Hoke vs. Beilein Parallels
Hoops season starts soon and we're all very excited about that. John Beilein is a genius! We're ranked #7! We're coming off a Final Four! OMG Shirtless Sophomores! We have good reason to be upset about yesterday, and the overall play of our 6-2 team but I personally believe in the big picture. "Fire Hoke" and drawing negative conclusions about his regime's trajectory is unwise at this juncture. Allow me to describe -- using parallels to our current hoops coach who is figuratively walking on water in AA these days.
Beilein was hired in 2007 to replace a "sexy" name who didn't get the job done. Nobody was really excited about the hire because we struck out on Pitino [EDIT: Pitino was 2001. In any case, Beilein wasn't a super exciting hire with his "White Guy" reputation and preverbial "ceiling"]. Hoke, 2011, and Harbaugh and it's the same. Beilein had to re-recruit Harris and Sims and we struggled to a 10-22 record. His second year was charmed and we overacheived to an NCAA Tournament win. Hoke had to re-recruit Denard and others and we overachieved to a Sugar Bowl win. At this juncture, Hoke is ahead of schedule. Both coaches/teams fell back down to earth in the following season and fans are rightfully disappointed.
In Beilein's following season (2010-11), we started 1-6 in Big Ten play before the light went on and we upset MSU in East Lansing. It's been a consistent increase in production ever since. This isn't Hollywood so the parallels aren't perfect (we got smoked yesterday and Lewan didn't have an anueysm of leadership), but we're 6-2 and have some opportunities to wake up. In any case, we're still a year ahead of schedule according to the "Blueprint to BUILDING a Program" by John Beilein.
Now, Beilein made some coaching changes (Hello: Jordan, Meyer, and Alexander) that helped him out. I'm not saying Hoke does or doesn't need to make a few changes, but we're still figuratively playing with a couple Novak's and Douglass' at some skill positions, but while others (like the guards) have Darius Morris talent before the transformation.
The worst thing Hoke could have done was apparently expidite expectations with the Sugar Bowl. Have some perspective; remember Beilein's long road. We're recruiting better than ever. He's united the alumni and we love how he does things the "Michigan way". We've enjoyed some success on the field and I promise we'll get to play MSU (1-2 isn't ideal, but better than 0-3), OSU (1-1), and ND (2-1) again.
My opinion is that we should continue to support Michigan. We're obviously not where we want to be, but these things take some time. Tough to coach ourselves to a win when the interior O-Line literally gets crushed within 1 second on every play.
Should this be a diary? Is this too long? Are my paragraphs not up to the "MGoBlog Pulitzer standard?" Who cares. Step away from the cliff, anxious Michigan fans. The last time we gathered our pitchforks coaches negative recruited the hell out of our coaching stability and we got a Josh Groban appearance we'd all like to forget.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:50 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:41 PM ^
I'm not shocked- all he has to do at HU is out recruit the Ivies and we's done that. He couldn't succeed at M b/c he couldn't out recruit anyone with the program and facilities in the shape they were in and he couldn't develop/maximize the talent he did have. He's a coach who can only out-recruit you and at the highest levels of the sport, he can't do that.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:44 PM ^
You're right.
In any case, I think that many Michigan fans weren't terribly excited about the idea of a coach who "didn't like his players dunking." Not that there were many Michigan Basketball fans at that time in the first place. I was cool with the hire.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:49 PM ^
I do remember that insider guys like Dotman and DetroitBry were really down on the Beilein hire at first. They figured he'd never recruit high-level guys, apparently.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:57 PM ^
I think the difference with Hoke is how former players and alumn rallied around him at his pressed as a "Michigan man" who was going to turn the program around. Expectations were set, fairly or not.
With Beilein, the program had stunk for so long, they just wanted some incremental improvement, maybe some tourney berths.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:49 PM ^
Basketball, more than anything else, is about talent. 15 guys. Beilein also has a great reputation as an X's and O's coach. Hoke does not.
Borges is inept and Hoke has shown nothing but unwavering trust (not that he shouldn't. You don't shit on your assistant in the middle of the season) to the most failure-ridden portion of the team. He also doesn't wear a headset. When does he? When the team is trying to mount a late fourth quarter comeback. Shouldn't he treat the entire game with that kind of urgency? Have you seen our two minute offense?
Hoke is a bumbling company man with a product that sells itself. He's also a proponent of dinosaur offense.
Please hire someone from Oregon.
The game has changed.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:50 PM ^
I imply that it might be wise for him to evaluate the way he's doing things. Like Beilein did with his assistant coaches, maybe Hoke can put on a headset (or a sweatshirt). Maybe we make a coaching move or two. Maybe not.
