Unverified Voracity Isn't Trying To Use Big Words Comment Count

Brian

duke[1]

Duke: creating future generations of people who will crush the economy for their personal benefit

WELP. Ace will have a fuller postmortem shortly, but the short version of what happened at Duke: Michigan spent the first half playing offense like the football team not against ND or OSU and dug themselves a hole they could not extract themselves from.

Very frustrating that Duke can extend their defense so aggressively and not give up backdoor cuts, of which I don't think Michigan had a single one all night. I don't get it. A few bullets:

  • GRIII is the same guy and has to be seeing his NBA draft stock crumble as teams get a longer look at him and see someone who can stand in the corner and make threes at an acceptable rate and throw down some dunks but do little else, especially as an NBA three.
  • LeVert was pretty much the only guy willing to and capable of driving at a set Duke defense to generate shot opportunities.
  • Michigan's defense was actually all right, but flattered by a poor shooting night for Duke in the first half. Duke didn't put Michigan in too many situations where they switched, which previously led to a lot of confusion and things like LeVert trying to cover a power forward. This happened maybe once or twice.
  • Everyone in the Duke student section looks like the villain from a 1980s teen comedy.
  • Sports! Hate you, sports.

Yeah, pretty much. Ross Fulton breaks down what happened in the OSU game on both sides of the ball, noting that OSU often didn't align well and seemed unprepared for some things that Michigan had shown plenty of:

Like Iowa this year or Cal two years ago, Michigan was able to get easy yards by aligning their blocking strength to the boundary and running to the edge. By aligning to the defensive front to the field and failing to adjust, the Buckeyes are outflanked before the snap. For instance, Michigan picked up easy yards by putting their tight end and wing to the boundary and running touch passes to Jeremy Gallon.

Screen%20Shot%202013-12-01%20at%205.07.25%20PM[1]

In fact, Michigan went so far as to put their tackle to the boundary to run speed option and the Buckeyes still did not adjust. Michigan has previously shown this look (with limited success) this season, but the Buckeyes did not seem to expect it.

I don't know if that's good news or bad news. OSU's defense doesn't seem particularly well-organized (compare throwback/tunnel screens in this game to Michigan's attempt against MSU), which is a good thing in one game per year as long as OSU doesn't make changes. But some of their success being the stuff they'd already put on film that OSU was inexplicably unprepared for is less good than Michigan having a bunch of wizbang.

The proper way to have a vote of confidence. There is exactly one correct way to tell the universe that your embattled head coach isn't going anywhere. It is three sentences of boilerplate in which you strongly endorse the man in charge and say nothing else, because saying anything else is not useful.

For example: "Coach Hoke will be at the University of Michigan next year and for several years after. While this season has been a trying one, Michigan barely had a non-freshman interior offensive lineman on the roster and has to-date retained 51 of 52 recruits in Hoke's first two full classes, providing needed stability after years of turmoil on and off the field. He is the man for the job."

This is short, and crucially does not

MAKE IDIOTIC COMPARISONS TO NICK SABAN

Many don't remember that Alabama finished fourth in its division during Nick Saban's fourth year with the Crimson Tide. At present, Alabama seems to be doing pretty well!!

Nick Saban won a national title in his third year.

USE MULTIPLE EXCLAMATION POINTS LIKE A HIGH SCHOOL GIRL

OMG!!!

I imagine the editorial meeting about this spent 15 minutes talking about whether "pretty well" needed two or three exclamation points, with the third getting axed because This Is Michigan and three exclamation points is just not done for anything other than the many and varied accomplishments of the University of Michigan.

BRING UP THE GUY MICHIGAN—***YOU***—WHIFFED ON BECAUSE OF THE PROCESS

Stanford had 4-8, 5-7 and 8-5 records under Jim Harbaugh before reaching its current string of consecutive BCS appearances

>__<

ALSO STANFORD WAS 1-11.

