Enough with the discussion of whether Hoke (or Borges or Funk or anyone else) should be fired. This is why I am disgusted with college football fans and, at times, this website. Heaven forbid we have a down season or two. Ignore whether Hoke and his staff develop young men, keep a clean program, are good for the school and graduate their players. It's all about how many wins this year or in two years.

What should we expect from our program? Teams that show character and in which we can take pride.

I think I'm officially on vacation. I need a break from this place.

Enjoy the clusterfuck, kids. I'm gone.

take 9 in 2014 if followed by 11 in 2015 + wins over Ohio and MSU and appearing in the B1G title game.

The Ohio game may have bought a bit more time, unless we get crushed in the bowl game, but there is more rumbling among the fans than I have heard in a while.  Ticket sales for next season may put a lot of pressure on Brandon and Hoke.  If, by 2015, we aren't in the mix for a conference championship when we play Ohio, I think Hoke will be in trouble.

Ranked by importance:

1. 9 wins or more in each of '14 and '15 season.

2. Win(s) over at least one of MSU and OSU in each season. (ND doesn't matter in '14, frankly).

3. A B1G title.

Harbaugh's 4 years at Stanford were: 4-8, 5-7, 8-5, 12-1

Between Harbaugh and the 1999 season when they went to the Rose Bowl Stanford had gone:  5-6, 9-3, 2-9, 4-7, 4-7, 5-6 and 1-11. 

I wouldn't exactly say Harbaugh's first 2 years were blistering.  He did however have some big upsets in those first 2 years.

Our 2014 schedule is brutal: ND, MSU, and OSU on the road, along with Utah as a non-conference opponent.

2015 sets-up much better; we're at Utah to open, then face Oregon State and BYU as challenges at home, but have MSU and OSU at The Big House.  Our conference road opponents are Minnesota, Penn State, Maryland, and Indiana.  Very winnable.

What I'm saying is that eight wins in 2014 might be tolerated, depending on how we look.  We need at least 10 wins in 2015.

I really don't see how this is a discussion of whether or not Hoke should be fired. Its looking at a set of data and coming to the conclusion that Hoke would need 10 wins in each of the next two seasons to match Michigan's historical precedent. The OP isn't saying if Hoke gets to say, 18 wins, he should be gone, he's saying that based on his research we're still underachieving compared to Michigan in the past. And really, two nine win seasons would mean two four loss seasons and I think most of us would agree with that, especially if we're looking at 2015 as being the year Michigan really breaks out. 

The title is bad and misleading.  The data and metric correlate to how many Hoke needs to put the program on a similar arc as other successful coaches.  I'd go more with something like "How many wins until We're 'Back'" or something like that.

Other than that, I'd look more at the progression of seasons, not that he needs "20 wins" in the next two years.  If he wins goes 13-1 next year, losing in the first round of the playoffs, and follows that up with a 7-6 season and a bowl loss, does that keep his seat from getting warm?

is how the team got to that win-loss record. This means weighing the team's perceived talent and performance against its opponents. In 2013, Michigan lost 3 games against teams they were capable of beating due primarily to poor offense. This blame can spread to the coordinator, position coaches, RR's bad oline recruiting, and the interior line talent not developed yet by some subjective percentage discussed in one of Seth's posts during the season.

Given that Hoke has decided to retain the full coaching staff, we will be able to see if last season's problems were due to youth or coaching this next season. This will weigh more heavily than simply taking the number of wins and losses and deciding if UNACCEPTABLE or not. The schedule also gets the three hardest games on the road, a 9-win season may show large improvements. Then again, if one or more of the opponents crater next season, a 9-win season could mean Michigan's offense didn't improve very much despite getting more interior oline experience, so expectations are not something to be held static.

I agree with what your data is showing in that a good coach makes the team better, great coach makes the program better.

Before I started reading I thought to myself he really needs 20 wins over the next two years for all "hot seat" talk to go away. Funny that the data says that 20 wins pushes his 5 yr winning % to that of UM's historical average.

