and currently ranked #5.

• Chances/Loyalty: C+. Hard to say. Butch is a Michigan guy, but he's at a top-tier program that's paying him about $3 million and might match any Michigan offer. No direct ties to U-M.

• Demeanor: A-. 46. No nonsense approach and knows how to play to fanbase. Answers questions at press conferences. Would fit at Michigan, IMO.

• Three Phases: B. Is an offensive guy, but hasn't gotten offense going at Tennessee. Defense has been a pleasant surprise under his watch so far.

• Roster Fit: B. More Brian Kelly than Rich Rod, Jones could be successful with a Shane Morris-type at QB. Needs more space players on offense.

• OVERALL GPA: 3.14 (B/B+). May have overrated him a bit. I feel he needs more time at Tennessee, but if he's interested in the job, I would definitely interview him.

Ruffin McNeill, HC East Carolina.

• Track Record: B+. I believe McNeil should get more credit. Has taken perennial overachiever ECU and turned them into a ranked team. Was part of Texas Tech's strong run as a defensive coach.

• Michigan Ties: F. There is nothing here.

• Recruiting: C+. Has not had great success at ECU...but, ECU. No idea how he'd fare at a top-tier program.

• Chances/Loyalty: C. NO ties to U-M or the midwest. Would be about the money and the chance to coach a big-time program. Is an ECU grad. Only making $400K.

• Demeanor: C+. Southern guy who is not a fast talker. Seems like an awesome southern uncle. Don't think he would be appreciated in A2. 56 years old.

• Three Phases: B+. Is a defensive guy, but ECU allowed over 30 pts/game until 2013. Has made steady improvement there and has now beaten some tougher opponents.

• Roster Fit: B-. Defensively, it's a fit. Offensively, spready-spread needs space players, which we don't have.

• OVERALL GPA: 2.29 (C+). McNeill seems like a really good football coach. Unfortunately, he has no ties to U-M, runs a completely different offense, and doesn't seem like a good cultural fit.

Kyle Whittingham, HC Utah.

• Track Record: B. Was 58-22 in the Mountain West with an undefeated season in 2008 including a Sugar Bowl victory over Nick Saban's 'Bama squad. Since the move to the Pac-12, however, is just 22-18 overall and 10-19 in conference.

• Michigan Ties: F. There is nothing here. Born in California and has always coached in the west.

• Recruiting: B. Has done a pretty good job recruiting high-3 star types; classes average around 2.90 on Rivals. Not bad for Utah.

• Chances/Loyalty: B-. NO ties to U-M or the midwest. Makes $2 million. If he's interested in running a big-time program, now is his chance (he's 54). I think he would take the chance if offered. Has been at Utah since 1994(!!!).

• Demeanor: B. Boring press conferences would play well at U-M, but I'd like something better, and I think the fanbase would, too. Known as a good motivator and tactician.

• Three Phases: B+. Is a defensive guy, but smart enough to find the right staff: new OC Dave Christensen's passing spread has catapulted Utah into one of the top scoring teams in the country. Would Christensen take the Utah job if Whittingham left?

• Roster Fit: B. Defensively, it's a fit. Offensively, passing spread could use more space players, but simple route combinations have made his lesser athletes look great.

• OVERALL GPA: 2.57 (B-/C+). If Whittingham brought his OC, or hired a proven one, this a hire I would support, though not be overjoyed with.

Part I: Jim Harbaugh, John Harbaugh, Les Miles, Todd Graham, Jim McElwain, Craig Bohl.

Part II: Dan Mullen, Mark Stoops.

I'd rather have Rutgers Schiano than Tampa Bay Schiano, thank you very much

More CC candidates for your perusal.

Greg Schiano, Unemployed

• Track Record: B. Schiano took over a pathetic Rutgers outfit and turned it into a decent program. Only won 3 games his first two seasons, and had a 4-8 blip in 2010. Did not go to a bowl until his fifth season. Did not do well against ranked competition. Only one double-digit win season. But, Rutgers. Also, his 11-21 record at Tampa Bay is...not great.

• Michigan Ties: B-. Born in New Jersey and went to Bucknell (central PA). Coached at Penn State, the Chicago Bears, Miami (YTM), and Rutgers. Clearly knows the footprint.

• Recruiting: B. Schiano did a very good job rebuilding Rutgers, but let's not pretend he was getting the best talent in the country there. But, Rutgers.

• Chances/Loyalty: B. Supposedly, Schiano has already said yes to Michigan (in 2007). Would he mean it this time? And would he go back to the NFL? Would probably stay awhile; was at Rutgers for 12 seasons.

• Demeanor: B. Somehow is still only 48 years old. Known as a highly-demanding, motivational coach. Described as detail-oriented.

• Three Phases: B-. Manball offense was never near the top of the country (peaked at 22 in 2006), but he is known for defense and his special teams at Rutgers were solid.

• Roster Fit: A. Schiano's offenses and defenses were similar in philosophy to the current regime, and should be able to excel with the current roster.

