Changing my opinion on the Hoke hire

Submitted by mGrowOld on

As one of the more vocal supporters of RR and someone who felt Brian didn't go far enough in his disdain for the Hoke hire I must now publicly admit it looks like I was wrong.  Very wrong.  If you break down what a person has to do to be a successful college football coach I think the major buckets look something like this: 

Assistant coach selection: check

Recruiting: double check

Game planning: ?

Halftime adjustments: ?

With half the precincts reporting in, so far this has been a Hoke landslide.  He has massively exceeded my expectations in the first two categories and I'm now more than a bit optimistic he'll do the same in the last two. 

Maybe Brandon DID know what he was doing after all.  Go figure....a guy with his credentials, background and insight knew more about selecting the right coach to lead the football program I love than me.

 

 

Blue Durham

May 12th, 2011 at 2:33 PM ^

aawolverine as well). Us old guys got to stick together around this here blog. During most seasons, I have a lot enthusiasm for the team and their prospects. Last season was no different, but the final 6 games did dampen my outlook for the team somewhat. But after watching the bowl game and what Mississippi State did to us (can you recall any game from the past that left you with that feeling after the game?), I could not help but wonder (and doubt) how the team could improve next year given the present composition of coaching staff. Scott Shafer then Greg Robinson, how much different/better would the defense be with Rodriguez directing what schemes should be run? Bo never emphasized special teams much, but how far back do you have to go to find a unit as bad as they were this past year? I think I recall 1 year we had a kicking game that went something like 5 of 17 in FGs, but at least we had Anthony Carter retuning punts and kickoffs! I am heartened that you are bullish on Hoke; I have to admit, the more I hear what others (especially his peers and those he has worked with) say about him, the more comfortable and confident I am in the hire. Not a cross word about the guy. Jesus, all these people can't be wrong about Hoke, can they?

M-Wolverine

May 13th, 2011 at 1:12 AM ^

No.  I've been mad after games, elated, relieved, vengeful, sad...the gamut I'm sure. But that's the only one I just ended up not caring. It became....eh, this again?  I was paying more attention to MGoBlog than the game by the 3rd quarter. And I never miss a minute of Delaware State. And that's when I kind of went from Harbaugh or keep Rich, to this just might not be working out.  Unsure a whole off-season of hot seat rumors, negative recruiting and coverage, being the butt of jokes was something a coach or  a program could survive. It might have been more merciful to let him go. But in any regard, a program can handle people getting mad at it, for losing or whatever, as long as they're showing passion. When disinterest sets in, then a program's in trouble. And that bowl game may have pushed us over that hill.

Blue Durham

May 13th, 2011 at 7:31 AM ^

After that bowl game, and I watched all of it, I just could see the team getting much better with the coaching staff as it was composed. With his future at Michigan on the line, and RR knowing it, we got that bowl game. Why did Rodriguez succeed at West Virginia but fail at Michigan? Jeff Casteel? Departmental factions? Bad press? Lack of talent? Stiffer Big 10 competition versus the Big East? Any or all of the above? Regardless, after that bowl game on the heels of the second half of last season, with so much personally on the line, I felt the chances for success with Rodriguez as head coach were small.

MGlobules

May 12th, 2011 at 10:47 AM ^

to liking this hire. I was excited about the spread as much as about RichRod, and I think it's a mistake to assume that this team will win big this year. But in future, I am increasingly convinced, Michigan will field great teams again. I see Hoke as a little in the Bobby Bowden mode, as exemplary of the wider culture as of the football team. I think he could develop that kind of wider following among the fan base, and that could be a very good thing for Michigan AND the state--even MSU, if it forced them to field a cleaner program. Let's all just remember there are going to be some bumps, and not bail on this guy in two years if we haven't won the B10 championship. 

His Dudeness

May 12th, 2011 at 10:49 AM ^

Assistant coach selection: check

Recruiting: double check

Game planning: ?

Halftime adjustments: ?

That and, you know, coaching...

I will say that the spring game was awful. I was there. We looked like shit, but it is very early.

I have a wait and see attitude with the hire, but the stars seemed to have alligned for him so far which is a nice change.

