Brandon turned down Sumlin after RR
So Dave Brandon interviewed Sumlin, but wanted a "Michigan man" and we got Hoke. Starts around the 39 minute mark.
September 30th, 2014 at 3:49 PM ^
I mean, this is about a coaching change. And...this....
September 30th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^
sorry
September 30th, 2014 at 3:50 PM ^
dammit
September 30th, 2014 at 3:50 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 30th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^
In fairness, Sumlin was a pretty mediocre candidate at that time. He was coming off a 5-7 year with Houston.
September 30th, 2014 at 3:55 PM ^
September 30th, 2014 at 4:01 PM ^
September 30th, 2014 at 4:04 PM ^
Extremely well
September 30th, 2014 at 4:19 PM ^
...showing up in a helicopter.
September 30th, 2014 at 8:48 PM ^
He means that Sumlin is a massive oversigner. He couldn't do that at Michigan.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:06 PM ^
In 2011 @ Houston, he was 12 - 1.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:11 PM ^
Hoke was in place for the 2011 season. That was Sumlin's breakout year at Houson. That's why at the time his hiring would have looked suspect.
Of course he also had a 10-4 campaign under his belt. Honestly his resume was not any better than Hoke's at the time but he was missing the line item on his CV that said "coached at Michigan"
September 30th, 2014 at 4:16 PM ^
Hoke was hired in January of 2011, right after the 2010 football season.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:50 PM ^
I just did a whole diary advocating for Todd Graham (booo me!) doing a ton of comparisons to Sumlin. They both had 4 years in the exact same division of Conference USA. They overlapped 3 of their 4 years together. LINK here.
Both had stellar first 2 years, both stumbled in year 3, and both surged back to heights in year 4. Sumlin was coming off his 5-7 in 2010 but Graham was coming off his 4th year. If he came here instead of Pittsburgh I wonder how history would have changed. He would have never been considered a "bad dude" for how he left Pittsburgh and based on what Sumlin had done we'd have had a very nice few seasons - and his offense is about 90 degrees in between RR's and BH's.
He also had Chad Morris I belive in his 4th year at Tulsa so instead of going to Clemson, I could see Chad coming to UM with Graham.
Coach 1 below is Graham, Coach 2 is Sumlin
Coach 1: 36-17 W/L. Three 10+ win seasons and 1 down year. Total offense ranked as Top 5 in the country 3 of the 4 years he was there. Defense was not good 2 of the 4 years, but in this type of conference anything in the 60s-70s is considered "decent".
| Tot Off | Tot Def | ||
| 2007 | 10-4 | 1 | 108 |
| 2008 | 11-3 | 1 | 74 |
| 2009 | 5-7 | 35 | 85 |
| 2010 | 10-3 | 5 | 111 |
Coach 2: 36-17 W/L. Two 10+ win seasons and 1 down year. Total offense ranked as Top 5 in the country 3 of the 4 years he was there. Defense was not good for 3 of the 4 years, but in this type of conference anything in the 60s-70s is considered "decent".
| Tot Off | Tot Def | ||
| 2008 | 8-5 | 2 | 100 |
| 2009 | 10-4 | 1 | 111 |
| 2010 | 5-7 | 11 | 103 |
| 2011 | 13-1 | 1 | 62 |
September 30th, 2014 at 4:10 PM ^
He wasn't a "mediocre" candidate. He was one of the best offensive minds in football after being at OU for two years, in which he had one of the top offensive units in college football. His 2010 Houston team was decimated by injuries, and Case Keenum was out for the year.
Being 47-50 in the MAC and MWC is mediocre.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:21 PM ^
So if Michigan's next hire is a guy with a 23-16 record at a Conference USA school who just finished a losing season, you would be happy?
September 30th, 2014 at 4:26 PM ^
Not to speak for OP, but I think he's saying that would make him happier than a guy with a losing record in the MAC and MW, if those are his two options. If he is ineed saying that.. I indeed agree.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:27 PM ^
If they can find a guy who recruits and coaches like Sumlin, then yeah, count me in.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:48 PM ^
oh bullshit
at the time nobody knew or cared how he coached or recruited. I'd kill for Sumlin now but in the halcyon days of January, 2011 we'd have all gone WTF at the hiring of a guy who'd just gone 5-7 at Houston. His success at OU would've been chalked up to the system already in place and his 10 win season would have been credited to Art Briles players, with Briles having just led Baylor to their first bowl in forever.
