Penn State Postgame Presser Transcript: Brady Hoke Comment Count

Heiko

Opening remarks:

“Well, obviously it was a hard fought game by both teams. I thought our guys came back in the second half, played better. We’ve got to execute at all positions better. It was hard fought by both teams. Kept sticking around, so it’s a tough one, every time you go onto overtime, but we have to move forward.”

Missed opportunities?

“We had opportunities throughout the game. We had opportunities with missed tackles. We had opportunities to make a play on the ball. We had opportunities to hit a hole better. We had opportunities to finish blocks. There’s no doubt.”

The decision to punt with 45 seconds left in regulation. Did you consider kicking the field goal?

“Yeah, did, but if we could pooch it down there and them starting at the 20 instead of the 34 or 45 or something like that. I liked those odds better … Could we have executed the pooch better? Sure.”

Could you have kicked the field goal?

“Without the delay? Could have. I think Matt would have, probably, because it would have been a long one.”

Any concern with Brendan Gibbons’s consistency?

“Not really. He’s been great. That’s why we kicked it on the last [overtime].”

Taylor Lewan’s injury?

“Yeah, he should be all right.”

Was it a head thing?

“Not really sure.”

It looked like your guys were in position to make plays on that last drive.

“Yeah, well you have to make plays. You have to execute. Would we have liked to rush the passer better? Yes. But at times we did, at times we didn’t.”

Channing Stribling played a lot on the last drive. What was the reason there?

“Well we’d been playing some dime stuff, trying to put another DB on their tight end.”

Fitz had 27 carries for 27 yards. The offensive line shuffling didn’t seem good enough …

“It wasn’t good enough. There’s no question.”

Where do you go from here?

“Well, we’d better take a hard look at it.”

Chris Bryant got replaced late?

“Chris got banged up a little bit. I think Darrell [Funk] also wanted make a move.”

Some losses are harder to come back from than others. Do you have to work harder to keep everyone together?

“Well I think you always have to work hard. Anytime you lose in overtime, if you let it take a toll, it will.”

With the long field goal in overtime, did you consider Matt Wile at all?

“Thought about it, but Brendan, before the game, we talked. We talked to Matt before the game. Both felt good at certain distances, and that was the distance.”

You talked about the resiliency of this team coming out at the half. What do you take from this game?

“Well I think the biggest thing is we had all kinds of opportunities at every position. As coaches we had opportunities, and we all are in this together, and we all have to make sure we’re taking advantage and executing when those opportunities come.”

After Devin’s mistakes, did you change the game plan at all?

“You know what, we didn’t. Honestly. We started the second half with the same game plan that we used in the first half.”

Did you think there was more energy coming out in the second half?

“I thought we had good energy when we came out in the first half. I had no problem with how we prepared all week and everything we’ve done.”

Were the turnovers deflating a bit?

“Well they responded. Came back, responded. Defense got a couple. I think we complemented ourselves pretty good at times in there. Offense and defense and kicking game. There were some really good things. Especially the kickoff return part of it. When the opportunities are there, you have to take advantage of it.”

When did you decide Jake Ryan was going to play? And did you try to keep his plays limited?

“We tried to keep his play count down a little bit. I can’t tell you exactly how many he ended up having, but we really [made the decision] after Thursday’s practice and Friday. He felt good all week.”

The offensive line issues, is it a toughness thing? A confidence thing?

“We’re having a hard time sometimes targeting at times, combo-ing off the blocks. It’d be interesting to see. Magnuson came in from where I was watching in the game, he made a couple really good combination blocks. That was encouraging. But I’ll be honest with you, [you can’t tell] until you really get a good look at it all and you can analyze it.”

-------------------------

Quite understandably, the players were really down and only gave short, rehearsed answers. Their expressions say it all.

Jeremy Gallon drinks Gatorade by the quar- okay yeah now is not the time.

Comments

snarling wolverine

October 14th, 2013 at 6:18 AM ^

You (and others here) are overanalyzing this.  I don't think Hoke is "trolling" at all.  He was asked these questions shortly after an incredibly bitter loss.  These read to me like pretty honest answers from a guy who was probably emotionally spent.  How coherent could you have been at that point?  

ca_prophet

October 14th, 2013 at 1:13 AM ^

Lewan was injured, leaving us with four guys getting their first real experience on the line.  Magnusen and Kalis are highly rated and flash impressive blocks while derfing a bunch of plays.  Glasgow is transcending his limitations and holding his own at two positions - Funk has done a great job with him, it appears - but he still has those limitations.  Bryant is working on being healthy and playing at the same time - this was his second collegiate game in for all intents and purposes his first season practicing.  How often do you think these guys have played together?

It sucks, yes.  The coaches know exactly what the problem is, but it's not productive to blame our previous recruiting for the lack of an upperclass O-line, and it's certainly not productive to call out your players in a press conference just so the fanbase can get the blood they're baying for.

We should feature prominently in TWIS this week, and we'll deserve it.

