Uh....win all the games?
Edited Title: Player development over next three games
Winning is good
I heart wins.
If you're at a point where you're honestly wondering whether it's good or bad for Michigan to win a football game, something is wrong.
...buried in the livethread or the snowflake threads you read gems like "winnig is nice but this one came at a terrible cost" because it might save the coaches' jobs.
So, yeah, those people exist, at least in the heat of Saturday inebriation.
What's even more crazy is that there are people around here that think Borges should keep his job. I can only assume these people are on the verge of death due to intoxication.
At this point I'm not married to the idea of keeping him around, but I don't think his playcalling is the biggest problem with our offense. Our OL is the biggest problem. If I could fix one thing only with this offense over the offseason, it'd be the OL. A functional OL can make almost any OC look good. Look at MSU.
Is the OL part of the offense? The offense that Al Borges coaches? Is Borges the QB coach? The guy that turned record setting Denard Robinson into a shell of himself and has taken 5 start recruit Devin Gardner and turned him to whatever that is out there this season?
His playcalls are bad enough but he is responsible for much more than just that. He is the CEO of the offense. He is responsible for all of it. When Gerg's defense under RR was awful, people were not calling for the DB coach to be fired or the DL coach. They wanted Gerg gone becuase he was in charge of it all. In fact, not only did people want Gerg gone, they wanted RR gone too becuase he was the head coach.
For some reason that is not getting applied to this staff. We are all supposed to blame the players and give Borges a pass.
my son agrees with you
This may well be the dumbest thread ever.
I think we're in a very interesting position because the majority of people will blindly gauge success by number of wins, and not by how we got there. If we go 10-3 to finish the season, that will invariably garner a lot of momentum for Hoke to stick with our current coaching staff. And, I'm not sure if you've been on the blog at all, but it's not an uncommon opinion to think that our offensive coaching staff is a tad inept.
We've also demonstrated the ability to win games in spite of poor execution, poor gameplans, and shitty coaching. So, just because we win 3 games, it means nothing about the promise of our program moving forward. If we hold on to Borges and Funk, whose to say we don't have the exact same problems moving forward?
If you think the answers to these issues are blatantly obvious, then you are clearly on a level far beyond me, and I submit to your greatness.
Yesterday while staring at a 9-3 deficit I caught myself thinking, "Well, if we were to win this game, it would increase the degree of difficulty in the bowl game, so maybe we should just go ahead and lose out and get a nice easy bowl opponent."
Then I was like, "wait, that's stupid. I'm talking about trading a win now for a maybe-win later. What a terrible idea I just had." That's some thinking straight out of loserville.
Win the games, man. Just win the games and let the other chips fall where they may. Trading wins now for maybe-wins later is stupid.
Edit: I tell you what. You guarantee me, with 100% rock-solid, unassailable odds, that by losing out we will 1) fire Borges and Funk and 2) hire coaches that are guaranteed with no chance of failure whatsoever to be outstanding coaches, the best of their kind, who are absolutely guaranteed to produce positive results of the highest order, and I will accept your premise that losing the next three games is the best thing for the program.
Because that's not how it works. I'm talking about, 1,2,3 seasons down the line, we look back at these next three games and ask ourselves, retroactively, was that good for the program?
It may be dumb to talk about it now, but many people have been doing the same thing in looking back at Hoke's first season. People say things like, it made us have too high of expectations, or, it gave him too much job security and have too little accountability for mistakes. That being said, I'd rather have won the sugarbowl than lost it, just like I'd rather beat OSU than lose this year.
But at the same time, it's still possible to say that losing may be better for the program if we get rid of Borges and get lucky enough to have a better coordinator.
You're stuck on an MGoLoop: the board has told you what you meant to say in your thread and you won't be able to get out. Don't try to fight it, it'll only make it worse. Just grin and bear it...
This is simple. If this coaching staff can get this roster of players to 10 wins, it will have done a good job, because this is not a talented or experienced football team by Michigan standards. This may well be the least-experienced team (in terms of the number of upperclassmen on the roster) that Hoke will ever coach, and probably the worst OL he'll ever have. If he can win 10 games despite that, he's a good coach. That is definitely the optimal outcome.
Go 1-2 or 2-1 and it gets murky. Is that an acceptable season? I don't know. It would bring up the "Is it coaching or inexperience" debate." There's no telling where we go from there.
