Cook on WTKA now
January 13th, 2011 at 9:46 AM ^
Its not about making a blog leader happy, its about producing the right winning formula for the University of Michigan. We need bigger players I dont know how people do not see that. Fuck da spread
January 13th, 2011 at 9:53 AM ^
Bigger players? Look at the fucking numbers. We have 300lb linemen. 210 lb receivers, a 230lb back. 240lb linebackers, 190lb corners and safeties.
What do you want?
"Our receivers were too small for Michigan" - Desmond and Anthony Carter sure disagree
"Our linemen are too small" - Molk is the only OL under 300, and I believe he's listed at 287. Mike Martin wants you to tell him he's too small.
Denard is too short/small to suceed - look at Vick and Brees... 6' QBs do well all the time. Some of those giant 6'6'' guys don't pan out. Jamarcus anyone?
Get your facts straight before you start slamming a bunch of 18-22year old kids
January 13th, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^
We had this HUGE back named Morris that was pretty good too.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^
I do not think I was slamming 18-22 year olds( I am in that age range myself)? I just said they are not a very big group of players I dont think that can be argued.
January 14th, 2011 at 8:43 AM ^
And look at the roster compared to other big ten teams. This is total bullshit. our players aren't too small
January 13th, 2011 at 9:23 AM ^
How can Hoke make him happy?
Not hire Borges and kept Magee around. McKnown was only "running " QB Borges ever had (LOL).
Wants Michigan to be national prgram, not regional. With Hoke hire regional is our fate.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:27 AM ^
Be Brady Hoke's Rosenberg or Drew Sharp?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:31 AM ^
He won't try to submarine the hire, he is just stating the facts that other people who buy into the rah rah stuff are choosing to look over.
That is my opinion.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:03 AM ^
there ae no facts as to how Michigan will fare with Hoke as coach, or how he will use Denard or what offense he will use. Brian is stating his opinion, not facts .... and he is certainly entitled to state his opinion !!!
Remember, Chizik was actually booed when Auburn announced the he was going to take over. He had a losing record at Iowa State for the 2 years he was there ... but Auburn isn't booing him today.
Let's just not confuse our opinions, either great or horrble as facts. Results will tell us what the facts are.
Go Blue !
January 13th, 2011 at 9:50 AM ^
Rosenberg and Sharp's problem had nothing to do with their dissent, it had to do with their ethics. Please refrain from the ad hominems against Brian because you don't think he's fully behind Hoke.
January 13th, 2011 at 1:25 PM ^
Wants Michigan to be national prgram, not regional. With Hoke hire regional is our fate.
What the hell does that even mean? Talk about small-minded.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:27 PM ^
Meaning win national championships and not just B1G championships...
January 13th, 2011 at 9:23 AM ^
He basically said nothing Hoke does could ever get him on board (I'm reading between the lines a little). But he basically wouldn't answer the question about what would get him on board for the Hoke hire.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:31 AM ^
So...Brian is not on board regardless of what happens?
Will Mgoblog be Hoke's freep?
Will Brian be his Sharp?
Disappointed...
January 13th, 2011 at 9:36 AM ^
January 13th, 2011 at 10:34 AM ^
Brian was supportive and enthusiastic about Rich Rod who got shit-canned after 3 years of miserable results.
Brian is unsupportive and unenthusiastic of Hoke so perhaps it has the opposite effect.
I'm reaching for straws, but nothing else I've read in the last God-knows-how-long is much better.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:49 AM ^
When RR was here, the vocal supporters on this board - including Brian - chastized those of us who voiced complaints, concerns or opinions that criticized RR as not being "all is" or as submaringing RR. There were countless threads and comments imploring everyone to "support our coach" or "get on board, because if you are a true M fan, then you support the current coach."
Where is that meme now? Hoke is our coach. Much like many did not think that RR was a good hire in 2007, many do not think that Hoke is a good hire now. Ok. But, where is the support? Getting on the air - or even structuring the front page posts in this blog - to blast Hoke and spread negativity is not good for our program during this critical 21 day recruiting period.
Hypocritical, much?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:55 AM ^
That meme, without question, is still around this board. And you have a lot of people saying it, and a fair amount also saying they don't really like the hire much, but will completely support Hoke because he is Michigan's Coach.
Are some people being hypocritcal? Absofreakinglutely, and it's very disappointing to see too. Even moreso considering just how mad some of those users got at the Anti-RR Crowd.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:59 AM ^
I think you're right (in that I am being hypocritical) but you also have to acknowledge that the converse is true. In other words, those who berated Rodriguez supporters and bad-mouthed Rodriguez are now asking all Rodriguez supporters to get on board.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
Also true, but two negatives don't make a positive. If you were frustrated, annoyed, and upset with the anti-RR crowd, then why become anti-Hoke?