Also your talent comment doesn't really help your argument. Are you saying that Novak, Douglass, Meritt, Lee, and a young Jordan Morgan helped Beilein expedite "the process?" I agree that he's a great X and O coach. Might be too early to say if Hoke is or isn't. Tough to run a play in less than a second. We aren't capable of half of the things he wants to do. More spread right now maybe? But how much will that really do?
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:02 PM ^
Here's the difference:
Hoke is losing games against less talented teams.
Beilein won games against more talented teams.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:23 PM ^
You can't possibly say that MSU of today is less talented than we are, today. PSU? I guess, maybe. But their cupboard isn't bare yet. Just no depth. Beyond that who have we lost to that is less talented? South Carolina, OSU, Notre Dame, and Nebraska last year? MSU in year one? Oh, you're probably referencing Alabama. Those guys suck.
I respectfully disagree. I actually think Hoke has done a good job of not losing games we're supposed to win. We're undefeated at home. However, he hasn't done a good job of winning games we need to win in order to reach the next level. Not surprisingly for young and/or talent deficient teams, ALL of these losses have been road or neutral.
November 4th, 2013 at 9:46 AM ^
FIrst of all, the only teams that Michigan has lost to who are obviously worse is Iowa and Penn State, though PSU's talent is still fairly high despite having no depth. Maybe you could lump Nebraska in that from last year, but it's hard to when you're talking about a game where we lost Denard and were forced to play Bellomy. And Nebraska has similar talent levels anyway, so you really can't put that on the list.
That's two games so far. Unless you think somehow MSU is a bad, talentless team? You cannot possibly. They have an NFL-caliber veteran defense over there. Their talent has been higher than normal under Dantonio too.
November 3rd, 2013 at 8:06 PM ^
The Novak and Douglass contributions were undeniable. However in basketball, it is a lot more common than football to get big contributions from underclassmen. In 2010-11, a sophomore Darius Morris was a huge part of that tournament run. And last year of course, a sophomore Trey Burke (along with several freshmen) were instrumental to the team's success.
In basketball, the top prospects are often ready to go right to the NBA after a year or two of college. Football is of course very different in that respect - so although Hoke has been recruiting well, that is not going to immediately translate to on-field success.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:50 PM ^
"The game has changed."
The folks down at the University of Alabama would like a word with you....
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:53 PM ^
I'd love to have a word with you, but you're not wearing a headset and there's only three seconds left on the playclock.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:00 PM ^
You can win a title with any offense: spread, pro-style, triple option, air raid, whatever. It just takes the right coaches, players and personnel. Suffice it to say that Nick Saban is the definition of the right coach.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:04 PM ^
Of course you can. I agree with you. Most any offense will work.
Pro style, spread, air raid--these things are all independent of pace and playcalling. Hoke's teams huddle, don't have a wide audible base, and Borges' formations tip the call. I wouldn't care if we ran the flexbone as long as the offense was set with twenty seconds left on the play clock instead of five.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:05 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:35 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 5:06 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:08 PM ^
November 4th, 2013 at 10:33 AM ^
But something innovative. The 49ers have a tough defense and a power running attack, but they are NOT a "3 yards and a cloud of dust" team. They are a constantly shfiting, extremely innovative group that blends so many different ways to attack together. And it hasn't hurt their defense one bit. That's what Michigan should strive for.
Brady Hoke seems to think that toughness can mitigate any lack of creativity offensively. Maybe there's something to it. But (especially the last two years) Michigan has been neither tough nor innovative and it has cost them dearly.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:44 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:51 PM ^
Good points but only if Hoke does a critical analysis and figures out if he has the right people on the bus and, if not, spend some political capital and get Brandon to hire top notch assistants for the position groups that may need them (probably OL, maybe RB, maybe OC).
Also, Beilein has always been considered to be one of the top x's and o's coach in the game. Hoke has recently been questioned in this regard. I'm not sure if Hoke is a tactician or not but again Beilein has always been regarded as such. The concern to start was that he wouldn't be able to recruit. Through superior talent evaluation (I mean Trey Burke wow) and eventually landing some studs Beilein has answered the bell for not just x's and o's but also talent acquisition and development.
One thing to note is that Beilein has not been known for defense but that is where LaVall Jordan, who comes from the defensive tradition of Butler, comes into play.
I do agree with your larger points but hopefully Hoke is a greater tactician then many on this board have made him out to be. At least Brian has been positive about Hoke's decisions to go for it or not and game theory.
November 4th, 2013 at 10:34 AM ^
"One thing to note is that Beilein has not been known for defense but that is where LaVall Jordan, who comes from the defensive tradition of Butler, comes into play."
Now replace Beilein with Hoke and Jordan with Borges and the statement becomes laughable.
Hoke needs to (at the least) find a new OC
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:57 PM ^
Be better so let's not worry about the now because someday we will be better. Whatever you have to tell yourself!!
