Brady Hoke: Whole staff will return next year
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:32 PM ^
...was smokin the Sisyphean rock.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:34 PM ^
Mark Dantonio was 6-7 I believe after his 3rd season at MSU before winning 11 the next two seasons. I am not a Borges supporter or even a "Hoke fan" but can we chill out for a minute. Team has talent but they need some strength, conditioning, and some development.
I am on the BRING ED ORGERON to Michigan for recruiting bandwaggon... for no reason other than he lets guys eat fried chicken at meetings. Borges and Hoke have to like that...right?
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:40 PM ^
MSU and Michigan definitely have similar resources and expectations.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:56 PM ^
MSU expects to go to Indy every year and Michigan wants to keep saying 'Ohio' and 'Little Brother'?
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:39 PM ^
hey al, Washington has an opening. don't you want to be a head coach?
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:40 PM ^
Next year is the first year where there are little to no disclaimers for performace. The players are there. They are Hoke's recruits. Many of them have meaningful experience and an off season to improve. The system was implemented this year and should be completely installed by next season. The RR era is well in the rear view mirror. Next year it's Hoke's economy, along with the rest of the staff. At this point I think stability moving forward is a good thing long term even if Borges or someone else does not grade out. With that in mind, I'm willing to give them more time based on the entire body of work and overall upside.
December 2nd, 2013 at 6:31 PM ^
No more excuses next year! That is another reason why I like this decision, this eliminates the arguing points about lack of experience, consistent coaching, etc. The experiment is running its full course. I expect everybody to get along next year here on this board with no arguments.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:42 PM ^
This decision is disturbing. It means that Hoke values loyalty more than he should. It also means that he is willing to accept the product that Borges and the offense have given the program. That is what is really depressing about all of this.
December 2nd, 2013 at 5:56 PM ^
Or maybe he believes that Borges, who has worked with these guys for three years now, is a better bet to deliver a good offense next year than a totally new coordinator. Is that really impossible to believe?
December 2nd, 2013 at 6:23 PM ^
Yes. Because of what ACTUALLY HAPPENED this year. Its like you guys think we went 2-1 this year with the only three games being Indiana, Notre Dame and Ohio State.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:42 PM ^
Keeping the staff in tact for year 4 vs bringin in new oc/ol/rb coaches. Who's to say which is better? Hoke had to make a decision. He decided that not changing was the better choice. He'll reap the consequences of that decision. From my perspective, I hope he chose correctly.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:42 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:18 PM ^
And it'll continue to, somehow, not be the (current) coaching staff's fault.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:46 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:46 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:49 PM ^
Without making any evaluative statements about the staff, I don't know if anyone here could be wholly shocked at this development, but perhaps I am wrong in this. It obviously does not thrill some people, but at no point was it out of the realm of possibility that zero changes would be made.
As for me personally, I wasn't completely enthralled with the performance of the offense this year like many, but I understand - from a continuity standpoint - why they might take this direction and give the staff another year with these same players (plus 2014, assuming there are some early contributors) and this year of experience, good and not so good. They've had a down sort of year, the first year where they were free to go "full Borges", if you will, and I don't mind seeing what the second year of "full Borges" looks like.
If 2014 has similar stumbles, yeah, there would be some pretty pressing questions for this staff, but my theory - which may be totally insane as the rest of my theories are - is that you just saw 2011 if we had never had Dilithium, or some apporximation of that scenario.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:53 PM ^
A double Mod post?
These are trying times indeed.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:33 PM ^
The great thing about the mod powers is that I can delete my own double posts.
*waves wand, which is really a martini mixer*
Problem corrected.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:44 PM ^
Not fair.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:57 PM ^
That and edited posts don't show up as new from mods. That's a big deal when you edit your posts like a certain, unnamed, mod who may or may not have a pony avatar.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:55 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:05 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:07 PM ^
Doesn't matter when you play, you get the same number of practices.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:12 PM ^
Same amount of extra practice time regardless.
And we're probably going to the Gator Bowl, which is on New Year's Day.
December 2nd, 2013 at 3:58 PM ^
Really. You have no idea.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:04 PM ^
Well now I'm on the fire Brady Hoke wagon. He can't make critical decisions apparently when it comes to his staff.
December 2nd, 2013 at 6:12 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:06 PM ^
This is pathetic. Like not studying all semester, having a failing grade throughout the semester and getting an A on the final exam to barely pass the class.
We should expect more at Michigan.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:10 PM ^
1. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Al Borges was not making an excuse when he said this was the first year they werei nstalling the offense they wanted to run. A lot of the calls he made were the right calls. Guys were open down field. Gardner missed them. Probably because he had a guy in his face in 2 seconds.
2. Hoke and Brandon haven't done their evaluations of the program yet. That won't happen until after the bowl game. This isn't set in stone.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:21 PM ^
I think that "first year" thing is a bullshit excuse. This might be the first year he's running entirely "his" offense, but the concepts were there from day one. In no way should we treat years 1 and 2 as year's -2 and -1 respectively.
