Do you care whether DB forced Coach Hoke to fire Al Borges?

Submitted by Erik_in_Dayton on

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.   

BlueReign

January 9th, 2014 at 6:25 PM ^

bi·po·lar
bīˈpōlər/
adjective
 
  1. 1.
    having or relating to two poles or extremities.
    "a sharply bipolar division of affluent and underclass"
    •  
       
  2. 2.
    (of psychiatric illness) characterized by both manic and depressive episodes, or manic ones only.
     
     
    Manic episode - see MGoBlog server meltdown of joy yesterday between 4 and 12 pm.
     
     
    Depressive episode - waiting a full 24 hours to decided that the thing which made us super happy is actually a bad thing.

markusr2007

January 9th, 2014 at 6:00 PM ^

Nussmeier's que ridiculo salary as an opportunistic, aggressive commodity buy has Brandon's capitalist mits all over it. 

I do think Brady Hoke was genuinely pissed off and disappointed with Borges's performance last year, but to a fault, I think he would have ridden Borges into the sunset (or his own grave) out of loyalty and the "right thing to do".  

Hoke is all about familiarity and jump starting the past.  This explains the hire of Stan Parrish at Ball State.

Seriously, does Hoke even know Nussmeier from adam?

 

CR7

January 9th, 2014 at 6:05 PM ^

Somewhat, because if Hoke was really shortsighted enough to feel Borges was doing even an adequate job then maybe he isn't the guy. That and I hope this doesn't cause discontent between the staff if Brady is miffed about Borges going.

If it was Brady, then good on him.

blueblueblue

January 9th, 2014 at 6:08 PM ^

Has anyone determined how DB can force Hoke to fire Borges? Does it say in Hoke's contract that the AD can tell him who to hire and who to fire? Unless DB has hiring and firing privileges for Hoke's assistants, what leverage does DB have over Hoke other than threatening to fire him? 

This was Hoke's call. Yes, he might have bought himself more time, but that's always the case. 

UMgradMSUdad

January 9th, 2014 at 11:43 PM ^

I tend to agree.  If Borges had done something to violate his contract, sure DB could fire him. And while it might be technically possible for DB to fire anyone on Hoke's staff he wants, it wouldn't seem a very good way of doing business, nor would demanding that Hoke fire anybody.  Now as far as hiring, DB obviously controls the purse strings and signs that contract.

ish

January 9th, 2014 at 6:06 PM ^

the other possibility is that no changes were imminent until brandon/hoke/both heard that nussmieir was looking around.  that makes whose decision it was to fire borges less relevant.

Swazi

January 9th, 2014 at 6:10 PM ^

How many games this year did the Michigan offense gain less than 300 yards? One was against UConn.....UCONN. Borges was far too stubborn and never seemed to make adjustments when the opposing defenses did. Negative rushing yards in any game is unacceptable. And averaging 1 YPC against PSU is just as bad. If DB made the call, then good for him. Nuss is a better offensive mind regardless.

legalblue

January 9th, 2014 at 6:16 PM ^

My one and only care about whether or not Brandon forced this to happen is whether or not Hoke and Nussmeier will work well toghether.  Regardless it was a business decision that was made for the benefit of the football program.  It's tough to make those decisions especially becase coach Borges seems to be a well resprect and well liked guy.  The nature of the time between hiring and firing was such a short period of time that it seems likely that Nussmeier was recruited and on board before the firing occured.  If that's the case you had to think that Hoke was very aware of what was going to transpire, and at least tacitly condoned this.

ifis

January 9th, 2014 at 6:17 PM ^

The nature of this board is to speculate about things, but I think Hoke's character should be held in high regard until we get evidence to the contrary.  We do not know how this decision came about.  Nor do we know if Hoke was motivated by his own job security.  Personally, everything Coach Hoke has done since day 1 indicates he is motivated to serve the program as a whole and especially the people who trust and depend on him.  This should be evident to everyone, including those who are critical of Hoke's performance on the field.  Firing Borges must have been awful, but I'll bet watching Taylor Lewan, Jeremy Gallon, etc. fight through a sub-optimal senior season was no picnic either.  Until I see good reason to believe otherwise, Hoke has my utmost confidence that he is a man of character who places the successs of his players, coaches, and the program ahead of himself.  I would go so far as to say that it is one of his defining traits, sets him apart from many other coaches, and is a huge part of why a certain type of young man has been attracted to our program for the last 3 years.

ifis

January 9th, 2014 at 6:34 PM ^

a lot of people have been implying that Hoke's primary concern was his own job security.  Maybe I am wierd, but I take that as a negative comment about Hoke's character.  I think Hoke's primary concern is about the state of the program, especially the people in it.  I think it hurt him to look Borges in the face and fire him, but it cut him just as deep to look his players in the face over the course of the season.  Hard call, but I don't think it was primarily motivated by "well, I guess its me or Borges; get out of here Al"

03 Blue 07

January 10th, 2014 at 2:46 AM ^

Huh? Isn't Hoke's job security vis-a-vis whether to fire Borges or not directly tied to the performance of the football team?  Isn't the performance of the football team-- the success of the players (people) who play for the football team-- directly dependent on the offensive coordinator, among other things? 

