Stephen Nesbitt, who apparently spent two years covering the football team, said on Twitter yesterday that he had to believe that DB forced Coach Hoke to fire Al Borges. Chantel Jennings chimed in that she agreed. Kyle Bogenschutz said that he agreed as well and that, if they were right, this would mean a "major problem" and "far greater issues than anyone knows" for Michigan.
With all respect to Kyle Bogenschutz, I don't see a problem if their take is correct. You would of course ideally like everyone to always be on the same page, but I don't see a big issue with DB essentially saying, "Coach, I know you love Al, and I know you believe in him, but as your boss I have to step in here and tell you that we need to make a change." That's the AD's role at some level, like it's the HC's role to tell, say, his receiver's coach that something needs to change.
Am I missing something? What is the argument for the other side? I don't know any of the people I listed above or have a Twitter account, so I couldn't ask Mr. Bogenschutz to explain.
EDIT: Yeoman asks a good question. Nesbitt's reason for believing Coach Hoke was forced seemed to be - and I hope I'm not putting words in his mouth - that Coach Hoke and Coach Borges were too close for Coach Hoke to have willingly done this.
EDIT No. 2: evenyoubrutus informs us that Sam Webb said he has a gut feeling that this was Coach Hoke's call. FWIW, this puts me solidly into the camp that thinks it was Coach Hoke's decision. Sam has a remarkably accurate gut.