Cook on WTKA now
January 13th, 2011 at 9:32 AM ^
I have to side with Brian on this one. I don't care if you can do press conference well. All it matter is can Hoke lead Michigan back to being a national power. Evidences has not shown that Hoke can do it yet. It's inconclusive to say that Hoke is the right coach. All we know is Dave Brandon did botch the coaching process and his inexperience/aggronance has cost Michigan a month or two of uncertainity.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:33 AM ^
Michigan cannot recruit like other schools.
Michigan was not competitive with a pro-style.
Michigan can't compete with the USC's, Alabamas, and Ohio States of the world.
Michigan needs a decided "schematic advantage" in order to beat those teams (HAHALOLZ quoting Charlie Weis)--and the pro style isn't it.
Caller: "What offense did [does] USC run?"
Brain: Um, er,
Caller: "How about Arkansas"
Brain: "They run a passing spread never go under center I WIN! HAHA YAHOO!"
This blog's fearless leader now discounts Michigan as being able to compete with the Big Boyz.
More Rodriguez fallout. F***k, the spirit of Michigan is nowhere to be found.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:38 AM ^
Did he say that? We need a schematic advantage to beat a team like Arkansas? That's ridiculous. All we need is a good coach to recruit good players and develop them well.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:43 AM ^
But the other Big Boyz like Alabama, USC, etc--the usual suspects that the guys who think SPREAD OR DIE want to bring up.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:46 AM ^
When, in recent memory, have we competed with the "Big Boyz?" Hoke will try his hardest but without a kickass, creative OC and DC Michigan's spirit won't win us any games alone.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:56 AM ^
I'm not saying "Hey we were in on all the national championships" but to say we weren't competitive is a bit of a stretch.
But I'm not gonna rehash LloydBall. You guys can have at him--I think Lloyd was OK and not in on any secret anti-Rodriguez conspiracy.
I do like your opinion that without a good OC Hoke won't do very well. Wow! Coaching? Who knew?OH WAIT--we just found out how sh**ty coaching can affect a football program.
Not excited about Hoke? Fine. I was never excited about Rodriguez. We're even. We'll see if you and Brian are "right".
January 13th, 2011 at 10:19 AM ^
When, in recent memory, have we competed with the "Big Boyz?"
Pretty recently. Carr's record against top 10 teams was 19-8, I think, which is pretty unbelievable.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
January 13th, 2011 at 1:05 PM ^
But did Brian say that when we hired Rodriguez? Or as he warmed up to the idea of Rodriguez?
Or is he just tossing out the same crap RR supporters used to justify the SPREAD OR DIE mantra?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:35 AM ^
UM, with its limited natural recruiting base, cannot compete on pure athleticism with Alabama, USC, Florida, Texas, Oregon, etc. because those programs have access to such superior talent, whether in California, Texas, or the deep south. I think he is essentially saying that the inherent advantages of the spread as practiced by RR offers the ability to even the odds with those programs, so that UM would be competitive on a national basis, rather than just on a regional basis, which is what he forsees for UM under Hoke.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:39 AM ^
If you go back over the last forty years of Michigan football, that's been the norm: regional dominance and national mediocrity. It's pretty clear that's okay with the people who are driving this discussion. The desire to return to that mediocre comfort zone is a core part of this discussion.
Which is okay, I suppose. Brandon, Hoke, and many, many other folks as said as such. Brian is shooting for a different objective, and one that doesn't really resonate with most folks who are hard core Michigan fans.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:02 AM ^
I'll tell you one thing (maybe three)--without giving the TON of history of stored up Michigan moments in my very large brain--Michigan was NOT mediocre under Schembechler. He lost his bowl games in very close fashion most of the time. He got Michigan to a level that would be the envy of about 98% of college football. UM had escaped the really DOWN years every other program went through.
Lloyd had a few near misses that could have redefined him (alhtough a national championship season and the rest of what he did was pretty NON mediocre if you ask me). The Texas Rose Bowl. A close loss to OSU in 2006. Whatever--I already hear you shouting APPY STATE.