• OVERALL GPA: 3.05 (B). Schiano is an intriguing prospect. He should be able to have instant success with our current players, and he is a detail-oriented coach with a unique approach (uses soundbites to coach players). I would view him as a good hire, but not a homerun.

Gary Patterson, HC TCU

• Track Record: B. Patterson was very good in Conference USA, and he owned the Mountain West. The Big 12? Not so much. He's 7-13 there. Overall, though, he's still 124-45 has a head coach.

• Michigan Ties: D. Nothing here. Was the LB coach of Pittsburgh State in 1988...that's the closest he's gotten. Was born in Kansas and played college ball at K. State.

• Recruiting: B-. It's obvious he gets to most out of his talent, because he doesn't get that much. Yes, it's TCU, but it's also Texas. Plenty of great players in his neighborhood.

• Chances/Loyalty: C-. Does Patterson have any desire to coach anywhere but TCU? Having no ties to Michigan, would he stay?

• Demeanor: A-. Quality guy who speaks well. Would be a good fit at Michigan, IMO.

• Three Phases: B+. Defenses have been amazing, offenses have been good-to-very good, but not as much success in Big 12.

• Roster Fit: C+. Spready offense is paired with a 4-2-5 defense at TCU that uses three safeties, our shallowest position. Also, systems are based on speed, which we seem to lack.

• OVERALL GPA: 2.57 (B-). Patterson is a guy who has had some success but is just now starting to compete in a Power 5 conference. I don't see him coming to Michigan, and I'd be luke warm on the hire if he did.

For those of you who regularly come here looking for an unhinged diatribe against the powers that be, let me first apologize and recommend a different column. Thankfully, there isn’t really any of that here this week (ok maybe a sentence or two). I’ll preface by saying that I was away at an engineering convention last weekend and missed the second half of the Rutgers game, so perhaps my program ire/ennui wasn’t quite to the levels that many others here had attained. Either way, I found Saturday to be a welcome relief, not only that we won, but also from a general fan experience perspective. And this is compared to last year in particular, where the night game atmosphere mixed with general admission to produce one of the worst fan experiences I’ve had in the Big House (admittedly only until the opening kickoff).

Pregame: From the Football Student Advisory Council

The football student advisory council (or football SAC as some of their members call it) is a new initiative this year to get more student fan input on the program, the games, the department, etc. I have a few friends who are serving on it and so occasionally have the luxury of getting a feel for things yet to come (and occasionally can put that into print). After this week’s meeting, one of them commented that

“Anything and everything is on the table to fix this.”

“Where this means everything,” I replied.

“Yes.”

That includes lower student ticket prices, allowing bringing water into the stadium, etc. So despite the chaos of the last few weeks, it seems that the athletic department is listening. Whether, and how much, they’ll act on it obviously remains to be seen, but it seems reasonable to be at least guardedly optimistic. Hunter Lochmann, the AD’s Chief Marketing Officer observed that he has never seen Brandon like this—that he’s hurt, and that he wants to fix things. Will he be able to? I don’t know. But if *if* he does change course, if he does

• back away from the relentless commercialization of the football experience,
•  lower ticket prices, 
• fix the “little things” like allowing people to bring water bottles in,
• work to change the culture from a client-provider model to a more family/community model,
• back off from allegedly micromanaging aspects of the football program,
• stop screwing around with seating policies, gimmicks, and promotions,
• apologize for the way concussion-gate was handled and commit to being more forthcoming, and less legalese-y in the future, and in short
• work to bring back the fan experience that made the Big House what it was for decades;

then I won’t be crushed if he stays. Do I think he’ll be able to, or even willing? Not yet. But I’m not out for blood, I’m not a mean, vindictive blogger. I’m just a flawed, frustrated human being—as, I imagine, is Dave Brandon. And I’m not above forgiving someone who screwed up majorly, as long as they acknowledge the shortcoming and work to correct it moving forward. I can’t, and won’t, take my name off the petition; but for me this is about the issues, not the person. And if the issues get fixed, then the person can stay.

Pregame: MGoTailgate

I was explaining the above thought process to a friend as we walked to the MGoTailgate, which was a great tailgate experience and well worth the encouraged donation. He asked if I thought that allowing the purchase of beer in the stadium (as had been done for the Winter Classic and soccer match) would go over well with the students. My honest answer was (and remains) “no”. In the absence of fixing the real issues, I think that students would (possibly rightly) view it as pandering, and many would balk at the implication that students will be happy as long as they have enough to drink, actually issues be damned. This line of thinking was reasonably confirmed when I got to the stadium, which brings us to

The Stadium: Night Game Edition

Walking in the first thing I observed was that the event staff seemed to have a different air about them. Rather than getting hassled about the cowbell (which, mea culpa mea culpa, is likely still in the stadium) they seemed to be encouraging it. Further, they seemed genuinely interested in the signed photo I had with me because I had no place to put it prior to the game starting, and at least one was aware of the tailgate and expressed his desire to have been there.