Reader71

October 14th, 2013 at 2:37 AM ^

Because out of the vast numbers of plays that can be called, a huge percentage calls for the RB to go between the tackles. Running plays are basically Iso, Power, Lead, Dive, Veer, Inside Zone, Outside Zone, Sweep, Trap, Counter. That's it. You can put in a ton of wrinkles, but a wham is a trap and so is a tackle trap. A sweep is a sweep whether its a pitch or a handoff from shotgun. They are blocked the same. And aside from the sweep and (maybe) the outside zone, all go between the tackles. So we either try to run between the tackles, or we have an offense that consists of nothing more than passes, sweeps, reverses, end around, and a few other wrinkles to get guys outside the tackles. That's tough do do effectively, particularly when linebackers start to know its not coming up the middle and start really banging the edges. It sucks to watch us not be able to run between the tackles. But if you think there is such thing as an offense that doesn't feature it, you are wrong.

funkywolve

October 14th, 2013 at 1:37 AM ^

someone asks Hoke at the next presser why Gardner spiked the ball on first down with 13 seconds left after Gallon had gotten out of bounds.  While that probably didn't have much sway as to whether UM won or lost, it almost screams that no one on the sideline or coaches box had any idea what had just taken place on the field.

Vote_Crisler_1937

October 14th, 2013 at 8:33 AM ^

Also, on another play, you can see the players hurrying up to the line and the official steps in to let them know the clock is stopped and they can huddle if they want to. Then they huddle. With 4 yr + players at QB, RB, and tackle, not to mention coaches on the sideline, they should know better.

jadaSPW

October 14th, 2013 at 9:10 AM ^

In addition to being unprepared to run a play while the clocked was stopped for the entirety of the 40 second play clock, that spike also take an extra second off the clock. May not seem like a big deal, but after the 5 yard reception brought us to the 34-yard line, we had 7 seconds remaining in regulation instead of 8.

With 8 seconds left, do we try to get another 4-5 yards on the sideline to make the FG more makeable (which we should have done with 7 seconds left anyway)? That spike may have cost us a play and an opportunity for a more makeable last-second game-winning FG. Why settle for a 52-yarder when you can run another quick hit play along the sideline?

MichiganMan14

October 14th, 2013 at 7:02 AM ^

Ive thought about that game for the past 36 hours none stop. Therr is so much wrong with what happened and they way we have played this season. This staff is NOT getting it done and we have really turned into one of the most hyped and underachieving programs in the country over the years. Losing to a 62 scholarship team after disgusting efforts against Akron and Uconn....I cant say that I have any faith in this staff. This program and fan base deserves so much more. These players deserve championship coaching and they are NOT getting it. This is one loss that I will not forget and let slip under the rug. This loss is a microcosm of the disappoint ment that has clouded this program for a long time. We simply do not getIit done. When is it going to change? We have great resources and recruits....many programs win more with less. Really disappointed and kind of numb to Michigan football at the moment. I hope the fellas can pull iy together and salvage this season because our easy stretch is over. Tough weekend fellas. Tough weekend.

looty

October 14th, 2013 at 10:16 AM ^

A brutal November is right around the corner and after saturdays game, my blood pressure finally is in normal limits.  Never before have I become bi-polar watching this team play this year.  One moment I'm elated high fiving my kids and a couple of plays later I find myself asking WTF is up with that play call? Watching so many teams on saturday from the sec to other big 10 teams makes me realize just how far we have to go!

graybeaver

October 14th, 2013 at 9:13 AM ^

Hoke needs to get in his players face more.  When Gardner throws a stupid interception Hoke should grab him by the facemask and press his face up against it and chew him a new ass hole.  Same should be done to Fitz when he totally misses a pass block.  Hoke just stands there and claps his hands together.  His positive reinforcement routine is getting old.  Also, this team is about as physical as a Richard Simmons workout routine.  You preach toughness and man-ball, but your team can't even out muscle bottom feeding MAC teams.  I'm sick of the excuses.  Urban Meyer hasn't lost a game yet.  Penn State is better than Michigan and they have been crippled by the NCAA.  Are you kidding me?  Devin Gardner is not accuraute enough to run a pro offense.  It should be 100% spread or put in Morris.  Coach Funk needs to be fired.  I'm not so sure that Borge's isn't being forced to run what Hoke wants.  However, Borge's shouldn't be the QB coach either.  Greg Mattision is suppose to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.  Lets sit back and let a true freshman QB take his time and pick us apart.  Michigan needs to blitz a lot more.  Please stop running the ball up the middle on first down for a three yard loss.  Are you not smart enough to figure that out?

 

MGoManBall

October 14th, 2013 at 9:24 AM ^

Not sure what Hoke is supposed to say after a game like that. He probably should have just gone up and made a statement like Ace's recap statement and then walked out. The entire team and staff had to be exhausted and it's hard to comment on aspects of a game without reviewing them on film first. 

"Taking a hard look" at something better be Hoke sticking his foot up his offensive line and RB's ass. That's all I have to say... about that.

