Notre Dame Postgame Presser: Brady Hoke Comment Count

Adam Schnepp

Hoke presser 2

file

[Note: I wasn’t in South Bend, so this was all transcribed from the video provided by the Athletic Department’s site.]

Opening remarks:

“Obviously Notre Dame played a very good football game and we didn’t. You’ve got to give them a lot of credit. A lot of credit to what they did on third downs, either defending us or their third down opportunities that they converted on.

“We’ve got to go back to work, and we will as a team. You don’t want to have four turnovers in a game. That doesn’t help you. The red zone, we didn’t help ourselves in there. From the penalty side, we put ourselves behind the sticks offensively. And again, you’ve got to give them a lot of the credit too. But we will bounce back because this is a very resilient, hard-working group of young men who know what it takes to win.”

After [Devin] Gardner started fairly quickly, I think six-for-six, and then did they bring more pressure, did your offensive line struggle; what fell apart?

“I think a little bit it’s never one guy, it’s never one piece of the offensive line, or the quarterback, or the routes, or whatever. When those things happen I think they happen as a team. He started six-for-six. I think we’ve got to give them- we crossed the fifty and they were going to bring more pressure. That’s what they did.”

 

Can you talk about Ray Taylor and any update on his status?

“I’m not going to talk about any of those injuries. Number one, I don’t know enough about them.”

 

And then Jabrill [Peppers], he dressed. Could he have played?

“If he could have played we would have played him. We evaluated all those guys before the game.”

And then you dressed him?

“Well, he went out because we were evaluating him before the game.”

 

You said you’re pretty confident this team will bounce back. How do they bounce back from such a- I mean, this was a pretty humbling loss here.

“Yeah, it is but I think they’ve all been humbled sometime in their life. It’s part of the resiliency this group has.”

 

Your guys were pretty adamant about how bad they wanted this because of this possibly being the last game. Were you surprised at how lopsided this ended up being?

“This game? Yeah.”

 

[After THE JUMP: Gardner is still the starter, why Countess was pulled, and bouncing back from adversity]

 

You talked about Devin [Gardner]. Did you ever consider pulling him at any point?

“No. No. I mean, he’s our quarterback. You know, unless he doesn’t come to work every day, doesn’t come to learn, all those things, he’s our quarterback. We wanted to put points on the board.”

 

Do you feel like he’s slipping into some of his habits he had last year? Holding onto the ball too long, or…

“Well, obviously- I don’t think he slipped into all those habits. I think he’s a better quarterback- I know he is. He’s a better quarterback than he demonstrated today.”

 

You talked about how this team will bounce back, but does it need something different? Does it need some changes from you as the head coach, or personnel-wise, or anything like that? I know immediate aftermath it’s hard to know.

“I think that it is hard to know. I think when you evaluate it, and we’ll evaluate it on the bus on the way home; you know, how guys played, who didn’t play well, who played well. You know, because there were some guys who played pretty well. Jake Ryan- I thought he played a pretty good football game. You could feel him out there. You know, Jack Miller did some good things when you watch that.

“The bad part was we got behind the sticks too many times and got out of rhythm offensively, because we were running the ball halfway decent. That was encouraging to see but then obviously, I think at halftime it turned into a game where we needed to throw it a little more”

 

Evertt Golson is a guy who didn’t even make it out of the first half the last time you guys faced him. He was considerably better tonight. What are the biggest differences you’ve seen in him going against him?

“Well, I think they also use him well. I think Brian [Kelly] does a good job. There’s a lot of three-step game in it, a lot of slants. I think he’s matured. I think I said that this week coming in that he’s a much better quarterback than he was two years ago just from watching the Rice game, and I would say the same thing after our game.”

 

You shuffled the secondary a lot.

“Some of that was because of injuries.”

But even taking out Blake [Countess] at one point. What did you see there that you didn’t really like?

“Well, we’ve played a lot of guys back there in the past. Stribling, we wanted to get him some live reps in there. Sometimes you take a guy out and he gets a chance to watch from the sidelines a little bit, and maybe he picks up a few things. We didn’t play well in man coverage. You get called for two interference calls- and we’ve got to play smarter- early and the guys get a little bit worried about playing press.”