Go 0-3 and there will be consequences, but do not assume these will all be good ones. That would likely increase roster and recruiting attrition. It would put Hoke on a serious hot seat for next season, which would likely affect recruiting. It could also compromise his ability to hire top-notch assistants to replace any he might fire, because assistants might be leery of going to a staff that might not last.
So, we go 1-2. We finish 8-5. That's 11-2, 8-5, 8-5. And we want to fire people? Guys, we all want a better offense. But people don't get fired when having those kinds of records. The offense is ranked in the 50-60s, not the 100-120s. Its not good, but the line is dreadful. I know we believe in a linemen free-offense or at least a few linemen free plays, but they've yet to be discovered. Also, having this discussion on the day after our coordinator put together a good game plan and had what we will find to be a high-RPS day only to have the QB attempt 4-6 interceptions is odd.
I struggle with describing a game plan that resulted in 9 points (3 of them a total gift) as being "good". Maybe it is the best we can do giving the current talent, experience and level of player development. Of course, if the players haven't developed, some of that likely coaches. A long way of saying, it is likely a blend between the coaches and players and is really hard to figure out how much of each one. I personally tend to assign more blame to the coaches.
The fact that I'm not a frequent commenter doesn't mean I'm not on here 30 times a day.
No, I'm not going to try to mount a massive defense of Al Borges--the playcalling has been incredibly frustrating at times, and it is hard to imagine how our offense could be much worse than it has over the last 3 weeks. Having said that, there is no doubting the fact that the O-line play we are seeing is among the worst we've ever seen. We might be able to blame Funk for that, but probably not Borges. So, I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that it's hard to get a grasp on what he can or can't do until we have an offensive line that is moderately competent in place, giving him the freedom to call the plays he wants with some confidence that they have a chance at success. Now, I'm sure you (and many others) would disagree with me. But if I'm thinking that Borges might possibly deserve a year (maybe even 2) to show what he can do under those circumstances, then I think you can be resonably sure that Hoke does too, and my guess is that Brandon is giving Hoke a pretty good deal of independence.
So if there's little reason to believe that Borges is getting fired in the off-season (and there really is), then the only thing that changes if we lose the next 3 games instead of winning them is that we look like even more of a laughingstock than we already do. 3 wins, and a 10-3 season might just get recruits excited again, and reunite a fan base that appears ready to go back into cannibal mode.
I'll take the wins, if the football gods will give them to us.
If next year we can actually come out and establish a run game....that opens up play calling immensely. Being one dimensional...well....let's just say it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what it does to handicap us. What a refreshing change it was to see some positive yardage on runs. Now, I'm not saying defenses are scared of us yet...but if were actually to show some consistency in our running game. It would force teams to back off on pressuring us. Loading the box. Etc. I'm not telling anyone anything they don't already know...we just need our oline to execute better. (And our qb needs to work on not throwing the ball to the defenders)
"my guess is that Brandon is giving Hoke a pretty good deal of independence."
Doesn't Brandon which films with coaches on Sunday? Doesn't seem to me like a guy who is inclined to be hands off.
Borges and Funk are let go. Both of their charges have significantly regressed and showed little improvement whatsoever. Funk is a no-brainer. His line is statistically one of the worst in Michigan history, and the worst in FBS this year. Yesterday I was mulching leaves and found myself apprehensive about stopping the yard work and switching the game on because of how disgusting the line is. That pains me to my core.
Devin needs to show improvement over final two games with decision-making. He needs to learn to throw it away faster rather than scramble straight backwards 10 yards first. He's obviously playing hurt. He's started wearing a knee brace and rib protection so they're hide g an injury from us. I suppose they'll unveil it at seasons end to make us feel as though he gutted through something.
Brady needs to reevaluate defensive play. Not seeing as much progression there as we expected either. Linebackers haven't made strides (in most cases they've regressed - Bolden, even Ross hasn't made any quantifiable leap).
The list of noteworthy aspects of this team is so long I can't type it all out on my phone.
Time for Freddy to move on.
with the current state of M football, I can not see the coaching staff being safe. I can see them putting feelers out there to see who is available, but wouldn't see a firing after the season just to scramble to fill a spot.
I was very happy yesterday by not seeing Fitz on the field, Hoke has always said his best 11 will be on the field. I have called him a liar the last 4 to 5 games. Yesterday he got it right. I still stand by my theory for next year. Gardner to WR, while Morris is our QB.