NO ONE is satisfied with mediocrity--but a lot of us didn't think this program needed to be completely redefined or gutted. And please don't tell me that team that was on the field against Florida in 2008 and USC in 2007 wasn't national championship caliber talent. It was. THERE is where you can fault Lloyd and Bo--not coaching up the talent to NC status, especially in BIg Games.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:07 AM ^
There is only one team every year that can win the NC (well except in 1997). Point is, just because a team hasn't won it doesn't mean they are mediocre on the national scale. If you are consistently finishing in Top 25 then I'd say you are competing on the National level.
We won in 1997 and were close to winning it in 2007. I personally think the team was better in 2006 than in 1996. We could have easily lost to Iowa that year, just like we could have easily won against Ohio State in 2006 and been in the title game and then, who knows; not out of the realm of possibilities that we could have beat Florida even though OSU did not. It is one game and anything could happen. We were capable of winning it all that year.
If every year was 2006 leading up to the OSU game, then that is as good as gets for me, throw in an NC every 10 years and that is an elite program.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:41 AM ^
RR's spread did a great job of evening the odds between teams like us and Toledo. If you can't throw downfield it's tough to win. Most importantly, if you don't have a great RB like Slaton, you won't be as effective.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:12 AM ^
Toledo was in RR's first year, so that comment holds no water.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^
fine. substitute the fighting zookers and the point stands
January 13th, 2011 at 9:41 AM ^
we've been really competitive the last 3 years. give me a break. the offense played a small part in the miserable defense the past 3 years. it's inability to possess the ball for an extended period at times led to our defense being on the field too much.
sure, against bad and average teams we put up monster numbers, but what have we done against good teams?
January 13th, 2011 at 9:51 AM ^
Don, you're dead-on. Two breathless callers have a major problem admitting that we will NEVER out-recruit certain programs due to "scruples". The spread, offensive game theory, under Rodriguez would have closed the gap creating by the recruiting disadvantages.
I think Hoke will do well, but, and I reserve the right to change my mind if he brings in awesome coordinators, our future does not include us being a perennial top 5 power.
I hope I'm wrong because I love what Hoke stands for, and I'd prefer it over comprimising the integrity of the program to compete for a national title every year.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:00 AM ^
I love what Hoke stands for, and I'd prefer it over comprimising the integrity of the program to compete for a national title every year
One of the things I love about Rod and Hoke is that they both seemed to be in coaching for the players. There is the difference in offensive philosophy and game theory too. But I think they both wanted to win the right way. And I'd like to think that is still possible - even with the SEC being the SEC, and Ohio being Ohio. Michigan will win national titles, and we'll do it the right way.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^
West Virginia had a recruiting ADVANTAGE over the other teams in the Big East. It had the best players in the conference. Yet, in Rodriguez's best season, it lost to far less talented teams from Pitt and South Florida.
Having a "schematic advantage" over teams like USC doesn't help if you don't win enough games in your own conference to get to play them in a bowl game.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^
Do you really believe that WVU has a recruiting advantage over Pitt or S Florida? Pat White and Steve Slaton were 3 stars that RR unearthed to bring unholy fire down upon his opponents...
/poetic hyperbole
January 13th, 2011 at 11:01 AM ^
That's the first time I've heard that WV had a recruiting advantage over anyone, let alone a team from Florida.
Yes, West Virginia had a recruiting advantage over South Florida, which was not even a IA school until recently. Not all teams from Florida are UF, Miami or FSU -- does Central Florida have a recuiting advantage too?
West Virginia had much better players than Pitt or South Florida, by any metric. Yet lost too both, despite their "schematic advantage."
January 13th, 2011 at 1:14 PM ^
To verify this is look at the recruiting rankings. I think RR out recruited his conferenceevery year.
He DID have better players than the other teams in his conference (once the Big 3 left).
But that doesn't support the theory that the SPREAD gives you that decided "schematic advantage" and that RR "won with less"
His bowl victory against Georgia and Stewart's upset of Oklahoma are anomalies that people love to think proves a point.
Rodriguez was 8-11 vs BC, VT and Miami when they were in the Big East. The year RR defeated Georgia in the Sugar Bowl, VaTech shponked WVU. South Florida and Pitt figured out that vaunted spread as well in RR's BEST years at WVU (White and Slaton).
I've nothing against Rodriguez. He parlayed a couple of successful seasons into an offer from Alabama and then the Michigan job.
