Downside to coaching speculation
All of the local papers, Twitter, Facebook etc. are full of speculation about Hoke's future. That's understandable given last weekend's debacle.
That said, I think that an ongoing tsunami of posts this week and the coming weeks about possible changes at the top on the board are destructive to the program. People can obviously post whatever they want subject to the mods/Brian, and I'm neither a mod nor Brian so this is just my 2 cents. My point though is that Hoke will certainly be the coach throughout the 2014 season. Posts listing possible replacements or reasons to make a change may get the attention of the Athletic Department, but may also get the attention of current recruits and players in different way than a Terry Foster column since this site is largely made up of true fans.
While i'm sure that the commits realize that football coaches don't get tenure I still think that multiple Mgoboard posts about the potential longevity of the current staff, their perception nationally etc can't do anything but hurt us with the players we hope to see wearing the maize & blue in future years and the current team.
I hope and expect that there will a serious discussion/evaluation of the direction of the program at the end of the season, and that all options will be on the table. I just think the discussions I see now are premature.
September 10th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
in order to get rid of Hoke, part of me is hoping they lose to Miami this weekend. If that happens, he may be gone sooner than any of us think. They could put Nuss in charge, appoint a seach committe and begin the process of finding a suitable replacement.
The reality is as long as Hoke is the coach we will continue to win just over 50% of our games and hope for better the next year.
September 10th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
Hoping we lose to Miami is the dumbest comment I have heard since the loss. Well done!!!
September 10th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
Hey 99,
People here have figured out you are a troll; specifically, OSU troll. If it wasn't already obvious, that comment above nails it. We also know you are hurting over the loss of Braxton Miller. It wouldn't surprise me if you were one of the guys voting down every positive comment you can find. Trolls look for ways to incite chaos so they can feel powerful. Don't feed the trolls!
September 10th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
I am pretty surprised these are still those that think Hoke should be retained for 2 more years "no matter" what to "provide stability". That's a horrible mentality. Especially considering we have seen what an elite coach with decent recruits in our basketball program can do. Once said elite coach surrounded himself with the right assistants the program took off; it was not all chopped liver he was coaching but it also wasnt UK, Duke, Kansas talent.
If UM's recruiting drops from top 7 in the country to top 15 but we trade an average coach for a premier coach it is not going to matter. We have had great recruiting classes and you see the results on the field. They are not improving. This is a HORRIBLE conference. If Beilein coaches in this type of conference in basketball he wouldnt lose a game all conference season. This is partially why MSU is ascending - if MSU was in the SEC or Pac12 it would be a solid program with good coaching but they are taking advantage of a horrible conference. So why the hell wouldnt you want to immediately cut off what is not working (at season end) and find someone who is an upgrade. Michigan is not going to drop to #40 in recruiting ranking. Wisconsin, Stanford, MSu show that if you recruit top 30 in the country with a good staff you can do very well. And in the Big 10 it is even easier.
And it's not a permanent downshift in recruiting, you have 1 class down to #20 and then if new coach actually does something of value you are right back to where you were with top 10-12 classes and a good coaching staff in line which is the end goal.
So no, he doesnt have any right to go out his whole contract just so we have stability. The quicker we find a better option the better for the program. If you lose three 4 stars and replace them with three 3 stars in 1 class or 2 classes and you have a coaching staff who is superior - you take that all day. See basketball.
September 10th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
There were many who wanted to run Beilein out after 3 years. I am not saying Hoke is Beilein, I am just making sure we are consistent.
September 11th, 2014 at 9:19 AM ^
Hoke would have been given the same three years RR was given.
Now I'm not a tit-for-tat type of person and I don't bite off my nose to spite my face and all the cliches are beloing to me. For that reason I didn't want Hoke to be gone last year and in all honesty, I don't think most people (myself included) want Hoke to be retained simply for stability. For me it's all about finding a replacement that is a sure thing (or as close to one as there is).
If you don't and just fire Hoke to fire him, regardless whether there is a suitable replacement out there, you risk going through this very thing after another 3-4 years. To some that might be a risk they're willing to take, but there is more than just another coaching search 3-4 years down the road to think about.
With all coaching searches there will be people who are already enrolled that will leave the program and there are always committed recruits who will decommit. Again, if the replacement is a proven commodity that is probably a risk you'd take, but when it isn't...you're risking a lot on far less than a sure thing. It could set the program back another decade.
I just want to be clear that there are people out here that are against Hoke being fired that have more reasons than stability. I didn't like the hire in the first place and would love to have an upgrade at the HC posiiton. I'm just not willing to set the program back another 5-10 years to satisfy my desire for change.
September 10th, 2014 at 12:22 PM ^
That's fine in theory, but what "elite" coaches are out there for UM to pluck? People calling for Hoke to be retained are more commenting on the dearth of better replacements than some undying love for the current HC.
Yes, recruiting wouldn't take a huge hit, but I honestly don't think the issues are all on the coaching as much as youth + new offensivce coordinator + losing to a good team on the road despite not playing that poorly. Everyone cautioned not reading too much into the App. St. game, and yet this team loses a weird game to ND badly and this is the final straw? Yes, the corners aren't all-world, but this was also a team without a couple of starter-level players in the backfield, one lost during the game.
