"I love it that Ivy League coaches are coming to our camp and Big Ten coaches are coming to our camp. South Florida is coming. We've got about 70 schools that are coming to our camp."
In the updated bowl projections, ESPN has Michigan playing Texas in the Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl in Tempe by one guy. And in the Outback Bowl in Tampa against Georgia.
Jerry Palm of CBS Sports has Michigan in the Outback Bowl against Georgia as well.
A game against Texas would be cool but that would mean Michigan would have an even worse record than they do now.
First, let's get this out of the way. This is NOT a thread about getting rid of a coach. I hope most of you are not like that idiot who called for firing DL coaches (think about that one). I hope Mattison stays as long as possible and enjoys good health. So, if you want to spew about who should be replaced with who, go elsewhere, there are plenty of threads about that.
What I want to talk about is why Mattison is so averse to pressuring bad QB's.
Is it because of the time he spent in NFL where there are many quarterbacks who will carve up the blitzes? Rushing four is definitely the main tools of the best D's in NFL (Seattle, Baltimore, etc.). But is it really necessary in college?
College QB's are not like NFL QB's. Even very good college QB's do not handle pressure well (see Devin), let alone poor ones like Hackenberg (still a freshman) and Cook. But it seems like we are determined to give them as much time as possible and let them be comfortable in the pocket with ever increasing percentage of completions as the game goes on and they gain confidence.
I just don't get it. You can see how much havoc pressure can cause (see MSU). We are very effective when we blitz (I have numbers). I understand rushing only four is preferred, but why keep doing it when it is not working?
I'll just leave this at statistics alone:
|Coach||Seasons||Games with no TD||vs MSU/osu|
|Schembechler||21||6 of 247 (2.4%)||.667 (28-13-1)|
|Moeller||5||1 of 60 (1.7%)||.600 (6-3-1)|
|Carr||13||4 of 162 (2.5%)||.615 (16-10)|
|Rodriguez||3||0 of 37 (0.0%)||.000 (0-6)|
|Hoke||2+||4 of 34 (11.7%)||.400 (2-3)|
This actually doesn't paint the full picture, as Hoke's team scored a TD in his first 16 games.
They've failed to score a TD in 4 of their past 18 games (2012 ND, MSU, NEB, 2013 MSU)
There's been much talk about the game plan yesterday, how poor the offensive line is, lack of development of young players, and general wailing and gnashing of teeth. But as I think about things this morning, those concerns, while legitimate, don't strike me as being as concerning as this: Brady Hoke came here and laid out his mission for the team many times, which was to be as "physical" as possible, and to restore that tough Michigan standard of play. This is what the entire "manball" theme is about.
When he arrived three years ago, no one expected Hoke to out-scheme people offensively. I don't think anyone expected we would out-scheme anyone at all. We all knew that the offensive system would be a hybrid, and everyone that read Borges' resume three years ago wouldn't have been iunder any impression that we would have a dynamic offense. So my expectations for Hoke are tempered by IMO his lack of knowledge of offensive football, which is why he delegates so much to his OC.
But one thing that Hoke has entirely under his control is the physical nature of the team. That is a culture that is set by the head coach, and can often be affected before talent even develops or arrives--it is not dependent on talent. And his self described mission is to have Michigan be the most physical team out there. Yet we got beat up yesterday, just as we did two years ago, and that was not the first or second time that has happened. Three years in now, and do we see progress in getting to the core of what Brady Hoke wants this team to be? Perhaps I'm wrong, but that to me seems the largest concern about the head coach this morning.
Just want to know how the MGoUsers coped with losses over the past 2.5 years of the Hoke tenure. Don't know if anybody discussed this recently. For me, I never drink after a loss because the hangover the next day will make me feel much worse.
2011 MSU: Packed stuff all day on Sunday because I had to move to a new apartment on the Purdue weekend. Also cursed Borges for 1,200 times.
2011 Iowa: Took a stroll to North Campus after taking wife to Briarwood.
2012 Alabama: Can't remember. Probably watched three movies at home or something.
2012 Notre Dame: Was in DC with wife. Watched the game in Tommy Joe's. Went to a museum on Sunday. Still fuming on Monday.
2012 Nebraska: Can't remember. Plain and simple.
2012 Ohio State: Went to Knight's Ann Arbor and ate a ton of food.
2012 SC: Strangely not upset at all.
2013 Penn State: Was in Northern Michigan for the fall color. Trekked about 10 mi on Sunday.
2013 MSU: Probably go sit at the Diag for three hours this afternoon.
By the way, I think yesterday should definitely be included in next year's Ultimate Ennui Contest, if there is one.
(This is actually my first topic started.)