But in choosing to come to Michigan--he chose the WRONG place to roll the dice and f**k with tradition and history.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:28 AM ^
That's the first time I've heard that WV had a recruiting advantage over anyone, let alone a team from Florida. Unless you're talking about an advantage over in-state players? The recruiting gap that I was referring to is more due
Unfortunately, your last comment was all too true these past few years.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:16 AM ^
January 13th, 2011 at 10:03 AM ^
Tom Brady - southern cal (USC backyard)
Leroy Hoard - Louisiana (LSU backyard)
Dhad Henne - Pennsylvania
Brian Griese - Florida
Tim Biakabutuka - canada
I could go on
yep - we have never been able to recruit nationally without the spread
January 13th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
Is he related to Chani Jones?
January 13th, 2011 at 10:09 AM ^
There's always exceptions and its easy to point them out. I think the whole point is that, to be a national championship caliber team, you have to have a Top 10 recruiting class. And in the last few years of Lloyd Carr, that was not the case. All this talk about Bo winning games, etc. is old, old news. This is the 21st Century, its a new college football era, and the alumni/fans better figure this out quickly or we'll go right back to the 1990s where we always were competitive but could never leap that last hurdle. If people are okay with that, awesome. But I think what Brian is saying is that we needed to find someone or something that would build on what Carr constructed, someone/thing that could get us over that last hump to compete more on the national level. And Hoke did himself a disservice by refusing to admit that he wants to compete for national championship, in my opinion.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:12 AM ^
Have you ever heard the expression "crawl before you walk"? To start talking about national championships for this team is ridiculously hubristic right now. Let's compete in the Big 10, then we can talk about making the next step.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^
I totally agree with you. But to completely pretend that he is not thinking about a national championship at all was a bad move, in my opinion. It would have been difficult, but he probably should have at least acknowledge that Michigan will always have national championship aspirations and then said exactly what you said in your post.
January 13th, 2011 at 1:21 PM ^
Here's the deal: No one wants to be the guy who follows a "legend" (Now, APPY STATE SCREAM GIRL CRY aside) let's grant Lloyd Legend status, or at least "Elder Statesman" status.
So, these guys hang on a couple years too long, and lose a bit of competitive fire. Football takes a bit of a back seat to relationships, teaching the players a bit more than how to tackle or hook up a jockstrap. Did Lloyd's recruiting and player development lag a bit? The short sighted answer is "Yarp"
BUT--Mallet, Manningham and Arrington had time left. He left a pretty credible defense, of which a defensive line consisting of Graham, Taylor, Jamison and Johnson looked pretty solid. Linebacking? Defensive back? Those were fairly solid looking at the TIME.
Point is, UM makes the RIGHT hire last time, maybe they don't miss a beat and build from there. In choosing this radical hire, and a radical guy on top of it--NOW all the revisionists want to yap about Lloyd's recruiting.
I just don't buy that argument and no one else should. It's disingenuous.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:19 AM ^
exceptions - they are the rule.
Michigan has always recruited nationally.
These players have gone on to the pros - this is the end game that many of the top talents want to achieve - the pros. This is why we could recruit in the past because we always sent a half dozen kids on to the pros every year. How many RR recruits of the past 3 years will end up in the pros?
RR was not going to get us over the last hurdle. Winning NC requires a lot of great players playing disciplined football - spread or no.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^
Michigan has always had outstanding talent. But the fact is that, other in 1997, they have never been able to get over the last hurdle to a national championship. And in 2008, I think many realized this fact and brought in Rodriguez to help with that last hurdle. He wasn't able to and is gone. So the question is, can Hoke (1) get back to the B1G championship caliber level and then (2) leap the last hurdle. Brian is saying no to #2 and I can't say that I do not disagree but am hoping to be shown that my doubts are for naught. See what I'm saying?
January 13th, 2011 at 10:39 AM ^
Rodriguez was not brought in to get UM over the last hurdle. Rodriguez was brought in because Ferentz and Schiano turned UM down.
There was no grand scheme to revolutionize UM on the part of Bill Martin. RR was a desperation hire (he initiated the contact with UM) to save face because we had been turned down by two Carr-clones.