The next thing was easily the most shocking. They were giving out free water bottles to students entering the stadium. Yes. Free. So maybe I can start crossing items off that list above already. Here’s hoping. Many students, however, were less enthused than I. Once in the student section, the pre-game featured (by my count) one “Fire Brandon” cheer and many students criticizing Brandon’s attempts to “buy them off” with “two dollar water” after paying as much as they did for season tickets. So yes, I think that many small steps may be viewed as pandering at least initially. That doesn’t mean that the department should give up on these small steps. There’s just a lot of damage to heal, which will take some time and a continued effort.

I’m reminded of the department’s response to the chaos of the night game last year: they handed out seat tickets when you checked into the stadium so that there wouldn’t be a mad rush to the seats. The problem: they did this for the Akron game, saw it wasn’t necessary (for the Akron game) and abandoned it going forward (where it may have been beneficial). I’m worried that we may repeat that with things like the water, which in isolation was very much appreciated. By itself or one-time-only, however, it won’t do much to fix all the damage that has been done.

Apart from that, the only thing worth mentioning was the occasional drunk student trying to get a “Fire Brandon” cheer started when we had the opportunity to force a safety (no, not that safety), who claimed that his 5 years here (everyone together now “get off my lawn”) made him the expert on the damage Brandon has done. But yeah, Zazu is right—there is one in every family, including the Michigan family. And there’s not a whole lot to be done except perhaps…

[Author’s Note: No, I’m not actually encouraging that. MGoBlog isn’t encouraging that. Nobody is encouraging that.]

Overall, from a fan experience standpoint, this was one of the more enjoyable games I’ve had here (though I have to admit, Norfleet was a huge part of that). Are the underlying problems gone? No. But it’s still a welcome relief to know that I can still go and support the players without enduring something that makes me wonder if it’s worth it. And at this point, that’s really all I ask.

[EDIT:4pm 13 Oct.] In my haste to get this out I overlooked one great occurence. 

Before kickoff we were doing our usual "get the attention of any borderline famous person that happened to walk by" routine. One of these people was Regent Bernstein, who not only acknowledged our yelling at him but stopped to talk to us and was incredibly personable. After a bit of chatting we jokingly said that he should come join us in the student section. He replied "There's plenty of room" so quickly that we didn't immediately get the insinuation that had been made, but yes I do believe that the Regents (or at least Regent Bernstein) get it.

Alum 65 asked what did we do to the injury gods.  I was thinking the same thing as it seemed like a lot, but then I asked myself how it compares to other schools.  Some Internet searches convinced me that reporting was too inconsistent across schools to have a good, comparable measure.  Plus, it was really time consuming.

The table below presents an imperfect measure of starts lost.  Michigan appears second to Maryland in terms of injuries in the Big 10.

For each player on the team that records at least one start in the NCAA database, the table sums up the number of games played according to the same database less the number of games the team played.  So, for instance, Michigan has played seven games.  Jehu Chesson started at least one game (four actually, which doesn’t matter) and has played in six.  So, he contributes 1 to Michigan’s total.  Kyle Kalis started only three games, but because he has played all seven he doesn’t contribute to the measure.  The theory is that if a player has started at least one game, he probably plays in all the games even if he doesn’t start unless he is injured or suspended.  You can’t just take everyone on the roster and calculate how many games weren’t played because you’ll end up just with an estimate of how coach’s play their benches and how many blowouts there were.

The one adjustment I made to the count was that I treated quarterbacks differently.  If a starter is replaced, he may not be hurt but not play in the game.  Moreover, if you end up starting a second-string QB in one game, you’ll end up treating him as hurt in all the other games that he may not have played.  Shane Morris is such an example, as he started against Minnesota, but did not play against Notre Dame when he wasn’t hurt.  So, he otherwise would have been counted as injured for Notre Dame had I not just excluded second-string quarterbacks.  I did go back and add in any games not played by obvious 1^st string quarterbacks.  Rudock, Leidner, and Lunt missed games due to injury, while it doesn’t appear that Etling, who missed two games, was hurt.  (The theory is that reporting on starting quarterbacks is good enough across teams.)  I didn’t add back in an injury for Morris for the Penn State game, which he probably should be counted, just like I didn’t do any comparable searches for other second-string quarterbacks who may be injured.

It’s useful to acknowledge all of the other imperfections in this measure.

• It includes suspensions, so Glasgow adds one to Michigan.
• It doesn’t include obvious starters lost for the entire year before the season started, such as Braxton Miller.  Note that Noah Spence also doesn’t show up, as although he played in one game, he didn’t start in that game.
• It doesn’t include injuries to important people on special teams or important backups that in a perfect world would be counted. 
• No adjustments are made for how good the player was that was lost.  Nor does it weigh injuries if for instance they occur in the same area, which may compound the damage.
• No allowances are made for guys who play in some games but are obviously not 100% (Jake Butt?).
• Teams that have instability in their starting lineups will have a bigger pool to have a chance to show up as injured. 

The advantage is that it doesn’t depend on a detailed knowledge of the teams, which might then be biased as I at least know more about some teams more than others.