Last time I fully invested in a coaches success he was given three seasons and was fired after his best one. So I am going to judge Hoke by his production on the field.

mGrowOld

May 12th, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^

Note that i said  "maybe".  I'm just thrilled that in the two areas he has had a chance to get a grade in they get high marks in my book so far.  And that is exponentially better than i expected.  I wouldn't worry too much about the spring game - they ALL suck if you ask me.

tomer

May 12th, 2011 at 1:55 PM ^

It seems most posters are really down on the spring game because of our offenses ineptitude with all of what 10 or so basic plays? You want to talk about a vanilla gameplan...sheesh.

What I saw when I watched the game was a defense that...wait for it...had some basic fundamentals. They were actually taking angles to the ball carrier. They were swarming. Dare I say it? But they actually were breaking down to make tackles instead of lunging at the ball carrier.

My excitement couldn't be higher. Perhaps I am drunk on Blue Kool-Aid but what the hell, why not?

M-Wolverine

May 12th, 2011 at 12:55 PM ^

In the Program, and not a coach. Then you root for each coach (barring ever hiring one who's a dirty cheater doing players wrong), but you want the program to succeed no matter who's at the helm.  Over the long haul, even the most successful guys are going to leave.  They kept playing after Bo retired. And in September, they'll do it after Rich. And someday, after Hoke too.

mikoyan

May 12th, 2011 at 10:52 AM ^

I'll wait to see what happens on the field in a real game situation.  Until then, I'm actually pleased with this hire.  When the winds tell you to go one direction, sometimes the best long term solution is to tack another way.  I'll just tuck in the back of my mind that many coaches who have long and successful careers were initially panned by the critics when they were first hired.  I mean who the heck was that Bo guy anyway?  However, given that he started at generally woofers of teams and turned them around within a couple years bodes well for his future, I think.  I also think that he is at the pinnacle of his coaching career so if he has success, he probably wont be shopping for another job so we may have him for a while.  So we'll see.

mikoyan

May 12th, 2011 at 11:33 AM ^

I was fine with Rich Rod until the Bowl game to be honest.  I was one of the "on the fence" folks in regards to him.  Mainly because I feel it takes longer than 3 years to make a judgement on a coach.  We should at least give a chance for the freshman he first recruited to play as seniors.  So I'm in the "at least 4 years if not 5 years" boat on a coach. 

Blue in Yarmouth

May 12th, 2011 at 10:55 AM ^

I will say that I was at the point where I knew it was time for RR to go (after the OSU game) but when Hoke was announced I was less than enthusiastic to be honest. 

However, from the time he stepped on campus he has been winning me over. I wasn't as impressed as others with the assistant's he hired other than Mattison. Frankly I found them to be somewhat underwhelming. As for Hoke, though, he has been outstanding. The way he finished last years class and moved into this years has been incredible and he already has a big committ for 2013.

I am not too proud to admit when I am wrong and I can say that in this case I certainly judged Hoke far too harshly originally. Again, we know he hasn't put a team on the field yet, but I am waaayyyyy more optimistic about what he brings to the table now than I was previously. Plus, as many have noted...he "gets" it. It is nice to see someone bringing that fire back into the tradition of what is UM football.

Brady...not that you read this, but if by some miracle you do I am sorry for the way I judged you previously and I am very excited to see what you can do with this team this coming season.

I should also say that I was never anti-Hoke either. As the coach of my favorite team I got behind him right away, I just was thrilled by the hire. Now I am behind him and thrilled to be there!

 

Promote RichRod

May 12th, 2011 at 10:58 AM ^

recruiting should have a double check yet.  If we were grading recruiting speed or regional recruiting then yes, double check.  My concerns:

  1. We are not a regional team.  We can't adopt a strategy of just "lock up the Midwest" and compete nationally.  That's MSU's strategy and it doesn't work.  We can take their players and hurt MSU (which is nice), but I'm more focused on getting the best players no matter where they are from.  Hoke and co have not shown they can recruit beyond our borders yet.  That doesn't mean they don't have the ability, they just haven't shown the ability yet.  I'll give this an incomplete.
  2. I think we are overrating our current recruits a tad.  They are certainly the best of the best in Michigan, but the recruiting services are pegging them at above-average to good nationally.  It could be that everyone else is underrating them but it's more likely that we as fans are the ones that are overly optimistic.  Every fan does this every year, though, so no big deal.
  3. I'm worried that we are adopting the failed RR recruiting strategy of 2009 (I think) where RR pushed kids to commit early, only to suffer mass decommitments later.  No hard evidence really except for recruits saying a lot of similar things about wanting to get it done to lock up their spot and worried about positions filling up, etc.  Have to wait until signing day.
  4. Just like RR focused too heavily on signing offensive players early on, it seems we are doing the exact opposite right now.  I hope future classes have a bit more parity.