I'm surprised how many people forget how the 2007/2008 coaching search went down and that it was not some referendum on UM football philosophy.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:45 AM ^
Maybe you're right, but can you honestly say that those are the facts? I know the rumors but was that how things really transpired? Because I heard a lot of rumors about both Harbaugh and Miles being offered the job (both have been refuted, but who is right?) and Gruden being interviewed. On its face, it appears as though this search transpired exactly the same as the last and all we have to go on is what Brandon has told us after having remained silent for weeks. You'll have to excuse me for being skeptical.
January 13th, 2011 at 2:16 PM ^
Brian Griese is not a good example.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:55 AM ^
Someone had better tell oklahoma, stanford and oregon (and illinois to some extent) that if you dont have a deep local talent pool you can't recruit with the big boys. they seem to have missed the memo
January 13th, 2011 at 9:37 AM ^
is wasted energy at this point. He's gone, Brady's our guy.
One thing I've come to realize throughout the past week is that, for better or for worse and regardless of how well-informed and intelligent we are, the online community is just one small portion of the fan base. We're just another sub-market of UM consumers, really, and Brandon just sold a new product. And regardless of what Brian or whatever percentage of this site thinks, sales were darn good yesterday.
I should stand up and come clean as well-- I made no secret that I was a Harbaugh guy, even before the fire... but I feel okay. I'm enthusiastic, remembering the climate of the program before, well, the Horror. I'd be happy to get back to there for now, with a little dilithium and dreads sprinkled in for good measure. We're okay.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:10 AM ^
Agreed. But I'm not hearing "anger". I'm hearing frustration that we're swapping out defensive defencies with offensive ones.
Yesterday was a product demo, sales of the actual product occurs every Saturday in the fall. We're at the point now where we're assembling the team that will bring that particular product to us for the next 6 years.
For the record, I will always be a fan of Rodriguez, but I'm also very impressed with Hoke, as a person, as a motivator, and as a leader. If Brady can get the right people around him, it should be a quick return for Michigan to being competitive with the big boys.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:47 AM ^
Is UM really going to suffer that much on offense?
SDSU averaged more points this season than UM (35.0 for SDSU vs. 32.7 for UM) and Hoke has publicly stated that he would like for Denard to be UM's QB in 2011. We know for a fact that UM's defense sucked under RR, how UM's offense will fare under Hoke is undetermined at this point.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:38 AM ^
Shoe calls in. Says Brian is way off.
Caller says Michigan can recruit nationally.
Says RR sucked at recruiting (LOL).
January 13th, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^
..."Shoe calls in" refer to, because it wasn't MGoShoe.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^
Dude said his name was Shoe.
???
January 13th, 2011 at 10:50 AM ^
Guy said his name was Shoe. Thought it was strange. Obviously an impersonator.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:59 AM ^
...could be Shoe, so perhaps not an impersonator. Anyhow, it wasn't me.
Thanks to you and His Dudeness for the info.
Oh, and Brian is way off, IME.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
But I can understand why someone who's name/or calling himself 'Shoe and calling Brian would make one think of you. Though it at first seemed odd that you would be calling into a station you're not around, and the guy's call didn't have your tone at all. So it just came off as a weird coincidence.
January 13th, 2011 at 11:56 AM ^
...for that.
January 13th, 2011 at 9:38 AM ^
Man I love Brian and he is real smart, but the idea that Rich and his system were the only path to making us better than regional failed the reality test. We hadn't even shown signs of being competitive regionally. Also, the idea that we can't compete nationally playing a more basic pro style over time, because we can't recruit with national programs fails the Ohio State test.
We used to beat them around like a drum in the 90s. What changed is we didn't recruit and coach em up as well as our opponent. The answer isn't trying to get smaller and trick them with some "schematic advantage." The answer is have greater will to recruit like MIchigan can and to coach them better then we did the last few years when Carr was coach.
It starts with winning our league, because that schedule will never change. If we don't handle that, forget national.
January 13th, 2011 at 10:18 AM ^
Wrong. We beat That School in Ohio like a drum in the 90's because of a man named Cooper. Once Tressel came the tides turned.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:06 PM ^
But Tressel's dominance is far more about recruiting than it is some schematic advantage. And not only that he's a better recruiter than Cooper (which he is, by a small margin) but that he built a wall around Ohio that's only now starting to weaken. The rise of Glenville as the dominant Cleveland talent school and their deep ties to OSU has badly hurt what was once one of the key locations from which we recruited.