ACK

THROW A FORMER COACH UNDER THE BUS FOR NO REASON

The senior class was recruited by Coach Carr and had some terrific talent that had simply been underperforming.

Football is simple, says the BTN commercial.

NOT AT ALL INCIDENTALLY THROW DENARD ROBINSON, MIKE MARTIN, JORDAN KOVACS, DESMOND MORGAN, TAYLOR LEWAN AND JAKE RYAN UNDER THE BUS

Seriously, seniors recruited by Lloyd Carr had about 20% to do with that Sugar Bowl season, because his last class was horrendous.

MAKE UNJUSTIFIABLE ASSERTIONS ABOUT THE MOTIVATIONS OF PEOPLE WHO THINK THIS SEASON PUTS BRADY HOKE'S JOB AT RISK

Anyone making efforts to stir up a coaching controversy at Michigan is ill-informed and is likely promoting a personal agenda that is not in the best interest of Michigan Football.

They will be taken to our new Go Blue Gulag in the upper peninsula.

MENTION THE DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR BUT NOT MENTION THE OFFENSIVE COORDINATOR

The transformation and improvement of our defense under the leadership of coach Greg Mattison has been outstanding.

This was taken as a sure sign Borges was getting axed when there has been very little indication that would happen from inside the program. This was not mentioned in the editorial meeting because of the exclamation point discussion.

But, hey, why say what you have to say in 100 words when you can take a thousand?

I HAVE JUST THE SOLUTION. From the NYT's repulsive tongue-bath of Jim Delany:

After the Southeastern Conference expanded to include the University of Missouri and after the Atlantic Coast Conference added the University of Notre Dame (the school’s football program remained independent) and the University of Pittsburgh — both schools within the Big Ten’s geographic footprint — Mr. Delany concluded that the Big Ten was in danger of ceding strategic ground. “We felt threatened,” he said.

The solution was clear.

Mr. Delany countered with the invitations to Rutgers, then of the Big East, and Maryland of the A.C.C.

YOUR MOVE, SEC.

wait youre just going to not do anything

UT San Antonio is out there man

make a move

d'awww

Speaking of Rutgers…

So much for that theory. I'd ventured that Rutgers might actually become a good program in the Big Ten since New Jersey puts out quite a bit of talent and they would be able to flag down a lot more of it now that they were in a power conference. That prediction was looking pretty good as Rutgers locked down an array of quality local recruits en route to what looked like the best Big Ten recruiting class of the year, non-M-OSU division.

That's now in shambles as Rutgers deals with yet another coach-abuse fallout scandal. Recruits are decommiting in droves after this, which happened a week or two ago:

The incident -- which Jevon Tyree said occurred in April with the Rice fallout still fresh -- happened in front of approximately 10 teammates and a tutor, Jevon Tyree said, and it led to the 19-year-old's escalating ostracization, eventually driving him to quit.

Clarice Tyree called it "an outright bullying episode," and Mark Tyree said the behavior soon "transferred to the other coaches." Jevon Tyree, a redshirt freshman on scholarship, said that after the frightening incident, his standing on the team plummeted, along with practice repetitions and any shot at playing time. He said there were team meetings from which he was excluded.

Four of Rutgers's top recruits have decommited in the aftermath of this going public, including MI QB Tyler Wiegers.

Rutgers is just months removed from firing their basketball coach for flinging basketballs at players' heads and hired an athletic director who had been a coach so hated that most of her last team banded together to release a statement about what a horrible person she was. And no one got the football coaches together and said "hey, let's maybe not call people bitches two inches from their faces." The athletic director in the aftermath:

Look: I don’t know if Hermann is lying. I only know that her response, when I asked her on Saturday morning if she had indeed talked to Mark Tyree, was less than convincing.

This was the answer: “Yeah. Somebody – if it’s not him, who calls me and informs me of it? Otherwise I wouldn’t know about it. So I’m not trying to call – I’m not trying to use big words like the words he’s using, but I’m informed by him, to my knowledge. If it’s not him, who’s calling me?”