November 4th, 2013 at 1:29 PM ^
Also, based on your response you seem sort of miserable. Smile sometime. It's just a game.
November 3rd, 2013 at 3:58 PM ^
Hah - I just finished (I guess) another post asking this question...
http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/did-we-just-watch-turning-point-game-hoke-era?page=5#comment-2245435
Thanks for the optimism, OP - here's hoping you're right...
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:07 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:23 PM ^
The comparison to Beilein is not a good one, I think. Thoughout his career Beilein scored upsets. Brian always talks about his great tournament record. In ten years of coaching Hoke has 3 top 20 wins, two at home (Nebraska and ND) and one in the Sugar Bowl. Before coming to Michigan he had never finished the season ranked. If you extend it to the top 25, he beat Air Force at SDSU, also at home. I love the guy's attitude and how much he loves Michigan, but he's nowhere near Beilein in terms of accomplishment prior to coming to UM.
I made the point that he's like Amaker on another thread, but I'd kind of like to build out the thought process a little more because I see a lot of similarities in the situation. Here they are:
Hoke and Amaker were both second choices after striking out on a big name and both guys were hired because of what they did off the field/court as much as what they did on it.
Hoke and Amaker were hired because of who they had served as assistants under, not because of their records. Amaker was coming off 16-15 season. Hoke was coming off a 9-4 season. They both had one good season in their career before coming to Michigan, but it wasn't the season before they came to Ann Arbor.
Both are recruiters more than Xs and Os types of guys.
Both had a decent season early off, but there were always signs that they'd not take off. Amaker could never get that big win. Hoke has one road win against a winning team in 3 years.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:28 PM ^
Can't poke any holes in this one. Although that conclusion can only be drawn if/when his tenure is over. Amaker got 6 years. Hoke is in year 3. I think what he's achieved to this point at Michigan a better parallel to Beilein, but you do have good points about his resume being closer to Amaker. Maybe he'll end up with a Michigan career closer to Amaker. His M trajectory could be rising or flatlining. Let's re-evaluate in three more years.
November 3rd, 2013 at 8:13 PM ^
under Hoke sort of makes me depressed.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:40 PM ^
They both had one good season in their career before coming to Michigan, but it wasn't the season before they came to Ann Arbor.I don't agree with this. SDSU was 2-10 in 2008. In 2010, Hoke went 9-4 with them, a pretty dramatic turnaround. How would that not be a good season?
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:57 PM ^
I guess. Sure. SDSU typically is a 500 team in conference, they went 5-3 that year.
I should have said, the season in which they made their name.
November 3rd, 2013 at 5:25 PM ^
SDSU was awful the decade before Hoke got there. They hadn't been to a bowl since 1998. Again, they were 2-10 the year before his arrival.
November 3rd, 2013 at 6:35 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 8:44 PM ^
1 at SDSU.
Urban Meyer took a 2 win BGSU team to 8 wins and then 9 wins in his two MAC seasons.
Jerry Kill took a 2 win NIU team to three straight bowl games and a MAC championship.
Tim Beckman took a 3-win Toledo and in three seasons they played in two MAC championship games.
Darrell Hazell took a Kent State team with 5 wins for three or four straight years to an undefeated MAC championship and a number 25 ranking in two years.
Hoke took 5 years to get to 7-6 and then to 12-1, no MAC championships. I'm not saying that I'd rather have those guys, but what Hoke did at Ball State isn't some sort of amazing feat. Good coaches in the MAC do that all the time.
November 4th, 2013 at 7:49 AM ^
You left off another 'key" B1G coach: Mark Dantonio
Dantonio's record as a coach:
3 Seasons at Cincinatti = 7-5, 4-7, 7-5
First 3 seasons at MSU = 7-6, 9-4, 6-7
Next 3 seasons at MSU = 11-2, 11-3, 7-6
I'd hardly say that Dantonio had a stellar record before getting the MSU job - that's 3 years of mediocrity in CUSA/Big East.
He too had a "break-out season" except his was in year 2 rather than Hoke's year 1. The pinnacle was not reached until Year 4 and Year 5 - with a regression last year.
I'm not satisfied with what I have seen this year, but I also realize that UofM was/is in a unique situation going from Pro-style to spread and back to Pro-style. it's going to take more than 3 years - we only need to look at the Rich Rod years to realize that.
It kind of has me wishing the 2011 season hadn't gone so well. Had we gone 7-5/8-4 that year, would we all really be complaining so much? Probably not.
November 4th, 2013 at 5:28 AM ^
I see very few parallels to Beilein. JB was a guy whom other coaches would rave about. Even Bobby Knight said wonderful positive things about him. He is known as a superb tactician and innovator on offense, and (amazingly) has adjusted defensively to the Big Ten (remember that old zone he used to run?).
I see nothing in Hoke (yet) that seems at all like this.
