replied to wrong comment. never mind.
Mike Lantry, 1972
replied to wrong comment. never mind.
Something funny happening at the page-break; "edit" turned into a double-post. Sorry.
His record sucks and he is another Lloyd Carr cronie, like DeBord, English and all of the other losers the Lloyd faction keeps trying to jam down our throats.
right since all that winning with carr was just annoying... /s
Im not blind to the fact that the game had passed carr by but merely updating and modernizing his values to the 2011 game (which I am confident Hoke could do) is a recipe for success in the big ten and on a national level
I'm not in favor of him, but I will stand behind Hoke if he is hired. I somewhat doubt though that someone with his record is capable of implementing a modernized and successful Carr game. Les Miles is a better pick, if DB can overcome all of the politics.
The only reason people mention Hoke is because of his ties to the program. If he didnt have ties to the school nobody would mention him. It took him a quite few years to build Ball State. There are plenty of other viable options that should be looked at before Hoke.
as quoted from someone in an earlier post. "You dont fire a guy with a track record like RRod after 3 years to get Brady Hoke."
Seriously, are we still looking at RR's track record to judge him as the coach of Michigan? I was a firm believer in RR until I watched our debacle of bowl game. We have not looked like a well coached team this entire year. And seriusly, what more could Hoke have possibly accomplished during his head coaching career? Just because he's not flashy, or doesn't have the big time head coach profile does not mean his a bad coach and does not mean he'd be a bad coach? If you are to look at his track record, and thestate of programs he originally took over, I think you could argue he'd be very succesful at Michigan. RR has not been and I don't see him ever being a succesful coach in AA.
His track record didn't start in 2008. Stop picking and choosing your data points.
Who would you rather have coaching next year if it was just between Hoke or RR?
RRod by a mile.
Give Hoke a shot in a year or two then. He'll still be available.
I am a RR supporter, but I don't see how he can come back. The situation here is toxic for him. He will have very little support and IMHO, if he comes back, he is set up for failure. The bowl loss was the icing on the cake for the haters and change some minds of people on the fence about him as a coach.
If RR is going to return, he needs an extension or something to calm the skeptics over 1 more year. Having the appearance of one more year will not help the team. And I don't see anyway that DB will give him an extension after the bowl game. IMHO, I think this was why DB may have waited. He wanted to keep RR and needed some good evidence to back it up.
Should not even be a question
you didnt read any of the posts did you?
I agree that it shouldn't be a question, but if it is, the answer is Hoke by a mile. Hell, at this point, I would take DeBord, English, Miles, Loefler, Brian (his UFR is aweome), Profitgoblue or Mike Hart over RR.
Face it - RR has presided over the WORST ERA IN MICHIGAN FOOTBALL. That says a lot. He has destroyed our defense. He has destroyed our special teams. And, while this will be unpopular, he has harmed our offense. (Yes, tons of yards, dtnamic, exciting, #6 in the country, spread and shread . . . so long as we are facing crappy competition. Against real defense, our offense - composed largely of upper classmen - has been less than decent).
RR has brought us recruiting violations, a divided fan base, bowl-less seasons and losses to MAC teams. I have seen enough.
I wonder if cypress (OP) works in the Athletic Department (possible source of the never-ending rumors concerning Hoke)?
- - -
This twisted fascination with a 52-year-old coach whose record (as noted elsewhere) is 47-50 *and* who has never coached at the BCS level is dazzling to me. Other than widespread panic, I really can't think of an explanation. I can't believe he's in the conversation.
that at this point some people would be willing to make even Drew Sharp the HC just to see RR out.
This thread makes my head hurt.
How many fucking times are fucking people going to fucking bring up Gary fucking Patterson when the motherfucking motherfucker has REPEATEDLY stated he's not leaving his job. He turned down $2 million before from Minnesota, signed an extension last year, and just won the Rose Bowl and is moving to the Big Easy next season. All he needs to go is win in that division and he's guaranteed at minimum at BCS bowl every year. Jesus Christ people are fucking dense.
TCU doesn't join the Big East until 2012.
My bad. It was riddled with grammatical errors too. Patterson has been brought up 20 million times in the past few days, it's been shot down 20 million times and throroughly explained, and yet it keeps coming back up. Frustrating as hell.
Stop with the swearing. You bastard.
I've lurked on here for years as a student and now as an alum-but this is getting ridiculous. This is the type of post and thread that would appear on scout or rivals- please don't let this board degenerate into something where crazy theories and lists are thrown around. Let's be realistic in our expectations.