Sten Carlson

October 14th, 2013 at 10:06 AM ^

Michigan currently has 102 players on its roster.  The classes break down as follows:

RS Sr: 11

Sr: 5

RS Jr: 9

Jr: 7

RS So: 11

So: 12

RS Fr: 25

Fr: 34

Notice anything?  I think people are totally underestimating the effect of having 58% of the players on your roster being RS Fr & Freshmen.  Guys that are complaining about the coaching staff continually say, "youth is an excuse" and they whine about "other teams play underclassmen."  Which teams do it, specifically?  Further, when you look at the 25 players that have been in the program for 4 years or more, how many of them have performed at a high level thus far?  In looking at that list I can really only point to 4 players: Lewan, Gallon, Ryan, and Gardner.  Schofield has done ok, as has Black, Q Washington, and Fitz.  That leaves a lot of guys that have played a lot of football, and never really accomplished much.

People can say it shouldn't matter, that it's just an excuse until their blue in the face, but it obviously DOES matter, and its effecting Michigan's ability to execute.  Is it that hard to see that the most of the 25 guys that should be leading this team just aren't that good?  How much can a coach do? 

newtopos

October 14th, 2013 at 10:33 AM ^

You want examples?  Just look at the team we are playing this week, which has our old O-line coach.  Last year he was forced to start a true freshman at LT and a true freshman at guard.  And they weren't blue-chip, 5 star recruits.  No, he had two 3 star guys -- one with one other Big Ten offer (Illinois), the other with only MAC offers.  Both earned freshmen All-American honors.  The LT allowed two sacks all year, the other true freshman none.  Indiana was second in the Big Ten in total offense.  This idea that coaching does not matter, and that only teams with upperclassmen four and five star talent can show any competence is crazy.  Most teams in the country cannot fathom the talent we have to work with.  What this offensive staff (especially Funk, but throw in Borges and the S&C guys) does with that talent is awful. 

AgonyTrain

October 14th, 2013 at 10:39 AM ^

Totally agree. This proposition that you can only win with JR / SR players is way .  I live in MN and it's the same excuse fans out here use for Kill.  Not expecting a young team to always defeat a vastly experienced opponent but PSU did not a 2-1 advantage in upperclassmen or anything close to that

AgonyTrain

October 14th, 2013 at 10:35 AM ^

The youth excuse is only valid when you are going up against more experienced teams.  Taking a quick look at ESPN, PSU looks to have around 20 players listed as SR and 20 as JR, so about as experience as Michigan.  Oh yeah, they only have 61 or whatever scholarship players.  Weren't they also starting a true freshman at QB, most important position on the field?

AgonyTrain

October 14th, 2013 at 10:29 AM ^

Nothing is going to change in a week, so while I consider myself as being extremely negative on Borges (don't think he has an offensive identity or know how to best utilize the players he has) and Funk (every year the OL gets worse) I am content to wait for the result of the Indiana game before grabbing the pitchforks.  If we lose to IU at home people should have very serious questions about this program because last I checked the IU coaching staff inherited less talent, has had less time, and recruited lesser talented players since they arrived in Bloomington.  Honestly, you could say the same about PSU but people can accept losing to them on the road much easier than IU at home. 

 Hopefully they win and the panic can be deferred for the time being

Sten Carlson

October 14th, 2013 at 11:04 AM ^

Thanks for the praise Tim H, love the avatar!

Look, here is what I am saying in a nutshell.  It's numbers, but it's also talent.  The upperclassmen Michigan are not only few, but mostly below average players, IMO.  It would be one thing if we had All Big 10 players among those upperclassmen, but we basically have one player in Lewan that is recognized as such.  One!

I am not saying that you can only win with 5* upperclassmen, what I am saying is that when most of your talent and numbers are pooled in your RS Fr and Fr classes, and your upper classes are thin and relatively untalented, you're going to struggle. 

Of course coaching matters, and Hoke & Co. have shown that they can coach players up with the best of them.  But, I just don't think there is much to coach up in the upperclasses.  I think Michigan was a severe talent  (and number) shortage, but most Michigan fans just cannot bring themselves to admit it.  They want to cling to this idea that we're just better than everyone.  Fine, have it your way.  But I promise you one thing, if you "fire so and so..." guys get your way, you're going to see the program regress AGAIN. 

robmorren2

October 14th, 2013 at 12:19 PM ^

Anyone else notice that the 2 Gardner picks were on 3rd & long, and both times their D-Co knew EXACTLY where we were going with the ball. Both times he rolled coverage underneath Gallon right at the sticks. Once with a CB rolling under, and once by dropping an end back into a zone. Part of the problem is Gardner, but I don't think he's the majority of the problem. (1) Being in 3 & long is tough on ANY QB, and we are always behind the chains. (2) We are telegraphing our plays to the point that D-Co's can roll coverage to the exact area that our plays are designed to go to.

Wings33

October 14th, 2013 at 12:38 PM ^

To me the only way to give the QB hope is to open up the run game for balance? In saying that what is up with the o-line!? If Fitz is back and clearly the most experienced runner then open up some holes some the QB can open up play action without it being telegraphed!we need to stop being in 3rd and long and be in short range with the option to run for short yards