This doesn't mean we shouldn't wait a couple more (long) years to do the judging - we should. But I'm not waiting for Hoke to become the next JB - that ain't ever gonna happen.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:23 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:35 PM ^
could not be more stark. Beilein speaks directly, articulately, with facts and information at the ready; you know here is an individual in complete command of the program and team who can answer any question.
With Hoke, it's hard to discern just what he knows because he says nothing meaningful and has a hard time getting that out. It's painful to listen to.
I was formerly of the opinion that Hoke's everyman, meat-and-potatoes personality and speaking style concealed a much brighter football mind than seemed on the surface, and that he was almost a genius at connecting with people.
While I still believe the latter is true, I now have doubts about the former. If he doesn't surround himself with top-notch assistants, he's going to struggle badly if he doesn't have the ability to fill the gaps himself.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:29 PM ^
Beilein revamped his staff. So you are on board with firing Borges and Funk then? Good.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:37 PM ^
I see more team play and less watch Burke. Should be a fun year.
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:49 PM ^
"watch Burke" was a pretty damn effective strategy at times
November 3rd, 2013 at 5:00 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:51 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 4:58 PM ^
November 4th, 2013 at 1:25 PM ^
fans are correct about is the belief that our prestige somehow guarantees us to perform in the top 1% each year. We have been mediocre in the last 10 years and downright awful under RR.
We have built in advantages to help us reach the summit again but let's acknowledge the fact that Hoke needs to renovate the house. He's building the program again.
November 3rd, 2013 at 5:00 PM ^
November 3rd, 2013 at 5:34 PM ^
It's important in both hoops and foosball.
When to burn a time-out, what play to run out of a time-out, having your guys ready for the final minute of a game or the last position. Substitutions in crunch time, etc.
Beilein pulled all the right strings last year in the tourney. The end of the Kansas game and OT, the end of the Syracuse game. Those two games showed me, when faced against coaches with NCAA championships, he was the BETTER coach that day, when it mattered.
I'm not on Hoke to the point of firing him now or anytime soon. The 11-2 season erns him some respect.
When I look at his biggest games:
2011 ND - he outcoached Kelly
2011 MSU - got outcoached by the grumpy green dick
2011 Nebr - badly outcoached Pelini
2011 OSU - who can't out-coach Luke Fickell, but at least we didn't panic when Miller had his best throwing game of the year
2011 VTU - waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out-coached Beamer
2012 Bama - no chance on talent alone, even 1972 Don Shula loses this one
2012 ND - a wash, after ND had lost to us 3 yrs in a row, didn't expect Kelly to lose. It was close considering we had 6 turnovers
2012 MSU - I think he out-coached grumpy green dick, MSU tried manball and couldn't beat us
2012 Nebraska - a pass, Bellomy was brutal, maybe OK to say we weren't prepared for Denard going down BUT at least Gardner started the next week
2012 NW - out-coached Fitzgerald, Yes, lucky tip but we didn't quit and used the 2-punt returners scheme at the end to give us a chance on the throw
2012 OSU - wash that was a tough game for anyone and we lost by 6
2012 S. Carolina - think he held his own or better even in a loss to visor head
2013 ND - out-coached Kelly
2013 PSU - out-coached by O'Brien
2013 MSU - worst out-coached game in his career, especially bad seeing grumpy green dick smile
So, I see him getting out-coached not always by same coach, not all the time, but not winning enough close match-ups, unlike Beilein who wins more than his share.
November 3rd, 2013 at 6:32 PM ^
Funny thing is though, there were lots of people who were unhappy with Beilein's late-game management last season. He was often criticized for not calling enough timeouts and letting Burke dribble down for the last shot instead of running more "structured" plays. This place was not that favorable to Beilein at the end of the regular season. He, too, lost at PSU and then had the late-game collapse at home against IU.
November 3rd, 2013 at 8:17 PM ^
jmblue,
Yes, the end of the IU game was ugly. But, we did have three chances at the free throw line to add points (and two misses were 1-and-1's). Plus Morgan's lay-in missed.
But even during that meltdown period, I always felt Beilein was at least as good as the other guy.
Hoke CAN be a better coach at Michigan. In fact, going into THIS season, I thought he wasn't getting his due when compared to O'Brien, grumpy green dick guy, etc.
His failure to call that TO at end of PSU game, which resulted in delay of game penalty, is rookie coaching at its worst, and he's not a rookie. We may still have missed the FG and stayed up by 7, but that was awful. In the MSU game, I expected him to burn a TO when we were scrambling on D with 30 seconds left and MSU had rushed to the line (resulted in TD pass to Fowler). Maybe Lewis drops his jock in the EZ anyway, but he's got to see that confusion w/ or w/o headsets on.
All will be well IF we win November 30th. That saved Lloyd's hide in '95 and '96.