 

This is I believe 0-4 against the big three rivals on the road over the last four years. What is this team missing? What does this team need to get over the hump?

“Winning. You win the game. You play. You don’t turn over the ball. You don’t give up big plays.”

Is this a mental thing at this point or what do you guys view this as?

“You talk about it enough into being a mental thing. I don’t think it’s a mental thing.”

What do you think it is?

“Just what I said. You can’t give up big plays. Can’t turn the ball over.”

 

When the game was that far out of reach, Gardner often puts his body in a position where he takes hits. He takes hits in the fourth quarter. Why were you playing him at that point?

“Because he’s our quarterback. He’s our quarterback. You know, we’re going to play some really big games on the road this year, and for him to keep improving he needs to play quarterback.”

Is it a risk, when he takes a hit like that?

“Anything’s a risk. To me, the risk was starting him maybe. I don’t know. We’re trying to develop a team.”

 

You might have touched on this a little bit already, but what specifically was your message to the team?

“After the game? Number one, give Notre Dame credit for how they played. It was a total butt kicking all the way around that we all took. Going back to work tomorrow as a team, like they will. And we’ve got to get a lot better. I think we learned some things that we’ve got to get better at.”

 

It looked like your quarterback was under pressure a lot and their quarterback wasn’t under pressure a lot. Was there a disparity in the trenches or was that scheme?

“I don’t know about that. He had to run enough. He did a good job evading a lot of rush, Everett did. And so I think there was pressure there. And sometimes it’s hard to get pressure on a three-step game.”

You mentioned that you feel like this team will bounce back. Adversity-wise, with a young team do you worry that they may get off track?

“I really don’t. Not with this team.”

Why?

“Because of what we’ve seen every day from them. I mean, from their work ethic, from how they care about each other. All those things.”

Devin [Gardner] took a good shot at the end. Is he okay?

“Like I said, I’ll talk about those injuries when I know more.”

Comments

Shatty13

September 8th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^

When you win what you're doing is working so people can't complain. Fans just want change and adjustment when something doesn't work. So I can't blame the bloggers. Hoke has shown very little if any mid game adjustments, and minimal mid season adjustments. We can't just wait around to next off season and hope there are adjustments. He needs to keep adjusting to keep us happy. Staying the course isn't working. When he wins we'll stop complaining.

247Hinsdale

September 7th, 2014 at 1:00 PM ^

With the caveat that I'm sure he's not sharing all his thoughts with the media, I do seriously wonder if Hoke has the ability to identify and correct our problems.  It seems like all his press conferences after a loss are the same and we don't seem to make any significant progress.

cobra14

September 7th, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^

Should of been this: "No one associated with Michigan football did their jobs tonight. The main cause of this is the guy standing right in front of you. I did not have this team or coaches ready to perform. I look forward to the challenge of motivating this entire program to get better. Monday can't get here soon enough"

blueblueblue

September 7th, 2014 at 12:40 PM ^

My heart loves Michigan. I got a master's and a phd from the university. But my head is really starting to make me question, from a rational perspective, if I should stop supporting it's football team. This is a public university. For Hoke to come out and basically treat the press, and by proxy it's fans, like animals begging at his hand, is reprehensible. He just toys with the press, and the fanbase. I'm tired of Hoke treating the fanbase like shit.  

RockinLoud

September 7th, 2014 at 12:48 PM ^

If I can say this: don't give up on the team. Give up on the coach(es), and the AD (god knows I'm there after last night), but these kids are playing their butts off.  No matter how I feel about the state of the program I'm always going to watch every Saturday and cheer these kids on with everything I have.  That might not be what you meant, if so I apologize.

RockinLoud

September 7th, 2014 at 12:41 PM ^

Our D wasn't doing the things that make press-man coverage work. Jam the frickin' WR at the line and get pressure on the QB. We had neither of those for the most part. But I have to give ND credit, they made some plays that I was just like "ok, that was a great throw by Golston and just as impressive catch by (insert ND receiver)".  The coverage wasn't bad per se, but they got way too much free release and to their credit made some outstanding catches.