Give the guy an honest shot, give him some time to do his thing, just like we all asked the Anti-RR people. It's not that hard to do, you can dislike the hire all you want, but at the minimum give the guy an honest fair chance.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:20 AM ^
I was not able to listen to Brian but it sounds like he may have come off more negative than I feel personally. But I, for one, do feel like Hoke has a lot more to prove out of the gates than Rodriguez should have when he was hired. If Rodriguez was a mistaken experiment, then Brandon had better damn well have done his homework and get this one right.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^
It seems to me that many of us on this board supported RR because he was the coach of our beloved Michigan program, despite the (mostly) unwarranted criticism of RR from some factions. Now that the change has been made we are supporting Hoke because he is the coach of our beloved program. It's the team, not the coach.
Are we RR/Hoke supporters or Michigan supporters?
Go Blue.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:50 AM ^
The difference is people weren't allowed to critcize rr even after he went 8-16 the first two years. Hoke hasn't coached a game here yet
January 13th, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^
Advocating that your right to criticize RR was infringed upon by others on here is a double-edged sword that undermines your criticism of Brian airing his opinion regarding the recent hire. You can support the coach and still be skeptical of the hire.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:25 AM ^
Brian mentioned him/her...
January 13th, 2011 at 9:25 AM ^
Hoke seems like a good guy, doesnt think Lloyd way of doing things can win national championships unless you have a recrutiing bed like Florida and Texas and Michigan will never have that.
Hokes record is brought up. Mediocre.
Hoke can recruit. Brian says that is just noise because he was an assistant.
Brings up the Mathlete (BOOM!) stats. He claims that the upward trending Hoke stats is a positive.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:37 AM ^
Lloyd ball couldn't win us a Rose Bowl (yes, aside from '98) let alone a NC.
Hoke is a good guy and we'll be proud of the kids and the program but I felt that way with both RR and Carr. The whole competing with tOSU and winning BCS games is something that Hoke won't bring more regularly than we've seen in the past decade though.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:26 AM ^
The rah rah stufff doesnt move brian. The stats do. Mathlete stuff is likely the only positive Brian sees abotu the hire.
His recruting stuff was Michigan based, not Hoke based.
Call him now.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:27 AM ^
Hoke's teams get better over time.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:27 AM ^
Made me want to change the channel, but at least he acknowledged Mathlete's stats on Hoke are positive.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:27 AM ^
People need to let it go. I would have kept RR for another year but that is irrelevant now. Hoke is the guy. Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. But as long as the team does okay or is improving, he should get 4 years to demonstrate how he leads.
I liked the spread and felt it gave us a chance to win a national title because it was a schematic advantage and we typically have a talent deficit against the very top teams. But who knows, maybe Brady is a great recruiter and we will become like Alabama under Saban where we have enormous talent.
This is the new plan and everyone needs to get on board with it if they really are a fan.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:44 AM ^
This really is non-sense. The spread obviously isn't a schematic advantage when playing against superior athletes.
I can't buy all of this argument. We (Michigan) were a hair away from the NC in 2007. If we beat OSU and then play Florida in the NC I think everything changes. The fact is we lost that year in the bowl to USC, which is why it is forgotten how good we were (literally everyone argued for a month whether we and OSU were the top two teams in the country.)
To me there is no way to know whether we could have beat Florida and whether OSU could have beat USC that year. All I know is that were so close and not for a lack of talent or effort. 39 points on OSU running a Pro-Style offense.
I think our guys had a let down after the loss to OSU and were disappointed to play in the Rose Bowl that year because they were so close.
Sure App State happened and we lost to Oregon, but we also ended the season by beating defending National Champion Gators the last year with Carr. That was no small thing.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:28 AM ^
The biggest difference is that, for whatever reason, he RR didn't have the support of the alumni, AND he didn't win. I'm not sure which one was bigger, but I think that you could make the case that they equally conrtibuted to the firing.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:36 AM ^
I don't recall many people or alumni that were against RR to begin with. There may have been factions or former players loyal to Carr's system (mainly not against RR but rather against propping up RR against what Carr brought) If anything they were defending the program Michigan had when they were there. I think it may have offended some to infer Michigan had an inferior system in the past and that was about to change with RR. But for the most part I thought even former players were excited about the program and the especially the strenght and conditioning changes.
What happened to lose support really was to go 3-9 in year 1 (1-7 B10) and 5-7 in year 2 (1-7 B10). I mean seriously, that is horrible. RR didn't inherit a program in shambles (he put it there by insisting on his way or the highway - which many players took).
January 13th, 2011 at 10:01 AM ^
I can appreciate you qualifying your statement by saying you do not recall but the fact remains that a very vocal minority did not support Rodriguez from the start. There are many, many articles and undercurrents about numerous influential people working to undermine Rodriguez at every move. Maybe that wasn't a huge factor in his firing, but it is what it is.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:14 AM ^
Even had Mallet, Boren, and Manningham stayed, it's doubtful we'd have had a lot of success in 2008. And when you do bring in a specific style offense (and I don't believe "pro style" is a specific style) and you know a kid like Mallet won't be successful in it, I think the right thing to do is to talk with him and tell him he'd have more success in a place like Arkansas. Manningham left since "there's nobody to throw the ball," which is fair. And Boren left...whatever.
