Are they really opposites or the same person only slightly different?

Never mind - that question doesn't even make sense to me.

One important difference between the 2010 defense and 2014 offense:

The 2010 defense was bad in the same ways as the 2009 defense (worse, in fact), and for the same reasons. The same coordinator was in charge both years, and halfway through the 2010 season, there was no reason to believe that the defense might be any better by season's end.

The 2014 offense is bad in different ways than the 2013 offense, and at least partly for different reasons. A different coordinator is charge this year than last year, and there is at least some reason to believe the offense will be better at the end of the year than it is today.

It remains to be seen, of course, whether the offense will in fact improve as the season goes on. But on paper at least, Nussmeier has a better resume than GRob did, and has a lot more leeway to run what he knows than GRob had under RichRod. This season is a major disappointment so far, but all hope is not yet lost.

It would be consistency or execution if the plan was solid. But the offense and punt coverage is disadvantaged by the planning. It's the equivalent of a basketball offense centered around half courters and then citing consistency as the reason for only hitting 20% of the shots.

How many people were clamoring for the exact opposite of Rich Rod?  Well they got their wish.

I feel significantly less hopeful right now unfortunately.

Last year, it felt like our problems were very tangible and fixable. The OL was young and needed experience. The OC couldn't take advantage of opposing weakness nor would he account for our own weaknesses.

Both should have been mitigated. Yes I know OT is in the same position, but the interior isn't exactly lighting it up. As far as OCs go, it seemed like Nuss is as much a slam dunk as there is in coaching.

Neither seemed to make much difference and this offense seems frustratingly familiar and making frustratingly famliar mistakes and even adding some new ones. Coupled with the uncertainty at the end of the year should Hoke be canned, I just have a very very bad feeling about what this program will look like for the forseeable future. I am at heart an optimist when it comes to Michigan football, but I have to admit, I'm finding it hard to see things to hitch whatever optimism I have left to.

Another big difference is Rich Rod was only given 3 years. Hoke is now on year 4 

I've found it strange that Michigan seemed to be under center the entire game.  Gardner has shown he can play, however, he seems to have regressed a lot.  I wonder how much of it is just him not comfortable playing under center. When he is under center, he turns his head away from the defense and rarely does he face forward, identify what the defense now looks like, and takes a look anywhere but his primary reciever.

When he has played in a shotgun, he seems a lot more sure of himself and appears to make both better throws and better (more?) reads for his recievers.  Personally I'd prefer to go right to a shotgun.  run jet sweeps with Norfleet, draws with Hayes (who has made some excellent blocks), dump offs to Butt, and downfield throws to Funchess and Chesson, or even a wheel route to Hayes or Norfleet.  Add in the occasional QB draw or zone read, and that is a lot for a defense to handle, plus our QB feels comfortable in this offense.

I am all for head coaches believing in their overall strategies, but it is frustrating to watch two coaches fail due to stubborness.

"I have not given up hope that this offense can turn it around and be good enough to allow this defense the chance to win a B1G Championship." 

Ron!! Oh Ron. 

Enjoy your posts as always but this little hope in your soul will be crushed soon enough ;)  This offense is somehow worse than last year's despite a relatively better run game and OL than last year - which is amazing.

I think we have a good defense that will finish top 20 when all said and done but the stats are lying a bit for all Big 10 teams who play a lot of bad MAC teams non conf and then each other.  We had 3 of the top 7 defenses in 2013 in the conf.  We currently have 5 of the top 14.  No one believes Big 10 defenses are that elite - we just play a lot of bad offenses in the Midwest in conference and outside of conference.   This pads out statrs.  Just like Pac 12 teams dont play much defense at all and their offensive stats are padded.  We're the inverse here in the Big 10.

So let's take it all with some grains of salt, I will write up a piece on this tomorrow perhaps.

...anybody who thinks DB is comparing Hoke to RR and concerned about being equally fair will be disappointed.

DB wants Hoke to work out- not only because Hoke was his own hire, but because of what he felt went wrong with RR: Michigan had lost its physical toughness, its physicality.  That was painfully obvious in all the losses to MSU, OSU, and most of all, the embarassing bowl loss.  That aspect wasn't getting any better, and- like it or not- toughness has, should, and will be part of the Michigan 'brand'.

While Hoke's teams have improved in terms of physical toughness, neither Hoke's teams nor RR's teams had enough in the way of mental toughness. In my recollection, RR's teams tended to fade in the 2nd half, especially against better opponents. Denard's feet saved RR's offenses.

As bad as the OL and other problems are, what we have to deal with at the moment is two QBs who panic under presure.  Which, of course, invites more pressure.

Throwing motion is just a physical aspect, and yet it notoriously hard to fix.  Urban Meyer and some of the best QB gurus around couldn't fix Tebow.

Some pyschological aspects are even tougher.  While coaching ability can fix a lot of things, coolness under pressure are a lot more difficult to coach into a player.

Shane gets the start, hits a few of those passes that Devin often seems to throw behind the receiver, make some nice runs, don't kill the drive with penalties or minus yardage plays and we score on Minnesota early. That leads to confidence and momentum, which leads to a win. Then it is on to Rutgers and another win. Next thing you know, we are on a roll.

One common characteristic. RR had some young defenses, filled with more underclass men then upper. Same is true of BH and his offense. Don't get me wrong, I've seen enough cluelessness to make me want Hoke gone, he's in over his head, but youth is a real thing. I wish I could find the link, but I'm pretty sure I read a mathlete post back in like 2012 that said that 2013 would be worse than 2012, and that 2014 would be the low point in terms of this, with a rapid maturing in 2015 and 2016.

I don't miss RR. His offenses could look great at times, but when we faced stout defenses, we could not score. More importantly, I never liked the hire because of his record with the kids. He had a few players like Pacman Jones who were immensely talented but cause problems everywhere they went. 

That said, I do think Denard and Devin would have fared much better in his system. I recall reading somewhere on MGoblog that Nuss had experience mixing spread and pro-style. (I also remember reading that about Borges.) I don't know why Nuss is not mixing in the spread except possibly in an effort to teach the line one thing until they get it right. It's the opposite approach Al took, in which he tried every thing he could think of and confused the hell out of them. 

I feel for both of those QBs. I think they are victims of circumstances. I think this line has the talent to perform. It takes a lot of time, more time than Devin has in his career.