Gardner is not moving to WR. We will have Funchess and Chesson plus Darboh. There are a bunch of incoming freshman and players coming off redshirts. We will need both Morris and Gardner at QB, and I guaruntee Gardner is the starter. Our offensive line is not going to be much better next year and we will definitely need QB mobility to bail us out of a few games.
Yeah that bails us out of bad O-Line play. Oh wait, we've had like 19 sacks against us in three games.
And how does throwing out routes to opposing team linebackers 4-6 times a game "bail us out" exactly?
One or Two nifty looking runs and big gains does not make up for having no football sense.
...lose all our remaining games, then we'll get a higher draft pick next year.
The best outcome is for "Michigan fans" to start acting like Michigan fans instead of Sparty fans. The people who clamored for a return to "Michigan football," got exactly what they asked for, but are bitching right now are everything that is negative about fandom and sports in general.
Michigan had a chance to embrace the 21st century. Instead, they embraced their own egos. The decision was made that all head football coaches will be from the Inbred Michigan Coaching Tree and that "Michigan football" will be played in the style it has since Bo got there: MANBALL.
When Michigan had a huge advantage over the rest of the Big Ten in personnel, it worked. Now, however, they don't have the personnel to play a style of football where everyone knows what's coming. Other teams have equalized any slight personnel disadvantage by using 21st century concepts on offense.
Brady Hoke and Al Borges are doing exactly what Dave Brandon (via a considerable portion of the fan/donor base) mandated. They are exactly what those who bitched about Rich Rod wanted: a return to 20th century MANBALL. When they have had two more years to amass superior personnel, the results will be exactly like the "MIchigan Football" we have all come to know and love.
In the meantime, the staff deserves our support. If recruits start to waver and there is more movement "out" instead of in on NSD, the blame lies solely on the fanbase and media for creating an unstable environment that drives recruits away.
AFAIC, it is incumbent upon the fanbase to show some class and display to recruits and their parents who read blogs like this one that the community supports their team. Failure to do so is going to result in some high-profile decommits.
In other words: you asked for it, you got it. Don't sabotage yet another five years of Michigan football.
This is extremely well written and provides a solid understanding and argument why firing anyone really is unacceptable to even think about right now. Thanks for this.
Could't disagree with you more on so many levels.
1. You apparently have no idea what Michigan fans asked for. With RichRod's replacement, Michigan fans were not clamoring for Manball. In fact, I don't recall too many people complaining about the offense really, except how it kept tanking in big games. Fans were asking for a return to recruiting well (no more smurfs and empty O line classes), good defense (or any non-GERG defense really), winning and a coach that could shore the divide in the fan base. They didn't ask for Brady Hoke, and in fact there were several other candidates preferred to him that Brandon whiffed on, many of whom did not prioritize Manball. Yet you think everyone wanted Manball. False.
2. For you to state that Al Borges is doing exactly what Brandon mandated is absurd. Brandon didn't mandate the offense. How else explain years 1 and 2 where Borges stuck to a more spread option to leverage the parts (Denard) he had? Yet this year, with a gaping hole of experience on the O line, suddenly now is the time to turn to Brandon's mandated Manball.... If anything, the only thing that Brandon's sizeable paycheck to Borges mandates is that he do what Des Howard said, and maybe "figure it out," or maybe outscheme a D coordinator or two instead of having his lunch served to him by opposing coordinators week after week (hello 1 TD in 12 Qs of regulation play). This offense is worse than any MAC offense right now. 0 regulation TDs vs 0-5 Big Ten record NW?? Two near pix-sixes? Almost 4-5 interceptions going right through the hands of NW defenders? Winning by converting 2 4th downs and 1 second FG against 0-5 NW? 21 for 21 PSU? -48 MSU? -21 Nebraska? Yeah Brandon mandated this offense? Please.
3. The staff deserves support? I mean, what planet are you on Tater? What do you think this blog is? MGoBlue.com? Last I checked this blog wasn't propaganda central. Blogs are cool specifically because they are indy. The day Michigan fans are silenced from expressing issue with their third highest paid offensive coordinator being a miserable failure on so many fronts, is the day this blog will start dying. Check my signature. The blog's founder bashes the staff too, and it's this independent voice that goes a large part toward why people love this blog.
Clearly he didn't mean this offense production-wise. He meant offense scheme-wise.