People in charge of things are just in charge of them, possibly for no reason. In Rutgers's case, definitely for no reason.

Hockey commits. Michigan picked up a couple of future hockey players over the last few days. Cooper Marody is a '96 forward who is probably a 2015 recruit in his first USHL season; he's got 5-11-16 in 23 games and is second in the USHL for his age cohort in that department. SBN College Hockey notes he's a "blazingly fast skater" at six-foot-even. And I think this commitment is going to stick, you guys.

The other guy is a (probably) 2016 defenseman out of Salisbury Prep named Griffin Luce. Originally from Ontario and on pace to be a first round OHL draft pick, Luce has an interesting back story:

-- Griffin Luce, the son of Florida Panthers (NHL) director of scouting Scott Luce, has decided on Salisbury. The St. Thomas, Ontario native, a top ‘98 defenseman who could be selected in the 1st round of the OHL draft next year, played for the Elgin-Middlesex Chiefs this past season. Will be joined at Salisbury by his brother, Harrison Luce, who will be a PG.

The elder Luce played at Colgate, and they obviously know all about Griffin's options, so this is also a commitment that's relatively OHL-proof. Google knows nothing else about Luce, as is often the case for super-young hockey commits, especially defensemen.

Etc.: Charles Pierce on The Game.

Comments

aiglick

December 4th, 2013 at 1:20 PM ^

Well this bowl game is going to be a lot more interesting. If there is not a similar performance from the offense and it looks similar to how it did between Notre Dame and Ohio (exclude Indiana of course because their defense is pretty bad) especially given there is going to be some time to heal and actually prepare for the opponent I really think Hoke should rethink his stance on Borges.

Please do an actual evaluation Hoke. If we stink again next year the target for our discontent will be purely on your back. Please do something instead of trumpeting phrases like "This is Michigan". Do something.

JeepinBen

December 4th, 2013 at 1:24 PM ^

Are we really surprised that Dave Brandon likes to hear himself talk? I'm just surprised that he didn't delve in to the synergy that Coach Hoke is cultivating in and around the dynamic Schembechler Hall as he innovates strategic collaboration to maximize the enterprise that is Michigan Football.

Space Coyote

December 4th, 2013 at 1:25 PM ^

On the jet sweep, I don't think the initial alignment is much of an issue. Gardner isn't going to run a QB sweep and with the DTs inside in their front, it makes it difficult for Michigan's OL to reach the playside LB. That means you have 3 players for 3 fill lanes (CB, Safety, playside LB).

The problem, instead, is the lack of adjustment, or the fail to roll coverage, once the jet sweep motion begins. At that point, yes, you are completely out leveraged. You can either assist this by rolling the playside safety down and switch to a cover 1 type look or by shuttling the LBs a gap over (likely bringing the backside safety up to defend any sort of fake jet sweep and run to the backside). Both of these leave you a little bit exposed on the back end as far as coverage help, but as OSU did against Wisconsins 2-RB, jet sweep package, they leveraged the outside playside, played straight up on the DL, and understood that there are only a limited number of concepts behind that can expose your CBs.

So, in my opinion, it's the lack of adjustment to the jet sweep that did them in, not necessarily the initial alignment before the motion occured.

gbdub

December 4th, 2013 at 2:32 PM ^

I don't think it affects Brian's thesis, which is "At least some of Michigan's success was due to OSU blowing it rather than new offensive wrinkles". That theory seems pretty sound, and reasonably worrisome, despite the not so great analysis Brian linked to.

bubblelevel

December 4th, 2013 at 2:42 PM ^

Let's highlight that some plays are because the other team makes mistakes ergo - the offense (collective) reeeeaaaaaallllllleeeeeee didn't show much improvement. 