September 30th, 2014 at 11:27 PM ^
Noooooo, we just hired a guy who had seasons of 2 wins, three seasons 4 wins, a 5 win season, a 7 win season, sprinkled in with a 12 and 9 win season.
We all would have went WTF at the hiring of Brady Hoke if he didn't coach at Michigan in the 90s. But THIS IS MICHIGAN!
September 30th, 2014 at 11:31 PM ^
well, I mean, one of us was actually here at the time so one of us would know better than the other
October 1st, 2014 at 1:13 AM ^
Trying to use tenure on mgoblog to make a point
come on dude. I've been reading this site since 2008
September 30th, 2014 at 5:01 PM ^
I'm with Lord Grantham here. I am posting multiple candidates over in the diaries, and reading all the "CC" threads and I am convinced there is no candidate most on these blogs would be be happy with outside of a Harbaugh or Saban.... i.e. the dream crowd.
At that time Sumlin had 3 years of HC experience. He took over for Art Briles. His record at the end of 2010 was 23-16. That's .590 - not bad but not "becoming of a Michigan man". He had just come off a 5-7 year. People would have looked at his record and said he lived off Art Briles recruits the first 2 years at Houston and was trending down and boo'd Sumlin's hire big time.
A lot of revisionist history goes on when you have more data. I am very convinced if Nick Saban had been hired at UM instead of LSU (if there had been an opening and Saban was the coach at Wisconsin rather than MSU) he would have been roundly boo'd. Four mediocre seasons and then a 9-2 season... and a "job hopper".
People are looking for a unicorn that doesn't exist. Only 2 candidates the past decade have had nearly flawless resumes - Brian Kelly post Cincinnati and Urban Meyer post Utah. That's it. Everyone else has warts but people look at who has succeeded after the fact and then don't realize they were flawed candidates one way or the other at the time of the hire. Charlie Strong right now could be deemed "an invention of Terry Bridgewater" if you wanted to be a cynic. People mock James Franklin here. etc.
There are plenty of good NCAA coaches - they all have warts.
September 30th, 2014 at 6:38 PM ^
I'd be happier than I would be if it were a guy with a 47-50 record in the Mountain West and MAC.
ed: sorry this had already been pointed out.
Anyway agree with the sentiment that Sumlin wasn't a very attractive candidate then. But what we got was a joke. Hopefully things will go better this time around. I think we definitely have more talent to offer now than four years ago. I think.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:12 PM ^
I want Dave Brandon fired as much as the next guy, but when Michigan hired Hoke Sumlin's three year record at Houston was 22 and 15, which were his only three years as a head coach.
It would have been nice had Brandon had the ability to actual ID a bright future coach. But I also don't think the fan base would have been happy if we fired spread Rich Rod, only to bring in another spread coach with 3 unimpressive years as a head coach.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:25 PM ^
But you have to also admit that even with Sumlin's 5-7 record in 2010, HIS RESUME WAS STILL BETTER THAN BRADY HOKE'S AT THE TIME. Brady Hoke was sitting below .500 as a HC, had 5 of his 8 seasons have 5 or less wins, and took 7 seasons to get double digit wins in the MAC. And Sumlin was a great OC at Oklahoma previous to head coaching. Plus, it is the AD's job to identifiy the hot new coach. You may consider it an unfair job requirement, but it is one regardless.
But we can agree on wanting Brandon fired.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:37 PM ^
I am not trying to argue Brady Hoke was the right hire, he has clearly shown himself to be a terrible hire, but straight up comparing records isn't always the best way to judge a head coach.
I don't know anything about how good/bad Ball State or SDSU was before Hoke took over, but Hoke's record over the same three years Sumlin was a head coach was 25 and 13. In addition, a guy like Tim Beckman was 21 and 16 as a head coach before Illinois and Darrell Hazell was 16 and 10 in two years before Purdue.
Again, Brandon and Hoke both need to be fired, both are terrible at their jobs and Brandon deserves blame for hiring Hoke instead of anyone better. I completely agree its the AD's job to hire the right guy, thats what they get paid the big bucks, but I don't think at the time anyone would have viewed Sumlin as an improvement over Rich Rod so complaining about missing out on Sumlin is a bit of revisionist history.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:20 PM ^
In fairness, his resume was still far better than Hoke's at the time. Except Hoke was a "Michigan Man".