You can be right about all your facts, and I'm sure you are, and I submit it doesn't matter. Bob Ufer used to say over and over how football is a game of emotions, remember that? Maybe not at the pro level but definitely in college. You can have all the bells and whistles, charge sky high ticket prices and have luxury box seating but I don't think any of that changes the age of the players on the field. Which is why on any given Saturday, the collective wisdom used to say, any college team has the theoretical ability to upset any other college team. And we can all give examples of these upsets. So go ahead and cite numbers that back up who you want fired, it's always possible to do that. And I'm not saying that improvements aren't called for. But when the team gets a win, do all possible to celebrate the win? Then have some trust that the people who hold their high paying jobs know how to do their jobs. If they don't, time and tide will catch up with them. In the meantime, I love reading the discussions, will never pretend I have the answers. I'm just here to support our team. GO BLUE!
Well said. Thank you
Pulling the plug at this point wouldn't like help anything. If anyone goes, it should MAYBE be Funk. I couldn't argue too much with that.
Thank you for articulating an opinion I wish more fans shared. Yeah, no B1G Championship yet but this is not even close to the disaster that some people make it out to be. It is just what happens when the median or low end of expectations unfold.
But I don't understand how people can't be excited about the future with guys like Funchess and Butt breaking out, playing two true freshmen at RB almost exclusively, and an OL that hopefully had its collective floor against MSU and Nebraska. I can't help but be optimistic for the future of guys like Chesson (good WR and probably one of the best ST guys on the team) Willie Henry (Holy shit this DL is going to be crazy in the next couple years) JMFR3, Jarrod Wilson, etc.
Over 30 freshmen and sophomores have meaningful playing time this year and they all have shown talent. Yeah, the record has not been great but these are the growing pains of little depth and scheme change - not a catastrophe.
I feel like 9 or 10 wins would somewhat make up for the midseason slump they've had.
False. The search for replacements should have started a month ago. But the 24 seconds part, I'm totally on board.
And that's it. We can't get rid of this current staff and risk losing the athletes we have committed to us. I know a lot of people hate al borges but with how the line has blocked all year how is he supposed to be successful? Not saying he's great and there are better Ocs out there but the offensive line isn't allowing him to do what he wants to do. I for one don't want to have to start over again for a 3rd time with a new coach in 6 years.
Worked for USC.
Not so sure that the B1G gets two bcs teams this year, sec prolly does and one in the NCG, so that should bump a few lower teams higher in the bowl scenario.
da'shawn hand everything will be OK
/s too soon? too bad.
Not as much as what looking at that whitefro on his avatar of that nerdy painting dude from the 70's does to my eyes.
The best case scenario would be winning the last three in ugly low scoring games. That way Borges still looks incompetent and can hopefully be canned, but the team can feel decent about themselves going into next year.
I'm starting to seriously question our fanbase. The general tone of many posters on this board is that they would rather us lose to force coaching changes than win. That is complete bullshit. I realize that a lot of people have their ego on the line with Hoke and Borges failing to somehow prove they were right all along, but you need to seriously think about what is good or bad from the program.
Think about what went wrong with RR and whether or not this type of attitude would or wouldn't contribute to the failure we saw in that situation.
EDIT: To answer the question, best case scenario is to win out scoring 50 pts per game and having full improvement on both sides of the ball and continue playing like that next year.
Perhaps I've been blindly listening to random internet posters who say Hoke is loyal to a fault when it comes his coaching staff, but I do worry that he won't make changes that would otherwise benefit the team.
So if my premise is incorrect, and Hoke isn't like that, then yes, this thread makes no sense.
But if it's true (and it's impossible to prove one way or the other), then I think, as a fan, I have every right to worry that a couple lucky wins and we'll be stuck with an inept coaching staff for the next couple of years.
The basis of my argument is that winning today is not necessarily indicative of your success at winning tomorrow. Did yesterday's win give you any confidence in the coaching staff's ability? So if we keep winning like that, what makes you think the staff will do a better job in the future?
Several commenters have pointed out in other threads over the last few weeks that Hoke made some significant changes to his Ball State staff after his third season, so it's not a foregone conclusion that he's too loyal to make necessary changes. Regardless, my hunch is that he's going to stand pat and keep both Borges and Funk, for better or worse.
