in town for free camps
Whatever a 'Michigan Man' is, this guy isn't it.
While there is much worry about what direction the offense is going to go(rightfully so). I have no idea what will happen, but I do know the Pistol allows for power running and you can utilize the quarterback in the run game. Maybe this could be the hybrid bridge that will allow our coaches philosophy and our current talent shine at the same time.
This actually spawned from a response to one of the earlier posts, but I wanted to give it a little more space to breathe. Up front, I'm an RR supporter who felt he was shafted, but I'm cautiously optimistic about Hoke being a decent guy down the line. Also, I will admit to disagreeing with people who attacked RR in years past, though only if their comments lacked substance and were merely seeking a reaction.
For all the people complaining about how Brian's take is going to "alienate" visitors to this site because of his negativity toward the Hoke signing, I counter that the blind devotion I'm seeing about Hoke from everyone is turning me off a bit. The guy was a meh choice that may very well work out, but saying all this "but he loves UM" crap doesn't hide the fact that he is a risky hire and brings into question Brandon's handling of this situation.
And for all the people trumpetting Hoke wanting to be here as some major point in his favor, do you honestly think RR didn't want to be here as well? The guy has been busting his ass for 3 years here under near-constant scrutiny from local and national media personalities, from a faction of the fanbase that hated him from the moment he was hired, and who had to revamp a team that was dangerously shallow in depth at various positions. He suffered through the same losing streaks everyone else did, and this is from a guy who won over 100 CFB before he came to UM. He recruited reasonably well, brought an innovative offense to the school, groomed the B1G offensive POY, and honestly was making strides on offense. Sure his defenses sucked and he made some dumb mistakes, but every coach in America has his flaws, and RR just kept plugging along and tried to fix them. Whether or not you agree with the measures he took to address them, the guy is a good coach and was doing the best he could.
He wanted to be here as much as anyone, but Brandon decided he needed to go so the change was made. He didn't leave UM - UM kicked him out. So stop it with the argument that RR didn't care about being here - I'm certain he wanted it to work out, and is probably pretty beat up that it didn't. He deserved better than this, even if it meant being let go weeks ago.
As for Hoke, I'm very happy that he is excited to be here - after Harbaugh and Miles thumbed their noses at the school, it is reassuring to know that somebody out there wanted to coach this team. But wanting something really, really bad doesn't mean this was a great hire on paper, or promises future success down the line. When RR was hired, people questioned whether or not a guy with a somewhat-limited coaching resume at smaller schools (and yes, people crapped on the BE since it was created) could step in and succeed at a competitive school like UM in the B1G. But now with Hoke, a guy with even less experience and a less impressive record at "worse" programs than RR, any comments about how this is a risky choice are labelled as flippant and caustic because the guy really cares about the school and "since he's the head coach, you have to support him." It is this hypocrisy that drives me crazy, even if it is human nature (and something I'm as guilty of as anyone else).
Listen, there are many reasons to be happy with Hoke: the guy has coached in the B1G before, he seems more offensively adventurous compared to other Carr disciples, his most recent track record shows a coach on the rise (even though the Ball St. season was definitely a fluke), he sounds like a good recruiter who has connections in talent-rich California, and he will bring a focus on defense that has been missing the past few years. But implicitly devaluaing RR's dedication by saying Hoke is dedicated to the program isn't fair to either them or the discourse that needs to happen.
On WTKA this morning Webb asked Hoke about Denard and Hoke had this to say.
"I've seen enough of him to know that he can be the quarterback of the Wolverines."
Rejoice!? I hope.
He also talked alot about how he will adjust his style to the personnel. This is all starting to sound like the transition might not be as rough as some of us feared.
Stephon Diggs just won MVP honors at the Army combine.
He is teammates with Countess and I believe that Countess said he would work hard to get him here.
He only mentioned Michigan once and we don't seem to be in his top picks but we have over a year to show him what Michigan will be.
There obviously has been a lot of talk about keeping Denard here. Coach Hoke stated in the press conference that he believes in doing what's best for the team, and that means putting your best players in a position to be successful. One could easily infer that means that he will put Denard at QB and run a spread offense. Coach Hoke followed that by saying that usually means doing what's best for the player.
What if, however, he believes that putting Denard in the best position to be successful means he could be most successful at WR or RB? What if Coach thinks what's best for Denard is to play a position other than QB b/c he won't play QB in the NFL?
We can only go by what we know. The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior. Coach Hoke's teams have never run the spread, nor has OC Al Borges ever run it. As a former coach I can tell you that your best chance of success is to coach what you know. Since they a) don't like the spread and b) don't know it, I'm guessing that you won't see us running a spread offense.
The only way you'll see us running spread option is if the entire new offensive staff goes and visits with someone who runs it well. In my opinion, that leaves three options:
- Chip Kelly
- Urban Meyer
- Rich Rodriguez
First, we know that Coach Hoke despises an offense based on the outside zone (aka Stretch). (Boy, he must have hated watching his own offense during his time as DL coach at Michigan.) That would eliminate options 1 and 3. Besides, there's no way the new staff would go to the old staff and say, "Can you teach us your offense, please?" That would leave them with visiting Urban Meyer.
It would be a nice fit. First, he's unemployed, so he could actually come here and be a consultant, if you will. Second, he believes in inside zone and gap schemes like power, counter trey, and iso.
Inside zone is still zone blocking, but it's not about reaching the outside shoulder. It's basically the playside tackle base blocking the DE while the rest of the OL works combo blocks. The objective is to get vertical push on the DL, then come off to LBs working downhill--let them come to you. The RB is a downhill runner and he gets one cut into the hole. The hole isn't pre-determined, but the cut into that hole happens (in theory) at the LOS or on the defense's side of it. In outside zone, that decision (or cut) happens in the offensive backfield.
Regardless, I don't think you'll see Michigan in a spread option offense, and I believe it would be in Denard's best interests to transfer to Oregon.