September 30th, 2014 at 4:53 PM ^
no it wasn't
Hoke's resume at the time read like that of a turn around artist who took Ball State to a 12-1 season and turned SDSU from perpetual losers into a 9 win bowl team. At that moment Sumlin looked like a guy who'd taken over a Houston program that was cresting under Art Briles and driven it to shit after 3 seasons.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:53 PM ^
no it wasn't
Hoke's resume at the time read like that of a turn around artist who took Ball State to a 12-1 season and turned SDSU from perpetual losers into a 9 win bowl team. At that moment Sumlin looked like a guy who'd taken over a Houston program that was cresting under Art Briles and driven it to shit after 3 seasons.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:53 PM ^
no it wasn't
Hoke's resume at the time read like that of a turn around artist who took Ball State to a 12-1 season and turned SDSU from perpetual losers into a 9 win bowl team. At that moment Sumlin looked like a guy who'd taken over a Houston program that was cresting under Art Briles and driven it to shit after 3 seasons.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:36 PM ^
That season #1 QB Case Keenum and their #2 QB were both lost for the season in game 3. Remember Bellomy at Nebraska 2012?
September 30th, 2014 at 5:02 PM ^
...were the reason his defense graded out 96th in the country (dFEI, which is tempo-adjusted). They were 114th in rushing defense, 103rd in total defense, 96th in points allowed.
Do you really think that's what we were looking for at the time?
September 30th, 2014 at 4:46 PM ^
I personally think that Brandon hired Hoke so he can micromange him just like he does the rest of the athletics department. Hoke is Brandon's puppet. Brandon wants Michigan to return the the glory days the Mchigan of past. No AD should sit in on film sessions with the coaches. Brandon barely played football and the game has come a long way since his "lack of playing" days while at Michigan.
September 30th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^
That's just good leadership there by Dave Brandon. That gimmicky offense won't work in the B1G.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:05 PM ^
Well, dinosaur MANBALL looks like it is working out well for us. Why do people think that different or newer types of offensive schemes will not work in the B1G when they work everywhere else? Is this mentality also the reason why the B1G is horrible at football?
September 30th, 2014 at 4:14 PM ^
Dude, MANBALL is working great at UM. It's just not being executed. But if you imagine all those blocks being made, and all the passes completed to WRs, it's a really, really good offense.
September 30th, 2014 at 5:11 PM ^
I commend you sir. Nothing I could say can't be expressed by the above.
September 30th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^
Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwww....
Fuck us, right?
September 30th, 2014 at 3:51 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 30th, 2014 at 4:16 PM ^
Yep, but you're having a hell of a ride while you have him.
September 30th, 2014 at 3:55 PM ^
Classic Dave!!!
September 30th, 2014 at 4:02 PM ^
September 30th, 2014 at 3:56 PM ^
Sumlin's offense was probably too spready (*maybe?) for UM at the time. I hope they don't limit themselves this go around because a lot of the good college canidates are spread guys.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:03 PM ^
Brandon (and most fans) wanted to never see Michigan operate from a spread offense again, and that's how Sumlin rolls (although the transition would have been much easier!).
September 30th, 2014 at 4:20 PM ^
coach until Brandon is gone. He's going to want to hire another BH so we can keep the Power Football from the 90's train going. I just think we should be flexible in who we hire as far as their offensive philosophy goes. Yes, we need to be able to use the personnel that we have. But, I want to see an offense that is balanced yet is 21st century - whatever that mean.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:09 PM ^
...to coaches who would be able to make use of the roster they expect to have for the next two or three years.
First we bring RR in to run a QB-run-heavy spread with Ryan Mallett Steven Threet and Nick Sheridan, then we try to run a WCO with drop-back pocket passer Denard Robinson.
Change is fine but the complete 180-degree turns every few years have to stop.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:12 PM ^
Yes, Denard ran a WCO offense the year we went 11-2 and won the sugar bowl.
September 30th, 2014 at 4:52 PM ^
Thankfully, Borges was flexible enough to adapt his offense to run some Denard stuff--in fact, his first two playcalls here were straight out of RR's playbook. People here were pissed that he didn't do more (and some are convinced we would have been 14-0 if RR had been left in place), but at least he tried.
Establishing that should have been part of the hiring process, and for all we know it was. All I'm asking is that we do the same next time. I'm sure the Borges and Nussmeier offenses aren't the only ones compatible with a Morris or Speight or Malzone skillset. Let's not hire someone unless he's willing to run something that is.