 

I think I'm done with Hoke, hell, I even feel done with Mattison at the moment.  Though even Sparty and their all-world D-coord and system eventually cracked against Oregon in the 3rd qtr. But still, we're going to have to show some MAJOR improvement over the course of the season for me to change my mind now.  Just too many meltdowns against teams with a pulse for me to have any confidence he can get it done at an elite level.

 

Also, it's worth mentioning the refs in this one. There were some just down-right aweful calls last night. The ND receiver was clearly OOB on that catch they reviewed, blatant PI on Funchess that wasn't called despite calling our guys for less that ended a drive, and the JMFR late hit was absolutely not a late. It was probably some of the worst and most biased officiating I've seen in several years.

Sopwith

September 7th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^

during games, but I'm starting to miss that fire.  Either Hoke has absolutely no sense of urgency, or he's some kind of zen master at keeping all that under the surface.  All evidence is that he's running some kind of country club for highly rated recruits, and what the kids need is a drill sergeant and discipline.

skurnie

September 7th, 2014 at 12:51 PM ^

This answer is the most asinine thing I've heard Hoke say.

This is I believe 0-4 against the big three rivals on the road over the last four years. What is this team missing? What does this team need to get over the hump?

“Winning. You win the game. You play. You don’t turn over the ball. You don’t give up big plays.”

westwardwolverine

September 7th, 2014 at 2:04 PM ^

Okay, I'll be dead serious with you: To my untrained eye, until the drive before Notre Dame went up 28-0, our offensive line was not the problem. At that point, things started to give way and go to shit, but before that, they held up fine.  

On the ground, here were our carries by RBs (and Norfleet) by yards gained:

1, 13, 7, 0, 3, 5, 9, 6, 3, 7, 10, 10, 2, -3, 3, 2, 0 , 1 or 4.3 ypc. 

(Where things start to flag are at the drive I pinpoint above. Take out those last four carries and you're at 5.2 ypc)

That's...not terrible? It certainly wasn't like some of the disasters we saw later in the season last year. 

As for pass protection (again untrained eye), I have a hard time putting the blame on the line. For the most part, Gardner had time to throw the ball. It seemed like either the decision he chose to make was poor or the play was designed for something quick which wasn't warranted. Again, this argument starts to fail once you get to the drive above, but in the first half and start of the third, I'm hard pressed to put the offensive failures on the line. They were by no means perfect, but they certainly weren't...well last year. 

Other things: We play so damn slow. With the Oregon game on so many TVs next to Michigan's game last night, it was excruciating to watch. 

Also, I don't understand what happened to aggressive Hoke. Why didn't he go for it on 4th and 2 early? 

 

Reader71

September 7th, 2014 at 2:32 PM ^

I mean no disrespect at all, but my eyes are trained. I'm not saying you are dumb or that I am anything other than a guy who was forced to watch one million hours of tape. It's just that I can see it a little more clearly. The run game wasn't a disaster. We just had to get away from it because we fell behind by a large margin. The protection was better in the first half than the second, but it was pretty bad in both. Gardner had time early (first few drives) but that's not on our line so much as ND not bringing many extra rushers. They did that when they took the lead and has some cushion to gamble with. Before that, they wanted to play it kind of safe against our receivers and not fly upfield against Gardner for fear of him breaking a run. There were 3-4 completions that Gardner made while he was being hit. There was another one where he had a good pocket and an open man, but Miller had given ground and Gardner couldn't step into it and the ball floated and a completion that could have been a huge gain was just a catch. I am very sorry that I don't have the film or pictures or anything. Add to that the fact that after a QB notices he has no protection, he gets happy feet and stops stepping into throws and just assumes he's going to be killed. On one busted slip screen, Gardner tried to run. He tried to run on a play where the offensive line purposely doesn't block 2-3 DL! Not a good idea, but one that I believe has to do with repeatedly getting your brain bashed in. Really, nothing went our way. In a tight game, we get protection and a perfect throw on a key third down, and our 6-5, 230 lb receiver drops a ball in his belly. We get called on some ticky-tack PI calls after watching USC-Stanford mug each other all day and get no flags. Countess gets abused one every third and 1-4. We have perfect coverage on 3-4 huge plays that Golston puts on the money and their receivers hold onto. The OL wasn't the only reason we lost, but it was the biggest.