I would cut him some slack given that he came after what the data says is the "worst coach in the modern era". That is going to cause some growing problems that we saw this year and last. Probably enough to account for ~2 losses.

Given that, I think he needs the 20 wins less the 2 outlined above. So basically to answer your question, if he has <=18 wins then i could see a legit case being made for a firing (esp if at least 1 of the 9 wins isn't against MSU or OSU in each year). 20 wins and this isn't a discussion anymore.

Consider though, If UM splits with MSU and OSU (soon to be division rivals) over the next two years we will be 4-6 vs them through 5 years of Hoke. By splitting we also hurt our chances of even winning the division. Lets face it, OSU is not losing to anyone in the Big Ten outside of MSU, UM, or perhaps Wisky on the road. UM can only afford 1 BIG loss a season if it ever wants to win the division going forward.

5 years of Hoke without winning the division I think mean trouble. That why I think two 9 win seasons still gets hoke in HOT water. maybe fired, 20 wins means there is a chance he probably made at least 1 BIG title game.

It's fine to look at two seasons, but we've got to get through 2014 first. If we go 8-4, or (god forbid) 7-5, next year, that's it. There is no 2015 for Hoke (unless those 8 wins include wins over both MSU and OSU).

Think of all the grumbling this year at 7-5. Our AD felt the need/pressure to make a fanboy-like blog post to settle down the fanbase and recruits. If there is ANOTHER season like 2013, a blog post, or even finally firing an asst coach, isn't going to cut it.

The challenge is everyone acknowledges that even if the team is better next year, the record might not improve much due to the more difficult schedule. But them's the breaks - we should have made more hay this year, when we had the easiest schedule I can remember for a UM team.

If UM wins 9 or more games in 2014, Hoke will surely keep his job (b/c we'll be 'back' in a NYD bowl, potentially a big one). For 2015, though, the floor for regular season wins will still be nine games, and likely at least one higher than that. Hoke and his staff aren't getting paid their big bucks to just finish in the upper half in the B1G. He's got to start seriously contending for championships, and you very likely aren't doing that at 9 or fewer wins.

But again, I will worry about 2015 in January of 2015. We've got to get through the 2014 season first.

I am of the opinion that wins per season is overrated.  If the schedule is easy what is the point of beating a bunch of cupcakes?  Some have alluded that our records with our rivals is important.  I will take it a step further in that we should look at how we do against teams in the top25.   The only time a game verses a Akron, UCONN, or MAC team should ever matter is if it is a loss. 

In regards to how many wins Hoke requires to retain his job, it is some very little number.  The reality is the Big10 is so bad a team of corpses can shamble to six victories. APP State, Miami(OH), Rutgers, PSU, IU, and NW should be auto wins.  Win one contested game and you get your 7 wins.  

I would be far more impressed with a 7-5 record after a SEC gauntlet then 10-2 in the Little10 any day.

He can go 3 - 1 out of conference and 5 - 3 in conference and lose a bowl next year

and the next year he can go 3-1, 6-2, and  lose a bowl and survive.  

Obviously most all of us would find this reality brutal, but many would also consider cutting bait likely to be problematic.

But I really believe that another weak in-conference year (3-5 is very RRod-ish), and 4 - 4 is still total BS as well, with 50% basically being his in-conf record the last two years.

What will / would exacerbate this would be the way they lose when they do.  If it is more undeniably abject stubborn incompetence from an OC that BH does not address, then the number gets higher, style points matter.

I hope this whole conversation becomes academic due to him addressing the OC and having success, but the bottom line is he has a very low hurdle for survival, lower than it should be given the recruiting and overall resources he has to work with.  I would personally set the minimum at 19 given OSU / MSU become the wins.

What NCAAF team does less with the overall level of talent than M?  Depressing.

why are you looking 2 years into the future?  if next year is poor, he may not get another.

I'm guessing only if we maintain this 7-5 win seasons, but I would imagine he's got at least two more years to build up depth and get his guys to upperclassmen level.

