Hoke was top notch at this aspect of his job.
Terrelle Pryor heisman Tate Forcier
Admitted bias given here.... but you take a look at these numbers:
Player A: 36/53 passing 419 yds 5 tds 1 int and 24 rush 107 yds 1 td thru 2 games with a 2-0 record
Player B: 29/52 passing 480 yds 4 tds 0 int and 28 rush 130 yds 1 td thru 2 games with a 2-0 record
Who are they? One is a Heisman "front-runner" and the other a 1st year QB on a talent deficient team. A = 2009 Tate Forcier; B = (obviously) 2010 Terelle Pryor
I just don't get the TP Heisman movement (obviously a part of some large scale Columbus men in sweater vests propaganda thing...). I get that he's a worthwhile talent. I don't get the Vince Young comparions, nor the idea he's good enough for Heisman. The talent around him seems to make up for too many "rough" parts of his game.
I'm not saying anyone in particular at Michigan is Heisman worthy (yet), nor do I have some "Tate" agenda (just used as an example). However, I don't get how TP is so highly thought of, when his numbers are NOT consistently (all year 2009 for example) any better than they are.