Coach Hoke: The Numbers Thus Far

I think Hoke has clearly established himself (and of course, the program) into the upper ranks of the Big 10.  He seems on his way to being a reliable 8 or 9 game minimum winner each year.

The next level up is to be the kind of program that can win the big games on a semi-consistent basis.  I'm not sure Hoke and Michigan has quite got to that level yet.  Yet.  But I suspect that time is coming, and coming relatively soon.

The intangible about Hoke's teams is they seem never to fold.  As you point out, there are few blow-out losses.

All the signs are pointing up for the Maize and Blue.

This is a really interesting post, and the data is very nicely presented, so kudos to you. I think you do a great job of defining where our expectations ought to be.

I think both Rod and Hoke cannot be fully captured by such a small sample size - their first three seasons are something like an "interview" period. As you state, 8-5 is not acceptable, but just as Rod's first two years can certainly be blamed on a transition, I think this year is certainly a victim of the circumstances Hoke walked into (and last year was influenced as well).

In year 3 it became clear that despite his offensive wizardry, Rod's defenses were bad and not getting better. I think for Hoke, while his third year isn't as critical as it was for Rod, we'll have a great idea what his ceiling is as a coach. We've got a young but highly-touted group of offensive linemen who'll be teamed with a veteran group of backs and a veteran defense, most of whom have proved their worth. While I agree whole-heartedly on your thoughts regarding the defense, I'm cautious about the offense - I think the drop in Denard's passing and the running game were because of the interior line. I know there was a shakeup there, but ultimately it does concern me that we lost only a single lineman from last season and saw the production drop that much.

That said, Funk and Borges have a track record for knowing what they're doing. I'm hoping that while our young O-Line may struggle next season and keep us from smelling Roses, we'll see a unit that's gelling by the end of the season, and poised for great things in 2014.

I believe one of the keys to seeing lower number of wins is the rise of the SEC. In general, there seems of be a rise in the quality of teams in other conferences. Hence the bowl games are generally more competetive than they used to be. It is also a product of tougher out of conference schedules.

Also recruiting bases have gradually shifted southwards hence the southern teams are doing better than they did in the past.

The large victory margin in the early Bo era must also take into account that the conference schedule was a true round robin and they were fewer non-conference cupcakes. That shows the tremendous superiority of the Wolverines over most of the Big Ten (except OSU) during that time.

By next year Hoke will have more his own players.  We'll also see how much our offense was dependent on Denard.  I expect a 9-10 win seaon, but my real concern is whether he can beat Urban Meyer.

I think Hoke has changed the tide on the rivalry. Hell people in Ohio are starting to believe him. Never in a million years I would have thought that. Selling Michigan jerseys is a good start.

But seriously, I like Hoke. Still don't understand what Borges was thinking in the second half of The Game and was ready to call for his head after that game, but I trust Hoke to figure it out and lead us to dominance. 

Didn't Bo's teams go something like four or five years without falling out of the top 10?

As we think about Hoke at the two year mark, I am reminded again of why four years really is the only acceptable time to assess a head coach's performance.  I felt this way about Rich Rod, too, but his defenses were such an embarrassment that DB did the only thing possible in making the change after 3.  So I agree that next year will be pretty telling, and I am looking forward to a team that seriously challenges for the Big Ten title.  But year 4 will be fully-Hoke model that is revved up to full steam.  I think we will be very pleased with a Bo-like program that cranks out a regular 10+ wins.  Alot will be riding on the OL class that came in last year, but I think Kalis and Co are not going to disappoint.  

BTW, the above comment was not meant as critcism, just comment.  Thanks for a fine diary post.

In Bo's first years, the scholarship limit was 115.  Michigan had great personnel, but players had tuned Bump Elliott out, and were more interested in the "Den of Mellow Men" than beating Ohio State.  The rest of the Big Ten basically sucked.  

Bo and Woody were able to play power football and succeed because they were bigger and faster, and more motivated than everyone else.  Michigan's second string would come in and run over the first string of a lot of Big Ten teams during those years.  Alabama couldn't even pull that off in the 85 scholarship era.