moxiechicago

September 7th, 2014 at 12:58 PM ^

Hey Hoke! If it's so hard to get pressure against a three step drop, why don't we... Um... Ya know... Run a three step drop more? Particularly when we know our OL is suspect. Hmm, game planning for our strengths and weaknesses... Seems like maybe a good idea


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

cobra14

September 7th, 2014 at 1:04 PM ^

If you still think this team not having Captains or that team chemistry is not important to a team, last night was a prime example of why both might be the most important!

UM Indy

September 7th, 2014 at 1:11 PM ^

He talks about all these encouraging and great things that go on behind the curtain. It's like practices and preparation is where his reality is and the games are some kind of aberration from what he sees every day. This team is "resilient," Gardner's a better QB than he showed, etc. etc. SHOW IT IN THE GAME! Quite frankly, nothing else matters.

Wendyk5

September 7th, 2014 at 5:10 PM ^

The angle I can't stand is, "He's a much better quarterback than he was today." When should a quarterback be judged, in practices or in game situations? I vote the latter. I love Devin - this isn't a slight against him. I just wish Hoke would come up with some different talking points. 

SHub'68

September 7th, 2014 at 1:39 PM ^

And wondering if many of the problems that were our program still exist.  All the administrative ineptitude from top to bottom that distracts a coaching staff from building a winning program.

Brady Hoke is doing the right thing to keep as tight-lipped as possible to minimize all the crap that comes from external pressure.  But who knows what is going on inside?  We kind of assume all that was cleared up when Rodriguez was let go, but Bacon's book makes it pretty obvious that UM football was an administrative clusterf--- and way too much bullshit fell to Rodriguez to have to deal with.

Has Dave Brandon fixed all that?  If he has, then a coaching change might work this time.  Or giving Hoke a couple more years might work, too.  If not, well, I don't want to contemplate it, but we may be seeing the new norm for Michigan football for a long time to come.

Being among the elite means elite coaches, elite players, but it also means top-notch support behind those guys to free them to be elite.  Hoke and staff are getting the players.  I also think some of the coaches could be considered elite.  But what about the rest of it?

Seven years now.  How many seasons before it ceases to be an aberration?

harmon40

September 7th, 2014 at 4:49 PM ^

of course I have no idea. However much of what Bacon describes in his book definitely does not seem germane here, ie the fan base wasn't significantly divided about his hiring, former coaches & players are not damaging his recruiting efforts, no BS Freep jihad, he has had budget to hire his choice of coordinators, etc.

Certainly I think we should wait and see if he can rally the team after a terrible drubbing like this...if he can't, if they show no improvement by the time we play PSU, if continued poor play begins to effect recruiting...then yeah, probably Happy Trails at season's end

mddubbs

September 7th, 2014 at 1:39 PM ^

Everyone asks how Hoke can turn this around?  I suggest to you he already has.  From 11-2 and a Sugar Bowl win with RR's team, to 7-6 in 2013, the record is who we are.  Hoke was sub .500 when hired and he is returning the Michigan Program to those depths. 

htownwolverine

September 7th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^

Whenever I hear him say, 'we will continue to do the things we need to do,' I want to bash my head in. Hey Coach that's the problem you keep doing the same things obviously because the results are the same.

Mpfnfu Ford

September 7th, 2014 at 1:48 PM ^

"Coach, why did your DLine, the one thing you coach, play poorly and not get pressure?"

DON'T BLAME ME, THEY THREW A LOT OF 3 STEP DROPS YOU CAN'T GET PRESSURE ON THOSE

"Well coach, why didn't you all call more 3 step drop quick game passes since Gardner was getting assaulted?"

I DUNNO BLAME THE OC

__________________

 

There's my translation out of Hokese for y'all.

Wendyk5

September 7th, 2014 at 2:06 PM ^

I keep coming back here, trying to find answers, and there aren't any. Or if there are, they aren't the ones I want to hear, like we need to sit Gardner or we need a new coaching staff. 