I'm kinda one of those random internet poster guys Don who says he's loyal to a fault. And go back and look at who he let go at Ball State and how long they were actually with him prior to the terminations. He fired assistants he inhereted from the previous regime - not guys with any longevity or connection to him in the past. Saying he's not afraid to make changes based on fired somebody else's staff is hardly proof-positive of his willingness to make needed changes.
For better or worse Brady is a "stay the course" kinda guy. And Funk has deeper and longer roots with Hoke than Borges does so I'm guessing he's staying next year with Borges.
Saying he's not afraid to make changes based on fired somebody else's staff is hardly proof-positive of his willingness to make needed changes.
Perhaps, but what proof do you have that he's a "stay the course" guy? The one and only time he's been in danger of potentially losing his job (at BSU) he made staff changes. He's never been in that position since.
The "Coach ____ is too stubborn to change" argument is an internet staple (it comes up on virtually every message board of a team that loses), but in reality, almost any coach will let guys go when he starts to feel the heat.
"he "Coach ____ is too stubborn to change" argument is an internet staple (it comes up on virtually every message board of a team that loses), but in reality, almost any coach will let guys go when he starts to feel the heat."
A couple of things here. First off - I was simply debunking the Hoke is unafraid to make changes meme that is based on his firing of people he had no real connection to. Whether he has the stones to fire Funk & Borges is yet to be seen. You think he will if he faces enough heat - I think he won't. Only time will tell.
Secondly, saying that almost any coach will let guys go when he starts to feel the heat isn't always true. We have proof of that with the prior regime who refused to let Tony Gibson go in spite of the overwhelming failure of our secondary during his tenure. Rich put his personal relationship (IMO) above that of the team. And I think you'll find a fairly high number of coaches do that because they see the answer to their struggles in their long-time friend, not the cause of them.
I agree that it's not "proof-positive" but then that's not what I said, either. All I said was that it's not a foregone conclusion that he won't make changes. The fact that Hoke fired guys who were legacies from the previous coaching staff doesn't automatically mean that he won't fire guys who he brought with him. I would agree that it's less likely, but that's not the same thing as saying there's no chance. Our data set is pretty small—he's only been at one previous head coaching stop long enough for this to be an issue—and so it's a matter of opinion as to what we think he'll do after the season.
And I did conclude that comment by saying that my hunch is that he won't replace either Borges or Funk anyhow. I just wouldn't bet a lot of my own money on it one way or the other.
Agreed our wins aren't glorious but our wins -save MSU- are not knockouts either. I know how unrealistic it sounds but we are just as close, if not closer, to 9-1 right now as we are to 5-5.
Record wise this team is about on par with preseason projections. I was thinking 9-3 which is doable but Yeesh. The amount of domination in those wins is lacking. In the end, I don't care how well we win. I care that we win.
Agreed. I used to pull up this site a few times a day now it's probably a few times a week
At some point, when there's insurmountable data, the chance you are wrong shrinks to near zero. I mean, if I get stung by scorpion, and now I'm in a hospital bed laying there sick from poison, and that welt is the size of a baseball, and doctor has come and told me it's a scorpion sting, at this point I'm 99.9% sure it was a scorpion.
Most people are at about their 99% mark with Al Borges. Not that he's a scorpion, although I do feel like he's stung me in the dong for about 2 months straight now, but that he's incompetent relative to his peers in not only the top 5, but the top 30 highest paid offensive coordinators. Thus, many of us have reached the point where we conclude that yes, come January Michigan football will be better off without Al Borges and Darryl Funk.
As such, for the good of the program, we don't want anything shrouding or otherwise hiding this 'fact' as we see it.
Yesterday's game was another offensive abomination. Agains a team 0-5 in the Big Ten, mighty Michigan converted zero third downs in regulation, scored zero touchdowns in regulation even though frequently working with a short field, nearly had 2 pick sixes, and somehow miraculously avoided about 5 total interceptions, many of which hit NW linebackers in the palms of their hands. To think, all of this new data just yesterday, after all of the insurmountable data compiled over 8-10 other failed games, some epicly embarrassing.
Anything that stands in the way of Al Borges being fired, we don't want. Thus the ideal is wins over Iown and Ohio, but not in a way that cloud the obvious and somehow win this utter failure of an O.C. another year of Michigan salary.
So you're rooting for the offense to continue to suck and for us to lose if thats what it takes to fire Borges? Yeah, that makes you a terrible fan.