Yeah - there has never been a game before in the history of football where one team didn't always align perfectly (IN F'ING HINDSIGHT).  In fact it is such an anomaly that we should call it out.

Brian would bitch about Jesus Christ himself "all these hand jestures", "defiant in his arrogance to keep dressing down".  

The game Saturday was a good game, called well, played well with the usual smattering of mistakes.  It is a sample size of one right now separating itself from the prior two games but given the team it hopefully is a predictor of how this team can perform when all are in sync.

For those who have played/coached will easilly understand that the game can't be viewed through finite engineering retrospective analysis.  At least not fully.  Too many moving parts (brains, physics, player roles, sun, turf, play, alignment etc.).  There is not ever a perfect game so looking at the shit/doubt side of this game really is just trying to maintain a narrative.

gbdub

December 4th, 2013 at 4:07 PM ^

So in your opinion, "did we play well or did our opponent play poorly, or was it equal parts both" is never a valid question? Because that's pretty much all Brian is opining on. OSU was a (positive) outlier in terms of offensive performance this year, and it seems a perfectly reasonable exercise to speculate on why that is and what that means for the future. What the heck else are we supposed to talk about?

And if you don't believe him because he's just an engineer, SC the coach agrees that the play in question was an example of the OSU defense poorly adjusting to a play that was basically evenly matched by alignment. Previous opponents have defended the same play better.

But I guess since we're not on the team we should all shut up. That sounds like it would make for a pretty boring blog.

Magnus

December 4th, 2013 at 1:27 PM ^

If Ross Fulton thinks the image above involves lining up a wing to the boundary, then perhaps we ought not take his musings too seriously. The ball is in the middle of the field or, if anything, slightly toward the far hash.

bsand2053

December 4th, 2013 at 1:29 PM ^

“Yeah. Somebody – if it’s not him, who calls me and informs me of it? Otherwise I wouldn’t know about it. So I’m not trying to call – I’m not trying to use big words like the words he’s using, but I’m informed by him, to my knowledge. If it’s not him, who’s calling me?”

 

Is this English?  The size of the words is not the problem here.  

boliver46

December 4th, 2013 at 1:36 PM ^

Touchy topic - I know...but without knowing more - on the surface the Tyree incident sounds like what happens every day...on EVERY football field...EVERYWHERE.  I remember being called a Fat fck in high school...a p*ssy and a b*tch for having an earring when I walked on in college...

I am NOT saying it is right - but organized athletics are a lot like the military in that they want to break you down and then build you up.  Push you to be more than you ever thought possible.  Just seems like these days a coach can't even say boo to someone without someone sh*tting their pants.  Even coaches correcting little leaguers can't do it anymore with any authority...parents calling from the stands and saying coach is too tough...

P*ssification of America.  It's never your fault, it's all ok, we are all winners.  B.S.

EDIT: /getoffmylawn OFF

In reply to by boliver46

JeepinBen

December 4th, 2013 at 1:39 PM ^

I didn't play in college but I played pretty competitive high school hockey and have also coached some. There are different leadership styles as well as different ways that players will learn/respond. As a coach I thought one of my jobs was to coach each player how he would best respond to coaching. Some kids you can yell at. Some kids you have to nudge in the right direction. Some you can say "shoot faster" or "Move the puck" while others you need to set it up for them to see.

Both coaches just had horrible things happen to them. Which reaction was "better"? Hoke putting his arm around Hagerup or this?

 

PeterKlima

December 4th, 2013 at 1:49 PM ^

The story isnt about which coachig style works better.  We know Hayes and probably Schembechler LAID INTO KIDS verbally and it worked for them.  it doesnt work for others.

 

The story....the whole point....is that the guy should be fired or disciplined for being mean to the player. 

 

I don't care whether it works or not (deends on the kid IMHO), but you should be able to TAKE a tounge lashing without weeping. 

 

 

Maybe its because the kid really is soft....