M-Dog

September 7th, 2014 at 4:41 PM ^

There are some answers, but they are not the ones we want to hear.
 
Hoke, Nuss, and Mattison have a vision of where they want the program to go:  Power running, elusive but non-running pocket QB on Offense; Press coverage blitzing Defense.  But they don't quite yet have the experienced fully-developed body-type personnel to run it well.  The coaches are calling those plays on O and D, but they are not yet working as planned. 
 
In a perfect coaches world, they would be given enough time to let the players fully develop into the system.  The fanbase and recruits would just look the other way while the growing pains are worked out until the baseline of core players are experienced fully-developed Seniors and red-shirt Seniors.
 
Joe Paterno in his prime was actually a master of this.  At least once every four years he would have a terrible season where the team could not get out of its own way.  But once every four years he would also be in a position to play for a National Championship.  He knew he had the job security to manage for the long term of an experienced Senior-laden class.  And Penn State's recruits in those days were going to go there no matter what.  They weren't going to switch to the SEC because of a bad year.
 
But Hoke does not have that luxury.  He has to keep the fanbase and recruits happy along the way to achieving his vision. He has to successfully manage not just achieving the vision, but the transition to the vision.  
 
So how does he do that?  How does he win some key Rivalry games, Road games, and Bowl games now in 2014, which he needs to do to keep his job?
 
On Offense he has no choice in 2014 but to play to DG's strengths with his feet.  DG is not going to be a proficient pocket passer with the O-Line we have now.  It's not going to happen.  He needs too much time to make decisions.  Defenses are going to blitz on every down.  In the interest of transition, the Offense has to revert back to at least some zone read option plays and QB rollouts and designed QB runs to keep Defenses honest.  The dilemma of course is that it takes practice away from where you eventually want to go, and it risks getting DG injured.  But it still has to be incorporated into the game plan.          
 
On Defense in 2014, full time press coverage and aggressive blitzing are not ready for prime time.  Even though we thought they were.  Especially if key players remain out due to injuries.  Prepare yourself for a heavier mix of bend-but-don't-break zones to prevent big plays.  More 10 play field goals, but less 2 play TDs.    
 
Managing the transition like this delays progress, but it gives you enough success around the margins to let you live to fight another day.  It still may not work, but it's his best shot in 2014 given the hand he is dealt.
 
 

BlueHills

September 7th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^

Hoke doesn't want the team to panic. So he offers up the coach-speak to the media.

He respects his players' medical privacy rights. Under HIPAA it'd be wrong to discuss injuries publicly until at least given permission by the students involved. My guess is that they appreciate not having their injuries and personal matters discussed in the media. There's also a possible strategic advantage of not having opponents know exactly who's going to play until game time.

I don't have a problem with either one of those things.

What I have a problem with is that the road performance of the team has been miserable for several years, and that even with the very high quality of players the team has, this is the third straight year where I find myself scratching my head over unacceptable play by (old) Michigan standards.

Michigan had a very popular coach in Bump Elliott from 1959 until 1968, when Bo came in. The media loved him, and his players loved him the way the current players love Brady Hoke. I was a freshman during Bump's last year and lived in South Quad, which was the team's dorm. A lot of the guys were decent enough friends who shared their thoughts on being coached by Bump. They loved him.

Hoke's record is also better than Oosterbaan's and Kipke's. But we've had all-time great coaches who spoiled us, and many of us remember Bo as the savior of Michigan football.

For all the team's faults, Hoke isn't a bad coach. But he's also not going to be the savior of Michigan football. There are too many power conferences, and too many tempting places for coaches to go, and too much money involved in such opportunities, to find a football savior without a tremendous amount of luck.

Do I blame Brandon for bringing in Hoke over some other coaches? A little. I dislike what he's done in other areas much more than the fact that he chose Hoke. However, I don't blame a person for making a choice that lots of folks thought would be a good choice.

I will, however, be upset with Brandon if he doesn't start a coaching search now. I'm not saying he should absolutely fire Hoke at this point - it's a decision that should be made later. But he does need to at the very least have some research done on possible replacements so that if push comes to shove, he's prepared and has some candidates confidentially interested.