And for all the talk about the basketball team getting better, those sports are significantly different. Hell, Kentucky can have close to 100% turnover year-to-year and compete for titles. Football is a different beast, and if a Beilein-type was out there I'm sure the football team would take a run at him. But I don't see a guy like that anywhere.
September 10th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^
@Bronx
I agree the key to this theory is finding a better coach than Hoke. There is no home run outside Harbaugh and no guarantees.
I will throw out Todd Graham in terms of track record in terms of a viable choice. Makes half of Hoke's salary, is in a Big 5 conference, his teams improve, has won double digits multiple times now in different programs, etc.
I am sure there are a few other people out there.
But saying we should not change because we cannot find someone better than Hoke is not valid. There are coaches better than Hoke out there. Most likely quite a few.
If Hoke had no Michigan ties and was coaching at Ole Miss the past 3+ years and you saw his record at Ball State, SDSU, and Ole Miss (trade his UM record and transfer it to Ole Miss) would you hire him? People would mock me if I offered him as a candidate - he had one great year at Ole Miss in 2011 with someone else's players and 1 great year at Ball State after 6 years.
So if you think of it that way, there are a good # of coaches with better resumes than Hoke.
September 10th, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
September 10th, 2014 at 12:15 PM ^
Nothing makes a useless, self-defeated discussion end quite like ANOTHER post about it.
Unless Brady Hoke loses many more games, he isn't going to be removed from his position until the end of the season at the earliest, and even that seems unlikely. Can't we go back complaining about the lack of a UFR or the marching band not getting to play something, sometime, somewhere like it used to be around here?
September 10th, 2014 at 12:34 PM ^
September 10th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^
It didn't affect the program under RR one bit. I wouldn't sweat it.
September 10th, 2014 at 1:15 PM ^
It's all downside. I was perfectly happy for my first 30 or so years as a Michigan fan when there was no coaching speculation whatsoever. The last 7-8 years, not so much.
September 10th, 2014 at 1:25 PM ^
It says something about the state of our program when Penn State, coming out of a two year bowl ban and massive scholarship reductions, is likely in a much better position to compete than we are. I like Hoke. He seems like a really cool guy to sit down and have a beer with, which is why I think he does so well in recruiting. But he's been here four years and we have absolutely no identity. Urban Meyer made his presence felt in year 1. Dantonio at least showed he could coach some serious defense in year 3. O'Brien made Penn State a very respectable team in his two years there, and Franklin will likely take them even further.
Hoke has done nothing to Michigan but make it worse every year. Even Mattison, the one guy on our staff that should be a proven commodity, hasn't done much of anything to improve the defense. Hoke just seems like he's in way over his head, and while my opinion should mean very little to him, I have no desire to sit there and watch my team continue to suffer and become more and more irrelevant each year.
For me, the bar has now been set at either winning out, or going 10-2 and beating either MSU or OSU. If we get blown out by both, show Hoke the door. If we lose to both, even if its competitive, show him the door. John Cooper was a very good coach for OSU, and he won a lot of games. But he got fired because he could never win the game that mattered. Hoke just can't win, period.
I'm tired of losing. Its a steep expectation, but with the talent Hoke has brought in, there are ZERO excuses for winning anything less than 10-11 games a year in this god awful conference.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
September 10th, 2014 at 2:11 PM ^
That being said, if performance does not improve quickly, particularly in big games, then it is not realistic to think that discussion of coaching changes and criticism of both coaching and player performance should not be brought forth.
Recruits know more than we fans and the media know about what's going on. From their coaches, mentors, friends, other prospects and competing schools.
This is not Div III, this is big time, big spotlight, big pay football. The staff can quiet criticism and speculation by winning, demonstrating progress and displaying improved football IQ vis a vis their coaching peers.
Hoke happens to have the highest profile job in the state of Michigan. If only 60% of Michigan law, medical and dental school grads passed the BAR and state boards and or received scores significantly below peer institutions, I would be their would be consequences, both by the administration, Provost, and, students.
I really think what will quiet fan unrest is for Hoke and staff to do their job. No true fan expects perfection in w/l record or performance week to week. However, any true fan is right to expect positive progression, a balanced record against rivals and a higher degree of consistency than has been demonstrated.
September 10th, 2014 at 4:08 PM ^
Why do you care so much if we have to change coaches again? You're not playing for Michigan.
I'd really like Michigan to compete for national titles. If we have to change coaches so be it. We have the talent right now. It's not like when Rich Rod got here at all. The current staff is just not getting them to play up to their potential.
September 10th, 2014 at 4:10 PM ^
I AM NOT against a coaching change if they do not turn it around this season, because, after four years, if there is not demonstrable progress, this staff will have proven they cannot compete for championships.
September 10th, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^
I agree with Hoke on one thing...don't blame the kids. They deserve better coaching and it is high time Brady comes to grips with the fact he doesn't have it. We don't need tinkering, we need an overhaul.
September 10th, 2014 at 7:07 PM ^
September 11th, 2014 at 10:58 AM ^
Tom Brady and BB are 2-6 on the road in the last 8 road games.
Road games are hard.