I hope your second point is correct and this is merely Hoke playing coy with the media.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:16 PM ^
Honesly, I think our problem is that we're in the middle between RR and Hoke. We have a few upperclassmen that were recruited by RR and a bunch of younger guys recruited by Hoke like Green and Funchess. There's no middle ground because the 2011/2010 classes were decimated by transfers and the coaching change.
December 2nd, 2013 at 5:53 PM ^
FYI, you should update your signature - we have 910 wins.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:27 PM ^
Borges will do fine as long as he is allowed to call the kind of plays he called against Ohio. I hope the MANBALL mandate gets flushed down the crapper and we see more of the wide-open style that Borges is capable of calling.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:29 PM ^
Do you really want to fire Borges after the bowl game though?
- Who would be available?
- Firing Borges does not guarantee a better offense
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:31 PM ^
Sounds like if the Brady Hoke ship is going to sink, it will have Borges, Funk, Jackson all on board.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:35 PM ^
So who does Michigan hire for head coach after next season?
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:50 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:57 PM ^
You are probably right. I tend to forget that being mediocre is a way of life for the Michigan football program.
December 2nd, 2013 at 6:21 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:37 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:38 PM ^
Great News! Of course, I consistently expected this, from everything I've heard from both Hoke and Brandon. From my perspective, this is far more than mere "loyalty" or going back to DeBord. This is football minds assessing the situation, and seeing that the offensive line was too young and inexperienced, and that they needed the year of seasoning.
I find it interesting that Brian noted Funk's intelligence in coaching seminars. I also believe that Borges is very creative, and with a full team, they will do very well.
At the very least, terminating Borges or Funk prior to the 2014 season would be premature. By next season, Borges & Funk (& Hoke, & Mattison) will be able to be fairly assessed, for good or for bad.
What has not often been noted is how very close the entire coaching staff is with each other. The chemistry and cameraderie among coaches and wives permeates the entire program, and adds to the "family" atmosphere so many recruits and players have noted. To remove Borges and Funk would severely disrupt this strong atmosphere, to the detriment of the team.
I also debated whether or not to post my epinion, because the group think around here seems so strongly aligned against Borges. What tipped the scales is not being contrarian. Rather, from my perspective, this is 100% the right decision. And I am willing to go on record with that, even though it seems to make the majority of mgousers very unhappy.
I'd be more than happy to make a wager with any of the anti-Borges crowd: I'll bet every last point of mine against yours (point for point) that Michigan is at least 9-3 next year, at least 10-2 in 2015, and consistently at that level or better from that point forward. In fact, I'm confident enough in my prediction that I'd be willing to go negative, towards Bolivia, if we had less than 9 wins next year. I'm very happy for the future, and thrilled that Borges and Funk (et al) are staying on board.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:46 PM ^
I'm not quite as "yay borges" as you but in general I'm with you. This program has been having too damn much coaching changes the last 6 years...
I really think stability will go a long way and I sort of like the excitment of next year being "the real deal". It won't be win a NC or it's a failure but they better be in the division hunt and have a 9-3 season minimum.
I, for one, actually think that will happen. I see this team going 9-3 at worst....11-1 at best but I'd be surprised if they only dropped 1 game. if I had to bet a cool G to guess the exact number of wins I'd go 10-2.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:55 PM ^
TLDR version:
* If you don't like Borges it is because you are part of group think.
*Borges is a god of some type, regardless of what the actual evidence shows.
*This person holds up 9-3 as a successful season next year. You know becuase three losses in year four is acceptable at Michigan, even with a ridiculously easy schedule next year.
December 2nd, 2013 at 5:15 PM ^
lol the entire board is pissing about boohoo the schedule is so hard next year. Me and I guess now you are the only ones saying it isn't that bad.
Every year maybe 1-2 teams go undefeated in EQ conferences. Don't like like "yeah guyz year four we better be undefeated" like UM is some powerhouse that goes undefeated all the time....they are not...they haven't been that good in what 17 years so why are we all shocked that people think 10-2 or even 9-3 is pretty damn good for this program? Based on the last 10 years 9-3 is damn good. I wish that wasn't reality but it is. UM is a team that wins double digit games once every 3-5 and goes undefeasted every 15ish years or so.
December 2nd, 2013 at 6:33 PM ^
December 2nd, 2013 at 7:42 PM ^
They're also just a few years distant from a 30-losses-in-5-years stretch.
No program, no matter how dominant, goes 10-2 or better every year. Nobody. 9-3 happens. 7-5 happens too sometimes.
December 2nd, 2013 at 4:59 PM ^
for your 9-3 you realize they have road games @ ND, @ OSU and @ MSU right? Hoke's biggest win this year on the road was a miracle FG @ NW and crushing UConn....