 

...and so are people who think being mean is actionable.

boliver46

December 4th, 2013 at 1:56 PM ^

I agree with some of what was said above about different styles of coaching, and learning when to push and pull.  However, the report said he basically just met the kid after being hired...so how would he have this experience to know this about him?  That he couldn't take it?From the article it sounded like banter between the coaches and the players escalated and all of a sudden it's bullying?  The head-butting, if true, is definitely a problem - but the back and forth between them and all of a sudden he can dish it out but can't take it?  Sorry - I don't buy the whole story...I believe Rutgers is stone-walling as they are freaked out about the previous incident - but pointing to one isolated incident and calling it bullying?  Sorry.  Weak.

JeepinBen

December 4th, 2013 at 2:55 PM ^

But I see a big difference between Bo announcing to a team that he'll treat them all the same (Like Dogs!) and a coach, in a Study Hall no less, screaming at a player inches from his face.

Granted, it's easy in hindsight to say "he should take the player outside, explain that he crossed a line, etc" but what happened obviously wasn't appropriate either if an academic counselor filed a report. Was it fireable? I dont know. Was it wrong? Sure.

boliver46

December 4th, 2013 at 3:12 PM ^

but I would like to know what the "banter" was that was going back and forth that escalated to this.  There is good-natured ribbing between coaches and players all the time.  Could be this escalated because of an interpreted disrespect of the coach that inspired him to get in the kid's face.  We'll never know I suppose.

justingoblue

December 4th, 2013 at 2:05 PM ^

Bo, Lombardi and probably every legendary coach have said that their approach varied between each player. Not everyone responds to screaming, and not everyone responds to a pat on the back.

FWIW I'd rather be a program where there aren't coaches calling players bitches right in their face in a random hallway. It's different when you're at practice, but that just seems like a less than ideal situation to say the least.

PeterKlima

December 4th, 2013 at 2:35 PM ^

I tink RichRod got no where barking at players and being hard on them.  I think it only works if the players know it is done "out of love" or something like that.

 

Regardless, I would rather not be a program that prides itself on calling players names, etc., but at the same time IT IS NOT THAT BIG OF A DEAL...and it definitely isnt enough to make me think anyone should even have their wrist slapped.

 

I mean I guess I would rather be a program that had handsome and good-looking caoches and equipment managers, but I don't care enough to think that have a couple big uglies is somehow wrong or worthy of an outcry.

 

This kid had a LOT of growing up to do.

justingoblue

December 4th, 2013 at 2:43 PM ^

If they lost their four highest rated recruits because of it, including their QB, he not only deserves a wrist slap but he should be canned. Maybe it isn't the worst thing in the world, but if you're behaving unprofessionally and it has that type of effect than it is a big deal, which is why I'd much rather not try to toe that line.

boliver46

December 4th, 2013 at 2:52 PM ^

is the loss of the recruits a result of the behavior - or a result of the fallout?  I tend to lean towards the latter - but of course WITHOUT the former, you would never have the latter.  LOL

Point being is I don't think a player is scared off by a dick coach if they want to go there - I think they are scared off by potential instability and implications for the staff that recruited them.

JTrain

December 4th, 2013 at 3:43 PM ^

I'd love to sit in a player meeting room after games and see how the coaches talk to the kids. I bet hoke and co. aren't all that ez on kids. I mean, I don't think he calls kids big fat puss*es...but I bet he gets the point across.

TreyBurkeHeroMode

December 4th, 2013 at 3:58 PM ^

It's sounded like a key part of The Process is that Hoke & Co. are consistent and truthful with players and recruits alike. In all of the recruiting coverage, a constant theme from commits as well as current players is that the coaching staff is "real" and "honest" and "not fake" and the like.

I know that college players often end up in a situation where the best-friend-ever coach who recruited them turns into Vein-Popping Brian Kelly Impersonator once the kid's on the practice field/court/rink/etc. I think one of Hoke's advantages is that he somehow manages to be the same guy in the recruit's living room, on the practice field and on the sideline.