It will be very interesting to see what Hoke does with the remaining spots.  They will tell the story.  It's clear we have what is worth getting from this area.  If we fill up the remaining spots with highly-rated national recruits then most of what I said above is moot.  If we instead fill out the class with the remaining talent left in Michigan I'll be worried that our recruiting classes won't look so good in future years where Michigan isn't producing a lot of talent. 

For this year, I'll wait and see how our class stacks up nationally on NSD.  There's far too many variables to declare Hoke a recruiting success already.

TheHoke.TheHok…

May 12th, 2011 at 11:08 AM ^

I think this is Hoke's recruiting strategy:

We're not going to be able to sign the top 25 players in the country, only a team with insane in-state talent like USC, UF, or UT can bank on that happening.  For everybody else, you fill your class with good players who fit your system and try to land a couple great ones.

So, Hoke is filling our "good" player slots with midwest talent because they are the most-likely to commit to Michigan.  With half our class locked up with solid players, he can now spend the next year swining for the fences, brining in only the best national talent.

I think by signing day, you'll see this class add a couple high 4* or 5* players and it will look, rankings-wise, like a typical Carr class.

Mr Miggle

May 12th, 2011 at 12:14 PM ^

I think you are badly underselling the job this staff has done so far. They have exceeded all reasonable expectations, especially considering the head start their rivals had.

They have put themselves in a perfect position to fill out the class. Locking up so many solid players already is putting pressure on their other targets to decide. The fact that so many are from MI and OH is a positive. They won't be under pressure to reach for local players just to establish their presence, something that wouldn't have surprised me a few months ago. Early commits are typically local (other than QBs). I expect our recruiting map to change quite a bit before NSD.

Space Coyote

May 12th, 2011 at 1:41 PM ^

before Michigan can get back to being a great national recruiter.  Minds can be changed close to home and the midwestern recruits can be gotten, but to get back to national success, it usually takes game success first.  There are very few circumstances where this isn't the case (USC comes to mind recently).  If Michigan wins under Hoke, I fully expect it to happen, but they have to win first.

That being said, I like what Hoke has done so far.

Pasadena_Blue

May 12th, 2011 at 11:00 AM ^

My heart was pretty cold and stoney to the hire of Hoke initially, but he formed a small crack in that stone when he got up at that podium and said things like, "we would have walked here" , "you want to win 'em!!" (in reference to rivalry games), and "This is Michigan for God's sake".  Since then, everything he has done has worked that crack open bigger and bigger, and if he (and more importantly his corrdinators) can coach as well as they recruit, i am sure that crack will split wide open and i will get a gushy with man love for Hoke. 

Still, the win/loss columns are still 0-0, so I am going to remain a bit cautious and guard my heart a bit more until I see some really good results.  I will be really interested to see what this team looks like come fall practices.

MI Expat NY

May 12th, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^

Of course, he was almost certainly going to be getting a nice raise from his position at SDSU.  This, in my opinion, is more fluff than substance.  A coach with his record at the schools he coached at wasn't going to be in a position to negotiate.  Hoke was always simply going to take what was offered, as he should have.  If Brandon were to have offered anything above the bare minimum for what is appropriate for the head coach at Michigan, it would have been a mistake.  

MI Expat NY

May 12th, 2011 at 1:21 PM ^

That's the nature of the college coaching profession.  College coaches constantly uproot their families for better opportunities.  Hoke really wannted this job, he campaigned for it, I understand and appreciate that.  But to put anything into the idea that he didn't care what his contract terms would be is just silly.  He wasn't in a position to negotiate and the job was one that almost anyone in his shoes would have jumped at.  The fact that he didn't settle on terms before agreeing isn't all that surprising or important.