Why would Hoke say "it's me or Borges; Al's gotta go, if he doesn't, I'm getting axed"? The only plausible scenario that's even close to that would occur if Brandon said "fire Borges" and Hoke said "no, I will not," and then Brandon said, "well, I'll fire you then," and Hoke then said "oh, okay, I'll fire Al."  Who on earth has suggested that's how it went down? No one. If Hoke refused to fire Borges at Brandon's direction, he's saying "I go down with Borges." He would be calling Brandon's bluff, and forcing Brandon to either back down or fire him, Brady Hoke. That did not occur. Thus, doesn't it seem pretty obvious that Hoke was on board with it? Do you think Dave Brandon really fired one of Hoke's staff members without Hoke's consent or acquiescence? I can't see Hoke allowing that, and I can't see Brandon doing that (and trust me, I don't like Dave Brandon). 

 

goblue20111

January 9th, 2014 at 6:23 PM ^

I'm fine with it if Brandon stepped in. Someone has to have the stones to do it. This is where his being a CEO comes in handy. Results matter -- not personal feelings. 

NFG

January 9th, 2014 at 6:23 PM ^

I really don't want to beleive that Hoke thought Borges was worth another year. If, DB made him, that is just exevutive power at its purest.

Vasav

January 9th, 2014 at 6:26 PM ^

It depends on context, because I'd be okay with him saying: "coach, offensive production has been poor, from what I'm seeing the problem is scheme and you need to make changes for success, also BTW 'Bama's OC is available"

But if he says "hey coach I'm firing Al Borges," that's too much micromanagement. Let Hoke do his thing. If Hoke fails, it sucks but it's his failure. If you continually micromanage him then you negatively affect the dynamic within the coaching staff. Chemistry in any professional environment is a real thing. Let Hoke run the program he's in charge of - you stick with running the rest of the AD.

Bluegoose

January 9th, 2014 at 6:27 PM ^

that so many apparently think so little of Brady Hoke that he would need or even accept his boss telling him how to run his team. It follows that the same can be said re Brandon. Does everyone believe that Brandon would hire coaches that are so weak or of so little character that he would need to tell them how to manage their teams? This whole notion is so antithetical to the M that I know going back to Crisler.

I would suggest that Brady is plenty enough to do what he feels is right for his team, and would more than bristle at anyone who had the temerity to tell him what he had to do. If it came to that for him, I am confident he would simply wave goodbye. Either you want the man as your coach or you don't. Simple as that. I expect for both Brady certainly and Brandon too.

TNWolverine

January 9th, 2014 at 6:35 PM ^

I'm sure it was nothing out of the ordinary. DB and Hoke probably get together every off season and discuss the football program and what should be done. If anything it was probably a mutual decision.

snarling wolverine

January 9th, 2014 at 6:44 PM ^

Did Brandon force John Beilein to fire his original assistants in the summer of 2010?  We may as well debate that one, too.

I don't think it matters.  The only issue would be if Hoke and Nussmeier couldn't get along, but given how much power Hoke delegates to his OC, I don't see that being likely.

 

 

JamieH

January 9th, 2014 at 6:53 PM ^

Brandon were forcing him to do someting stupid, I would be pissed.

 

Since what he did was fire an OC that wasn't performing and hired an OC with a significant track record of success, I really don't care whose idea it is.

The only 2 things I care about are:

1)  Can this OC make Michigan's offense work

2) Can this OC work together with Hoke.

Those are the only 2 things that matter.  How we got here really is irrelevant, because I think, universally, it is being hailed as a good move.

Meddling from upper management is only bad juju when it causes stupid shit to occur.  When it causes to go out and get a really solid OC like Nuss, it really isn't meddling, is it?

jsquigg

January 9th, 2014 at 6:55 PM ^

It was Hoke's decision and it was obviously a hard one.  Dave Brandon may have had input, but he couldn't force Hoke to do anything.  If Hoke refused to fire Borges was Brandon going to fire Hoke?  Unlikely.

TheJuiceman

January 9th, 2014 at 6:58 PM ^

I like that DB seems to be willing to do whatever it takes (or what he feels it takes at least) for us to get back to elite status.  Great job firing and hiring this week. I don't like my "gut feeling" that DB is putting lipstick, fake tits, and wild tight yoga pants on a pig. And then giving it a degree. I'm thrilled with the hire, but who else out there succeeds with an HC who probably can't cut it and two coordinators who can...hopefully? It seems like an unsustainable model in my opinion.

Double Nickel BG

January 9th, 2014 at 7:01 PM ^

All staff decisions should be left to the head coach. I really hope that Hoke truely believes that making changes was neccessary and not that DB forced him into it. At the end of the day, its DBs job to oversee the progress of the head coach and its the head coaches job to ensure that everything in his power is done to make sure he has the best program and coaches under him that allow him to do his job.