Zok

December 4th, 2013 at 1:47 PM ^

Been waiting to see some improvement but he has actually regressed from last year as there is no Burke to feed him.

At this point I think Irvin needs as much PT as GRIII if not more. GRIII probably needs to start as I feel like he is the type of kid who will have no confidence (even less than now if possible) if he is benched.

Time to see what Irvin can do with more PT.

Irvin D = GRIII D if not better. GRIII also can't rebound much better.

Irvin can actually drive without turning it over

Irvin has a better stroke from 3 (if not a better %, too lazy to look). GRIII is shooting 3s with ZERO confidence. teams are actually playing off him on the perimeter and its hurting our other wings.

gbdub

December 4th, 2013 at 2:03 PM ^

Wait, how did Brandon whiff on Harbaugh due to THE PROCESS? I thought the nasty rumor was that Brandon wanted RichRod gone in November or earlier but held off THE PROCESS so that Harbaugh could wait till after his bowl game to decide? In other words the search went down the way it did because Brandon whiffed on Harbaugh, not the other way around.

Brodie

December 4th, 2013 at 2:09 PM ^

Yes, the rumor that I've always heard is that Harbaugh set the timescale because he wanted to coach Stanford in the Orange Bowl. Then, depending on the source, either he became blinded by the NFL glitz or his wife objected to a move to Michigan when there was a California option on the table. 

gbdub

December 4th, 2013 at 2:29 PM ^

Yeah that's what I was thinking.

And to be clear, I agree with the rest of Brian's criticism of Brandon's statement. It came off as unprofessional and petty (but then again that's par for the course for Brandon, who seems to rule with the ruthlessness of a twirly-mustachioed CEO but the attitude of an aged fraternity brother back on campus trying to relive his glory days).

Seriously, why the hell mention a guy that most fans wished, at least at the time and maybe now, that we'd hired instead of Hoke? So that's dumb, and then backhanded shots at former employees is just bush league.

jmblue

December 4th, 2013 at 4:19 PM ^

This is also what I heard, from a fairly connected guy - Harbaugh really wanted to coach Stanford to a BCS bowl game before he left them, and supposedly even gave us the "I'm coming if you'll wait for me" line (similar to what Miles allegedly said in 2007) - but at some point after Christmas he opened up his recruitment, so to speak.

Brodie

December 4th, 2013 at 2:04 PM ^

I don't know... I think the NYT piece does a great job of establishing why the Rutgers/Maryland move was necessary. It still looks bad, don't get me wrong, but if you actually look at long term demographic shifts, the conference had to do something to try and offset the decline of the rust belt. The Northeast was most logical geographic and cultural fit for expansion. The BTN stuff was a plus. I think in 10-20 years, this will look like a prudent decision.

M-Wolverine

December 4th, 2013 at 4:10 PM ^

THE BIG TEN COMPLETELY OWNS NEW YORK!!!!!

More seriously, does Duderstadt have a 1-800-NCA-ASUX hotline for any time someone is looking for someone to complain about college athletes? Look, we get it, you think all college sports should be a step below the Ivy League, you made your power play, lost, got shuffled out. But you're starting to look sad, Dude.

Mpfnfu Ford

December 4th, 2013 at 6:32 PM ^

It's the choice of Rutgers. If the Big 10 had taken UConn, I don't think it would be AS rough a sell. UConn might be poop at football right now, but they DID win the Big East a few years ago, and they've been elite at basketball, so you're getting SOME present day value. And honestly, the Big East already died on the Hey maybe Rutgers will one day get its shit together Hill. 

Or if you're obsessed with Rutgers, leave out Maryland. If a court rules Maryland has to pay that entire absurd buy out from the ACC, it's going to be Big 10 schools swooping in to pay it, because they're completely broke. And what will B1G schools be getting for all that money? A DC market that doesn't care much about college athletics and a school that has never consistently gotten its shit together that relies on an overcrowded recruiting footprint. Oh and a basketball team that had a brief shining moment in the early aughts when UNC was terrible. 