Section 1

May 12th, 2011 at 11:20 AM ^

Hoke was virtually guaranteed to double his SDSU salary by jumping to the Big Ten.  And so he did; from about $700,000, to about $1.7 million.

And as far as his "choice of assistants" went, Michigan had finally, belatedly, agreed to pay what was needed to attract top Coordinators.  Don't take that from me; Dave Brandon has said as much.

I just got finished saying above that Brady Hoke is a nice guy who in no way deserves any lack of support because of the Rodriguez firing.  But once again, there's a certain level of irrational Hoke-love that has no basis in reality.  Hoke has done fine in recruiting.   No one can doubt that.  And as far as I know, Rich Rodriguez hasn't recruited one single guy for our 2012 class, right?  But there are a few names I can recall -- Demetrius Hart, Anthony Zettel, Kris Frost.  It isn't as though Michigan just started recruiting when Brady Hoke returned to Ann Arbor.

chitownblue2

May 12th, 2011 at 11:25 AM ^

To be fair, Zettel commited to PSU before RR was fired, and Frost never committed.

I know you're big on "evidence" to support your claims, so I think we can agree that we can't really credit those two to Rodriguez.

That said, I'd agree that Rodriguez's recruiting was not his problem - it actually started out quite well. What became obvious, however, was a nasty combination of poor results, epic transfer rates of highly-rated players, and generally shitty press (some of which was out of his control) was impacting his recruiting. I don't think it's deniable that his '10 class was worse than his '09 class, and this '11 class was off to a worse start than '10.

Section 1

May 12th, 2011 at 11:36 AM ^

I think you're mostly right.  No arguments.

Stray ideas:

Recruiting in the midst of an NCAA investigation was brutal.  I'd call as my first witness in that regard Dee Hart's mom.

Recruiting the state of Michigan the last couple of years was a difficult proposition, with so much in-state negativity, and some graduating hs classes that may have been subpar.  Also, some of the few good recruits were coming out of places that have been historically hostile to anything maize and blue.

This topic could easily steer us off into the ditch of "Rodriguez versus Hoke" which is inevitably unproductive territory.  We both know that.

chitownblue2

May 12th, 2011 at 11:38 AM ^

I think we're in agreement, actually. My only point was that Rodriguez's recruiting seemed to be declining - which isn't really an indictment of his recruiting in my mind, but more the situation he had found himself, regardless of how you think that situation was created.

jmblue

May 12th, 2011 at 12:28 PM ^

And, regardless of whether or not it was RR's fault, the simplest way to repair the program's image and give recruiting a shot in the arm was to change coaches.  The athletic director's job is to do what's best for the program, whether or not it's "fair"  to the coaches involved.

NateVolk

May 12th, 2011 at 11:04 AM ^

I wanted Harbaugh and made no secret of that from the Penn State loss forward. When that looked like a no go, I wanted Rodriguez back.  IMO, the Gator Bowl totally eliminated that as an option. However it went down, it did.

I posted yesterday that people in San Diego thought Hoke's coaching abilities and ability to create excitement program wide, were his best attributes. The recruiting was not considered bad, but he hadn't been there long enough to judge.  I feel like he will handle all areas well, but we will have to see how it goes.

It's about Big Ten Championships and I want to be competing for one this fall. If we aren't, I am not  satisfied and Hoke is accountable for that failure. The great thing is he wants it that way and isn't afraid to say it.  This is Michigan.

chitownblue2

May 12th, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^

Borges has won the top coordinator in the nation award once or twice, and this group collectively coached a very successful offense last year.

It may not start out amazing, but it seems like they can coach.

the_white_tiger

May 12th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^

Recruiting is fine, and I've been pleasantly surprised so far, but these aren't the classes that can just come in and automatically win nine games. I'm going to wait and see to see how they play on the field before I change my opinion from "highly skeptical" to something else. This guy has a lifetime <.500 record, after all.

MI Expat NY

May 12th, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^

Answer:  Apparently the three coaches immediately prior to Bill Lynch.  This is just an annoyance I have, but Ball State hasn't historically been a bad football school.  In the 27 MAC seasons prior to Hoke's arrival, they managed 5 MAC titles and 1 Mac-West co-title.  Not great, but certainly not awful.  They had 15 winning seasons, 10 losing seasons, again not great, not awful.  The only truly atrocious stretch was a 1-21, two year span under Lynch.  They then recovered to go 16-18 over the next three seasons before Lynch was fired and Hoke was hired.  The second worst stretch of Ball State's MAC existance was Hoke's first three seasons (10-24).  