I want Hoke to get at least two more years, but in that time frame, he needs to win at least one conference title and get at least nine wins next season and ten wins in 2015. His leash is getting shorter.

but I don't really think the mild conclusion that "5 year average < program all time average leads to getting fired" is pretty far fetched. 

If Michigan wins 9 games or more each of the next 2 years, including at least 1 win over MSU and OSU each, I don't think anyone in their right mind would want Hoke fired. The progression would be pretty obvious. He took over a somewhat talented team with horrible defensive coaching and made them competent enough to win a Sugar Bowl, they then lost the majority of that talent and had gaping depth/talent holes these last 2 years, then (assuming those 9 wins) rounded it out with better talent while completing scheme changes. 

The program would certainly be on the way up from where it was and firing Hoke would be a completely awful decision, regardless of whether his 5 year average matched the all time average at UM or not. 

As long as he wins at least 7 games, Hoke should be safe. The schedule is tougher next season, so I would be happy if the young team could win 8 or 9.  Now 2015 he will need 9 or 10 wins. If 2015 ends up with 7 or 8 wins, then Hoke may not be back in 2016.

what Brandon would do and what my expectations are.  If Hoke wins 9 in '14 and 10 in'15.  Brandon will give him anextension and tell everyone "we're on the way..."

Problem is, at that rate, Michigan will still be third at best in the East Division and likely fourth at best in the conference.  If Meyer stays at OSU for at least 2 more years, OSU wins 11-12 games each year possibly more.  MSU with Dantonio will get better and Hoke will at best be .500 against Michigan's main rivals over the next two years.

We need to face facts, Michigan is not competing for a National title in the next two years, maybe a conference title, but not a national title.  OSU is already competing for it and MSU is a year or two ahead of Michigan right now.

If Hoke goes 7-5 or 8-4 in '14 and 9-3 in '15.  Brandon better be looking because the elite of the conference and certainly the country will have pull way ahead of Michigan.

It may be difficult to quantify, but I think there is definitely a need for stability for stability's sake in our program right now.

So not only is Hoke succeeding a coach who only had an average .402 winning percentage and improving on that, which is to his advantage.  He is also succeeding a coach who only had three years in the captain's chair, when this program is accustomed to longer term coaching solutions.

I think, therefore, that Hoke also gets more tolerance for not meeting our historical winning percentage because at this point, I think there is a real argument for some stability lest we get a reputation as a program forever in transition.

Yes, I think that Spread vs Manball at this point is less important than picking a fricking system and sticking to it.

That said, I am actually pretty enthusiastic for the future under Hoke AND Borges, OT issues notwithstanding.

Next year: loss to ND (given), split with Ohio/MSU on the road, and no more than 1 other loss. If we lose to BOTH Ohio/MSU, then must be perfect 9-0. 8 and 4 isn't going to work after 8-4 with bowl loss in '12 and 7-5 right now.

2015: 10 wins with MINIMUM split of Ohio/MSU at home.

Bowl wins make us feel better but Bo was 5-12 in bowl games but >50% wins vs. Ohio.

Lloyd survived his 1st two years with 17-8 because he was 3-1 vs. Ohio/MSU.

Assuming 1-1 in bowls, this comes out to 20 wins total (minimum).

I won't get into 2016 and later without seeing 20 wins (including bowl game) the next two years. 

At least 20 IMO. Considering his 19 in the first 2 seasons, I don't think 20 is unrealistic.

Then in 2015, we need to win 12! Nice!

just enough.

Its not just about number of wins. I think Hoke and co. needs to post another winning record next season, say 8-4, 9-3, showing some progress to keep the haters at arms length.

There is a year for me that will be my "final evaluation" and that is 2016. This will give Hoke his first "real" recruiting class in their RS JR and SR years. This will give us the best insight into what the future of Michigan football will be under Hoke. Hoke's DNA will be throughout the entire roster and the experience will be there to boot. This would be Shane Morris RS JR or SR season. Michigan must be playing in the B1G Championship game that year.

Hoke needs to have Michigan playing in the B1G Championship game in 2015 or 2016.

It would take complete and utter failure for Dave Brandon to fire Brady Hoke.