Yay, can't wait to have that in the conference!

Brodie

December 5th, 2013 at 3:03 AM ^

I don't disagree at all... I've always preferred Syracuse to Rutgers. I know a couple of Rutgers alums and none of them have any sort of pride or engagement with the school at all (one is a Florida fan, the other doesn't follow college sports). But I also see New Jersey as a growing producer of talent that will probably surpass Michigan in population within twenty years... a foothold there is more valuable than one in New York (not a talent hotbed in most sports) and Connecticut (ditto plus tiny). I firmly believe Maryland is there to build a bridge to UNC, which is our long term goal. It's going to be like Yalta where we sit down with Texas and the SEC (playing Churchill and Stalin, obvs) and divide the ACC amongst ourselves. I'd expect we'll take UVA and UNC, the SEC will get VT and NCSU while the Big 12 will end up with FSU, Clemson, GT, Pitt, Louisville and Miami in the name of building a bridge for WVU. The leftovers (Duke, Wake, Syracuse, BC) will merge with the AAC under the ACC banner creating a major bball conference that functions, along with the MWC, as a midmajor in college football.

Don

December 4th, 2013 at 2:39 PM ^

sneered at the idea of admitting Missouri and Pitt to the Big Ten, which I was always in favor of.

Instead, we got Rutgers and Maryland. LOL.

Space Coyote

December 5th, 2013 at 9:26 AM ^

But he's either 1B or #2 on their board right now. The other guy I guess is a bit more athletic but much less skilled of a passer. At least that's what the Miami board said that linked to my site.

I guess I didn't even know he decommitted until I read this, makes sense why they were talking about him now.

wolverine1987

December 4th, 2013 at 3:46 PM ^

runs a marketing department currently, and previously ran one at another well known company (including PR) I can concur with Brian that not only was the content (Saban, really?) ludicrous but the length was silly. A simple statement emphatically making the point needed is all you say. Unless you want people to share your opinions about things--which you should not want to do.

/Edit for spelling now with glasses on

howmuch

December 4th, 2013 at 3:37 PM ^

To me, having a few cuss words tossed at you and being put in your place as an athlete is just part of playing the game.  The bigger problem, if true, is the coach taking the incident personally, gathering support from the rest of the staff, excluding the student from team meetings, and ostracization from the team.  Basically making it impossible for him to continue as an athlete.  That's the bullying part.

M-Wolverine

December 4th, 2013 at 4:18 PM ^

Every good player who committed to Carr was "retained" by Rich, but every player like Jordan Morgan who had Rich as his "coach" all of 2 weeks in no way is any credit to Hoke.

And Kovacs was "recruited?"  I mean, how many times did he try out? I think you're dong a disservice to Kovacs to say anyone got him on the team other than Kovacs himself.

gbdub

December 4th, 2013 at 4:47 PM ^

I think the implied "knock" on the players listed is that they weren't seniors in the sugar bowl season, and Brandon implies that Lloyd Carr's last seniors were the key to our 2011 success (and that, basically, nobody could be expected to be successful after they left)

Of course, Martin WAS a senior in 2011, and committed to Carr originally, so yeah, he probably should have been left out of that argument.

Still, the comment by Brandon was unnecessary and could reasonably be read as a slight aimed at RR but hitting several of the key guys who committed to and played for RR.

M-Wolverine

December 4th, 2013 at 5:09 PM ^

It goes off on too many tangents and has too many asides that don't help the point in the least.  But this is multiple times that Martin as been listed; and others continuously take the track that everything good that came out of the 2008 and 2011 class is due to Rich, and every problem we have because of those classes is because of Carr and The Process. It's really everything. Each person got help but having players recruited to come to Michigan; each guy deserves credit for getting them to stick when he took over.