As for what Hoke has restored at Michigan, the main thing is that the saboteurs and whiners are happy now and are no longer telling midwest coaches not to send their kids to Michigan. That will keep what is being referred to here as "recruiting disasters" at certain positions from happening.  Also, Hoke's conservative style, while it won't produce many undefeated seasons, will keep Michigan from being blown out when they lose.  

Michigan now has their Lloyd Carr v2.  Expect an average of 3.5 losses per year, happy boosters, and a full Big House with lots of money coming in.  The majority has spoken, and they want MANBALL.  "Michigan football" is back.

In the 15-25 years that I have left in a reasonable projection of life span, I would like to see one undisputed National Championship for the Wolverines.  I just hope that somewhere, among all of the inevitable 3 and 4 loss seasons, Brady Hoke can pull off one "miracle season and take an NCAA Championship trophy back to Ann Arbor.

I'm hoping Hoke will transcend the 8 and 9 win seasons to really push us for national championships on a consistent basis. Unfortunately we really need some elite players at the skill positions, Greene would be a huge get. Some blue chip wide receivers would make it more possible

I also agree the sample space is way too small.   When you are comparing a coach with 2-3 years of work verse ten years local events and luck will not weigh out.   For example Hoke did not have PSU and Wisconsin on his schedule.   Combine that with the decay of Iowa and the destruction of Illinois and I think you can make a case that the Big10 was a much stronger conference three years ago.   R^2 was also stuck with a debacle at QB his first year, a true freshmen his 2nd, and a raw but talented sophmore his last.   Compare to Hoke who has been able to make a go with junior, a senior the first half of this year plus Gardner on the back half.   All of these things even out.  How well will Hoke do when he Dcoordinator is only human and not a God?  Mattison will not be there forever, though it would be nice.

Since some people are putting in predictions for next year if we do not bring in a top RB, next year will be very tough.  A lot of people are assuming the RB problems are completely on the line.  If we go back to 2004 Michigan was also struggling.   Somewhere in the 1st half, Lloyd Carr inserts Mike Hart and the rest is history.  Furthermore, look at any game from 2004-2007 and compare when Hart played verses not playing or being hurt.   It is the same line yet one RB was succesful and everyone else was not?

So before we run our graduating senior linemen under the bus let us put things in perspective.  Next years young uber recruits will only do as well as the RB.  So pray for Green.

I also agree the sample space is way too small.   When you are comparing a coach with 2-3 years of work verse ten years local events and luck will not weigh out.   For example Hoke did not have PSU and Wisconsin on his schedule.   Combine that with the decay of Iowa and the destruction of Illinois and I think you can make a case that the Big10 was a much stronger conference three years ago.   R^2 was also stuck with a debacle at QB his first year, a true freshmen his 2nd, and a raw but talented sophmore his last.   Compare to Hoke who has been able to make a go with junior, a senior the first half of this year plus Gardner on the back half.   All of these things even out.  How well will Hoke do when he Dcoordinator is only human and not a God?  Mattison will not be there forever, though it would be nice.

Since some people are putting in predictions for next year if we do not bring in a top RB, next year will be very tough.  A lot of people are assuming the RB problems are completely on the line.  If we go back to 2004 Michigan was also struggling.   Somewhere in the 1st half, Lloyd Carr inserts Mike Hart and the rest is history.  Furthermore, look at any game from 2004-2007 and compare when Hart played verses not playing or being hurt.   It is the same line yet one RB was succesful and everyone else was not?

So before we run our graduating senior linemen under the bus let us put things in perspective.  Next years young uber recruits will only do as well as the RB.  So pray for Green.

In Bo's first six years he rarely played ranked teams outside of Ohio and the Rose Bowl opponents. ND was not on the schedule and the Big Ten outside of Ohio was not strong at all. In those six years, Bo was 2-3-1 v. Ohio and 0-2 in the Rose Bowl. In those six years Bo did not have a bowl game in four seasons. When the scholarship limits came into effect, the team played ND every year, the Big Ten became more balanced and Bo had to play in a bowl game every year, the performance suffered.  I think Carr's record is more impressive given the much tougher schedules, increase in games played, scholarship limits, a national championship and a bowl challenge each year.