What happened that sealed his fate was an underachieving defense every year. The O behaved how we expected it to. And it was very good, and a year from being great. I'm not convinced that we can't "out recruit" and run a pro style. But Considering that Florida made a downright dynasty with a specific offense and great recruiting, I think it's fair to say we were hoping for the same with Rod and it didn't work because of the D. And we are trying to give that up with the Hoke hire, so I can see why Brian is disappointed. I don't fully agree with it, but I understand it.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:29 AM ^
on the Pro vs Spread... bringing up USC as example that Pro style can win...
Brings up Arkansas... which kills his arguement.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:29 AM ^
Some guy is getting all puffy about it and freaking out.
USC runs a pro style. USC beat our ass. We will now run a pro style.
Brian says Michigan can't recruit like USC can. Just won't happen, that is why we needed to keep the spread.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:33 AM ^
Italian, Brian. That was a good point. If we can get the best in Michigan, get second pickings in Ohio (with occasional steals of the top guys), maintain a strong presence elsewhere in the Midwest, and pluck stars from FLA, TEX, and elsewhere, we can recruit w/ anyone. USC/Texas/Flordia/etc have a recruiting advantage, but we can be roughly equivalent. We just have to work harder to get there. That school in Ohio does it regularly
January 13th, 2011 at 10:17 AM ^
I agree. Why can't we recruit nationally with the elite programs? I understand that being in Michigan there is less of a built in talent pool to draw from, but that's always been the case. There are certain things that Michigan has that few if any other colleges have to offer. History, The Big House, great academics to go along with great althetics, facilities, etc... Few universities can match up with Michigan across the board in areas other than local talent. All that means is that we have to recruit nationally, unlike Texas which can just pick the 20-25 best players in Texas and call it a day. Michigan's always had a presenece in California and Texas, we've recently made major in roads in Florida and we can always dip into Ohio. Talent is there to be recruited, it's just whether the coaches are willing to work hard to get it.
Here’s the average final recruiting rankings (per rivals) from 2002-2009 for a couple of comparative school (if for some reason a school was ranked lower than 25, I gave them a 25, I’m looking at you Notre Dame in the mid 00’s)
U of M - 10.9
ND - 14.6
Texas - 9.5
USC - 4.1
LSU - 8.0
OSU - 10.6
There’s nothing in those numbers (aside from USC, which yeah, we knew that and also that’ll be changing in the next couple years due to sanctions) that suggests Michigan cannot compete against the elite programs. Florida was left out because Florida, FSU and Miami all compete for the same talent, and all have there good and bad times. Over the past 30 years they’ve all had there moments but there isn’t one dominate team.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:34 AM ^
I think Stanford would have been a better example for the guy to make his point. B/c the recriuting theme would not have been a legit answer like it is for USC.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:56 AM ^
Pluse the Pro-Style system that USC was running against us also involved not just out recruiting us, but paying for it. Sure I agree we never can compete with that.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:30 AM ^
or Drew Sharp answering that last question, saying this hire has a low ceiling?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:32 AM ^
Is he not entitled to his opinion?
Sheesh.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:50 AM ^
"None of this helps. Dave Brandon is an adult and won't be swayed by talk radio, so all speaking out like that does is provide another PR hit against the program. It's juvenile. Suck it up and wait until this year is over."
http://mgoblog.com/content/unverified-voracity-cowers-your-enormous-bra…
also, are rosenberg/sharp not entitled to their opinions? sheesh
January 13th, 2011 at 10:03 AM ^
Even the guy with negative points is finding Brian's own words, and throwing them back in his face. Hypocrite much?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:50 AM ^
am I not entitled to mine? pretty sure thats how it works
January 13th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^
Brian Cook is entitled to his opinion, but in my opinion his opinion on Hoke seems very similar to that of Drew Sharp. From Sharp's column yesterday:
Michigan will staunchly deny this, still content in a delusional world of national football importance, but Tuesday's hire only confirms that the Wolverines lean more toward regional than national in their competitive scope.
Michigan doesn't possess the cast iron stomach necessary for doing everything necessary to field the best team for contending for BCS national championships, as they do in the SEC. U-M can talk a big game about paying big salaries and truly being a national player, but in the end, U-M opted for what's safe, solid and sturdy.
And my further opinion is that Cook and Sharp have both rushed to judge Hoke before even giving him a chance.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:30 AM ^
I believe that the proof will be seen, either way, down the road when RR meets BH in a Bowl game...
January 13th, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^
goes somewhere and THEN decides to hire a comptent defensive staff, my immediate reaction will be "Jesus Christ, Rich, why didn't you hire a staff like that at MICHIGAN?!?!?"