Okay, okay, so we've heard a lot of talk that Hoke is 99.99% not likely to be back next year. We've heard people try to defend him even when they want him gone. We've seen apologists and defenders. 95% of Michigan fans probably want to see him gone.
What we haven't seen, regrettably, is a post about delicous food from MMMgoBBQ or timely UFRS*, so let us pass time by arguing about stupid things:
There are also rumblings that Schissel is more interested in graduation rates than on-field success. So let us pretend, here, that to the delight of very few Hoke is retained for the 2015 season.
What do you do then? Cancel your tickets? Bring out your pitchforks (likely you still are weilding them)? Does it make you "less of a fan" if you decide to "take a season off."
I am in a minority that would probably do nothing different: still attend any game I can afford the time to, and watch every game not interupted by (stupid) friend's weddings.
*UFRs are like crack to me, they are the reason I keep coming back here even when I don't agree with "the agenda"
EDIT: I'm a stupid person, and bye weeks usually mean late UFRs. Just give me that crack
I was reading the article from Pat Forde on the Coaching Carousel and as he described Stoops, I started to think about the age of championship coaches. Stoops won his title at OU in 2000 at the age of 40. Forde described how Stoops (and Ferentz) aren't living up to the standard they set for themselves earlier in their career. As we embark on a coaching search in the next month or so, should the AD consider a candidate's age (not in a discriminatory kind of way, though)? In the last 20 years, 15 of the 22 title holders accomplished the feat by age 54, 3 in their late 50s (55-59), 3 in their 60s, 1 in their 70s.
The 22 coaches and their age
13 - Fisher - 48
12 - Saban - 62
11 - Saban 61
10 - Chizik - 49
09 - Saban - 59
08 - Meyer - 44
07 - Miles - 54
06 - Meyer - 42
05 - Brown - 53
04 - Carroll - 53
03 - Saban - 53 / Carroll - 52
02 - Happy Easter !! - 50
01 - Coker - 53
00 - Stoops - 40
99 - FSU - Bowden - 70
98 - Fulmer - 48
97 - Lloyd - 52 / Osborne - 60
96 - Spurrier - 51
95 - Osborn - 58
94 - Osborn - 57
For some reason I woke up this morning completely pissed at the job Hoke has done. I know. I know. Most of you live in that anger daily. I like Hoke and I want him to succeed, but, man... sometimes. (I have acknowledged he should be fired since the Utah game.)
Anyway, I want to think a little about the Harbaugh possibility. Here are some "reasonable" assumptions:
1. Jim Harbaugh will not be back at SF next year, regardless of their outcome.
2. Other NFL teams are the biggest threat to Michigan landing Harbaugh.
But, which NFL spots are a "serious threat" and how can those change over the course of the year?
Who should are the most concerning team I root for or against on Sundays?
Oakland. Obviously they are looking for a coach. Big advantage is that Jim and his family would not have to move. However, they are HORRIBLE. I say we would want them to continue being horrible. If they finished out the season strong, they could possibly become a factor.
Chicago. Probably going to be looking for a coach and a traditionally good franchise. They either need to finish so strong they keep their coach or fall off in an Oakland way.
Other than that, I couldn't really see Harbaugh taking another NFL gig that is likely to be open, unless he was just dead-set on staying in the NFL. Remember his previous decision to join SF came down to college or SF. He eliminated the Dolphins who offered him a lot more cash. Plus, the way he WON in SF, but still did not get along with the management leads me to believe other NFL teams MIGHT be a little cautious about hiring him. (Unless the also offered him the GM position?)
Any other teams I should keep an eye on?
remarks about collegiate athletics. Not sure he will help our cause to get a new AD quickly or replace Hoke. This may embolden Schlissel to sit tight and give Hackett and Hoke at least another year.
I thought we might take a moment here to look at a few differentials that normally get tracked (well, I normally track them because I am odd like this) and how they trend with scoring margin in games. We did this last year, of course, and for someone reason I called it “point differential” because I was on a roll with the word “differential” and I grew too lazy to change it. Anyway, it’s scoring margin.
First, we’ll look at yards per play, that differential and scoring margin. You’ll be pleased to know that we do in fact, on average, outgain our opponents this year despite everything that you have seen and the ugliness of some of it. By how much? The average is all of 0.76 yards, or about 27 inches per game, so we have this going for us. The average scoring margin, which will be the same in all three charts you’ll see anyway, is 0.3 points. By the slimmest of average margins, we somehow find a way to barely win half the time in 2014, if you will.
So, with two games to go and every opportunity for what I just mentioned to be completely untrue by the end of the month, here’s where we stand with this data:
Much like last year, the worst individual performance for yards per play differentials was against Michigan State, except that this year’s number is worse than last year’s – it was -2.62 last year, and we slowed down by nearly a yard this year. Overall, you can see that the two sets of data have a decent relationship though.
Before I introduce third down differentials, let me say that a most #B1G thing happened to us on Saturday in that ever so hideous win. We were, in fact, 41.67% LESS successful than Northwestern on converting third downs, so this is a metric where your worst individual performance in the season to date can still work out for you somehow. The average differential for the season to date on third downs is 1.20%, so we’re barely winning this one typically as well.
Here’s how that and scoring margin look together:
The relationship isn’t quite as strong as yards per play perhaps, but it is there. If you want an R-squared value for this, it is actually 0.668 (sample size…grumble grumble, of course), which is not too bad for all of the confounding factors of a football game.
With first down differentials, we find something similar to third down. On average, we manage to get 52% of the total first downs in a game, so by the slimmest of margins again, we come out ahead here. I keep saying that in this diary – I should qualify it by saying also that there are perhaps 2-3 games which are responsible for these averages looking like they do, but this is normal in most seasons, it seems.
Anyway, here’s the first down differential charted against scoring margin:
For kicks, the R-squared on this is 0.653, so as I said, very similar to third downs.