To be fair, the OP was not asking for people to list their coaching preferences, it is just what happened. I still want an answer to the OP.
I don't put it passed us to keep RR. Again, we have a great show man in Denard. I heard someone say today that there's alumni threatening to not renew their suites if RR comes back. That's quite laughable. If you don't feel Denard is worth coming to see then something is wrong with you.
So you enjoyed watching Denard in the Wisco, OSU and Bowl games?
I love Denard, but after Q1 oif both OSU and MSU, I was too busy watching us get the crap beaten out of us to enjoy watching him.
But that's just me. An "exciting" offense doesn't do much for me when it can't score against real defenses and when the team is getting humiliated. Again, that's just me.
there's probably 20 different coaches with better pedigrees than Hoke but you're stomping around acting like he's a viable option bc he went to UM. at this point, that means zero compared to moving forward effectively. RR will get a 4th year before Hoke, who is still an unknown despite his time at UM, is given the reins to a university who, if RR is fired, has "already made a mistake once."
But Hoke did not go to Michigan. He played college football at Ball State (OMG abandoned alma mater!!!!) and was the d-line coach here for 8 years after 6 years in the same job at Oregon State. The ties aren't as strong as they're made out to be other than the fact that he's said he would love to coach at Michigan, which, when compared to all the other schools he's been at makes complete sense.
Re: "In typical mgoblog fashion..." Dude, Brian didn't explain what the quotation marks meant. You can re-read his post, instead of expecting the rest of us to do something atypical. It just doesn't merit a separate post.
Can we just end this thread by saying that Jim Harbaugh is definately coming to Michigan and be done with it?
If you read this post it is obvious that we dropped the ball on recruiting before RR stepped foot in A2. If DB doesn't make that a priority (I dare say over being a Michigan Man) we're just spinning in the wind. So can Brady bring in the talent in an environment where people are negative recruiting against us? We must put an end to that!
He recruited Tom Brady to Michigan
Brady wasn't a sought-after recruit out of high school. I wish people would stop bringing up this point. It's irrelevant.
A poster made a claim the other day or yesterday that Brady was the #10 pro-style QB in his class which would have put him around a 4 Star recruit. For comparison, Threet was the #9 PS QB in his class and a third star was awareded to the #11 ranked QB. I wish I could find the post because I asked for substantiation as I couldn't find any on my own. If it's true, even #10 in the nation is no coup for Hoke. Tom Brady was a prototypical Michigan QB, not shocking that we went after a big white guy with an arm in the 90s. It's not like he was Manning or Tebow coming out of HS.
I agree with you. I've researched this before and everything I saw said he wasn't highly rated and he came in as the 7th string QB at Michigan. People who try to tout Hoke blindly point to the fact that he helped recruit Tom Brady as a reason he would have success at Michigan -- i.e., Brady is great and Hoke recruited him, so Hoke must be great too. This is really grasping at straws.
then you might just as well stick with Rich Rodriguez.
Hoke is also a pathetic 1-12 against Top 25 competition.
He has had only two memorable years as an HC: 12-1 at Ball State with no signature wins and 9-4 at SDSU.
Rodriguez teasily takes a flame thrower to all of that.
Honestly, just because a guy was an assistant towel boy for a national championship football team doesn't make him a "MICHIGAN MAN!", nor a great head college football coach.
There a plenty of higher profile targets Michigan should be going with. Grasping for every microscopic fiber to find some kind of past connection to Maize & Blue pedigree is the wrong way to select your future race horse. Just go after and hire the best coach you possibly can and give him the resources and support he needs to succeed. Period.
Brady Hoke? No dude.
Those slamming Hoke haven't watched his teams.
They are very evidently well-coached (something M cannot say at the moment). Most of all, they have a toughness that m is lacking right now, that is needed in the Big 10.
Brady Hoke isn't as flashy as Harbaugh- but he isn't likely to leave until Michigan wants him to. Harbaugh on the other hand, clearly wants to do both- coach in the NFL and coach college.
101 comments and not a single person answered his question:
Brian put quotation marks around his "Not an option" statement, implying that somebody said it. However, it was completely unattributed. Who said it? E-mailers? Reliable sources? Brian's mailman? His cat? Was Brian quoting himself?
The question wasn't your opinion of Hoke, it was merely asking what the genesis of the quotation was.