There may be plenty of reasons that Hoke struggled outside of his one good season at Ball State (maybe too young/inexperienced his first couple seasons, maybe deep rooted issues from the Lynch era, etc.).  But lets stop saying that Hoke couldn't win at Ball State because nobody ever wins at Ball State.  It just isn't true.  Ball State was an above average, even if only slightly, MAC program, from a historical prespective, before Hoke arrived.  

J.Swift

May 12th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^

I thought Rodriguez would fail unless he could turn around the poor W-L against conference big boys.  He did not. 

Hoke was an unknown to me but started to win me over with his press conference.  He closed the deal with his recruiting blitz to finish the 2011 class.  To me, he instantly became THE CLOSER.  Nothing I've seen since has changed my view. 

So, yeah.  I changed from skepticism to enthusiastic support.  He is THE CLOSER and I believe he will close out the big boys, starting this fall.

lunchboxthegoat

May 12th, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^

Firstly,

Yea, recruiting has been good. That's impressive for a guy with no real track record to go on.

 

Secondly,

I echo the Ron Zook sentiments. We'll see how he does come game time. I'm hopeful.

Thirdly,

Basing anything off the spring game is a tragic tale of LULZ. EVERYONE, EVERYWHERE thinks their offense sucks at the spring game. Go read EDSBS's review of the florida spring game or any of the readers review of any spring game from their team. ITS ALL AWFUL.

Lastly, 

Go Blue! 

TrppWlbrnID

May 12th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^

at the time of the RR hire, my thoughts were "ok, not what i was expecting, but we will see how this goes, hopefully it goes well since i have been all in since birth."  as things went, it was difficult from the beginning and ended rather poorly.

at the time of the hoke hire, my thoughts were "ok, not what i was expecting, but we will see how this goes, hopefully it goes well since i have been all in since birth."  as things have gone, this seems like it is going to be fun.

i wish i could look back and say "they should have done this..." but really there were no good options at the time.  hopefully, everything is stronger moving forward, so i would say i am more encouraged than i expected to be at the time of the hire.

Hail-Storm

May 12th, 2011 at 11:31 AM ^

Coach Hoke won me over at his fisrt speach.  I thought then that he seemed like a genuinely great guy that cared about Michigan and the players on the team.

I think that there is a misnomer out there that you are either in Carr/Hoke camp or the RR camp.  I think there is no problem in supporting all of them.  I really loved the way Carr coached with his dictionary and intellectual approach (also he was coach during my most formidable Michigan football rooting years 98'-03'. I think coach Rod is a great guy who got somewhat of a raw deal, but also created his own issues, but in general was a genuinely good guy who brought in a great batch of players and truly showed he cared about his players. I am not embarrassed at all by the way he represented this University.  And I think Hoke is and has done, everything that he can do right in his short tenure. 

I think we are lucky to have the coaches we have had, and to have coach Hoke.

As an aside, I really did not want Miles and am glad we did not go that path.  While I was originally very much for Harbaugh, I think we actually ended up with the better guy.  Although this may be my Maize glasses always thinking everything we get or have is better than the alternative.  The Grass is always greener on our side of the fence at the big house.

Hail-Storm

May 12th, 2011 at 4:18 PM ^

I am a horribly biased judge of my Michigan team and coaches. I remember arguing with people to look at Carr's overall record and average wins per year when they argued he was over the hill and boring (as well as spouting off about passing extravaganzas and crazy trick plays in Bowl games).

I defended RR through all of his defeats and "scandals" as a good guy who ran the program with integrity and spouted off UFR offensive stats and returning defensive starters for the next year.

And now I find myself defending Borges' offense in the spring game as just the players working on stuff they were bad at, as well as an offense the defense needs to prepare for, and that the offense will look much deifferent in the fall.

And I always seem to believe we can win atleast 10 wins. I realize I am not going to give you a true honest assessment of Michigan, but god forgive you if you disagree with my Maize colored view. Ha!