Tater

January 9th, 2014 at 7:03 PM ^

If David Brandon is dictating play-calling, he has no right to scapegoat Al Borges.  If MANBALL continues to be shoved down the coaching staff's throat, Michigan will continue to have the largest stadium in football but not get results commensurate with their status as a program.

I went to my first game in 1960 and have seen Michigan share one National Championship.  That is not a top five or even top ten performance.  We all deserve better, and David Brandon is one big reason why we aren't getting it. 

He should go back to screwing up pizza.

reshp1

January 9th, 2014 at 7:09 PM ^

I think Brandon pressured him, and I don't have a problem with it either way. Hoke looks at the pure X and O's perspective while Brandon has way more of a pulse on the fanbase and donors. It's natural for them to disagree, I don't think it's a sign of dysfunction at all. Above all else, the availability and interest from Nussmeier was probably the biggest catalyst. This definitely feels like a we found someone better situation vs fire first and figure it out later.

BlueFordSoftTop

January 9th, 2014 at 7:12 PM ^

 
But the premise is flawed.  The only thing "forced" here is the imposition of modern analytic tools and business processes I believe Brandon brought with him to manage the football program and athletic department.  
 
Brandon is continually evaluating staff and the coaching marketplace.  Nussmeier and other prospects are assessed and tracked, directly else by retained headhunters/talent management consultants.  It's tantamount to corporate hiring and succession planning. 
 
Borges likely knew 2/3 through the 2013 season that Brandon and University representatives were considering and communicating with coaching prospects who might fill Borges' position if the circumstances warranted.  (Nussmeier, Brandon, Hoke, Borges and Saban may have known this deal would be done, with the finer points to be worked out, back in mid-December, which may have been the earliest Nussmeier communicated his decision in strict confidence.)  I doubt Borges was surprised given the performance of the offense during the final 1/3 and the potential availability of Nussmeier and others we will never know about.
 
Fort Schembechler is a very different enterprise under Brandon's leadership irrespective of the nostalgia it capitalizes upon.  Hoke and Borges could hardly protest the performance analysis processes they each accepted when they signed on for executive-scale compensation packages.  Nobody's hand got forced; there are only continually emerging opportunities for improving performance of the entity and its subunits.

newtopos

January 9th, 2014 at 8:50 PM ^

My question regarding this premise is why did Brandon agree to pay Hoke approximately $4M/yr in March 2011?  That was not the market price for Hoke.  Minnesota had looked at Hoke in November 2010, and then hired Jerry Kill in December 2010 (ultimately at around $1.2M/yr).  Given the intense desire on Hoke's part to coach Michigan, and the lack of interest in Hoke from other top programs, his compensation appears significantly inflated. 

Yeoman

January 9th, 2014 at 9:00 PM ^

And that is not snark. Coaches' salaries are public knowledge, and Brandon would not have wanted to establish from the get-go that he considered Hoke to be an inferior choice, worth much less than coaches at presumably comparable programs.  Especially since he didn't.

UMgradMSUdad

January 9th, 2014 at 7:15 PM ^

To me, the fact that reporters are basing this purely on speculation shows that Hoke and Brandon are on the ball and have control of this.  It just seems to be reporters trying to create a story out of nothing.  Let's do our own speculating.  Why would reporters even make claims like this?  Could it be they're peeved that they weren't in the loop and were blindsided by this news?  

BlueMan80

January 9th, 2014 at 7:23 PM ^

I see the following.... Brady knows that if Al stays, everything is on one roll of the dice in 2014. New OC gives him at least one additional year. DB knows that, too. He doesn't want to look like an idiot for picking Hoke as his coach and everyone knows that another HC/reboot will start the process all over again. I do think DB had some input on the OC and that whoever comes in has to be future HC material. He'll pay for that. If a new HC/reboot has to occur, then the transition won't be a complete do over. It will be interesting to see if that causes any friction with Brady working with someone that may be his chosen successor. This theory could be a bit of a reach, but looks very plausible to me.

991GT3

January 9th, 2014 at 7:25 PM ^

remain HC as long as he was AD, all the major decisions for the football program and staff became part of Brandon's responsibilities. My view is he forced the issue since he put his neck on the line for Hoke.

However, I don't find this unusual. I suspect many AD's have a hand in their football programs. Only the strongest of HC's would resist the AD's input. It happens frequently in the NFL between the GM and HC. 

Dilithium Wings

January 9th, 2014 at 7:29 PM ^

I hope that it was Hoke and not Brandon who forced Al Borges out. It looks bad for Hoke if he's unable to do the tough job and fire friends. Carr was way too loyal to his staff and truly believe this cost Michigan so much with all the talent on his teams.

Again, if it was Brandon and not Hoke then I'm even more wary of him as a leader of this program.

Foley99

January 9th, 2014 at 7:37 PM ^

Calls the shots, and I am drafting a thank you letter for the $275m donation and making the right choice. He is on an OC firing rampage these days in Miami and Ann Arbor