I'm curious, in the hypothetical that you turn on the game next week and we start with a great 75 yrd drive for the TD, will you be disappointed? What we if put up 40 pts? Again, would that upset you?
Rooting against the short term success of the team is never acceptable. It reminds me of going to the MSU game many years ago when their fans came to the big house and rooted against MSU so that Bobby Williams would be fired. That's what you are.
The ideal outcome is that the coaches get their shit together and makes guys better, get guys playing to their potential, coach to their potential and put players in the best position to win.
There isn't even another right answer to this question.
The best outcome is to win and max out with the current players and staff. The real question is whether that is likely...
I'm pretty sure that if I told everyone we're going to keep everyone on our current staff and we're going to win games, play our best in the majority of those games, put guys in a position to win in all of those games and get our players better each and every year...we'd all take that.
That's the outcome we want and that's the best outcome for the "future success of the program."
What would you need to see, outcome/execution/gameplan/etc., in these next three games for you to have confidence in the offensive coaching staff moving forward? Is three games enough for them to demonstrate anything of substance to you?
I have a small amount of confidence based on last night. Taking Fitz out was the right move by the coaches. And even though we didn't do much in regulation, we opened up the offense quite a bit and were able to move the ball in awful weather. I think we build momentum from this game and then lay some wood to Iowa next week.
Are you kidding me? Confidence from last night? Were we watching the same game? I thought I saw a game where we scored zero TDs in regulation against an 0-5 Big Ten defense, had 2 near pick sixes bounce off of NW hands, have 3 other near interceptions, need 2 4th down saves to just get into an insane scenario to kick a wild field goal to not lose to an 0-5 Big Ten team even after our defense heroically held their potent offense to 0 TDs.
Yet you are telling me you gained confidence in this offensive coordinator? Yeah we sure built some great momementum what with an overtime where we got the ball at the 25 yard line 3 times...
How was yesterday not a confidence-builder? Not just positive rushing yards, but over 100 by two freshmen after two games of negative yardage. And while there were some dropped picks, UM has only turned the ball over once in the last 3 games.
The OL still struggled but UM adjusted and 3rd downs sucked but they had 2 critical 4th down conversions in the final regulation drive. There are now 3 fresh backs going into the final two games of the season. NW was a slumpbuster and probably Brady Hoke's biggest road win given the context of this season.
are the alleged Michigan "fans" who are actively rooting for Michigan to lose so they can affirm their self-image as badass alpha dogs who "sack up" and "won't settle for mediocrity."
But I think it's reasonable as a fan to hope for a coaching staff that, in my view as a fan, puts the team in a position to win games.
It's also my personal opinion that it's tolerable for fans to have no faith in coaches who, in their opinion, don't put the team in a postion to win games.
Now, I don't believe it's reasonable for those fans to be all like "THISISMICHIGANFURRFOOKSAK," but I tried to avoid that as much as possible.
But if this staff somehow figures out a way to win the next 3 games, couldn't that possibly be a sign that they... ARE the right coaches for this program?
I personally don't think Iowa is a good enough opponent for the results in that game to swing the pendulum at all in favor of keeping the staff. Their defense isn't on an Indiana level of incompetency, and may very well be better than Northwestern's (which bottled us most of the game), but the talent level is so inferior that dominating them wouldn't really feel that impressive. So maybe it's unfair, but nothing that happens next Saturday is really gonna change my opinion on the staff.
Against OSU it's obviously different. If we win by scoring 3 defensive td's, does that really say anything about the offensive staff?
But if we get 2 halfs of the Al Borges we saw in the first half against OSU last year, and against South Carolina, then maybe I grudgingly conclude that he deserves another season to further implement his offense.
The biggest question to me is can we get push from our offensive line against OSU. If we can do that, then I have way more confidence in the offensive staff moving forward.
A win is a win. If we win the next 2 games, no matter how it happens, it will be a tremendous success by this coaching staff. Outside of Funchess and Gallon, we have very little talent on offense (other than the 2 freshmen that finally got some PT). Winning 9 games with possibly the worst offensive lines in Michigan history, a QB that has been prone to turnovers and terrible decisions, and essentially zero running game would be incredible. We all need a reality check based on our original expectations for this year.
We have (1) a returning LT that would have gone top 5 in the NFL draft; (2) a second or third round RT; (3) a senior QB who was a top recruit; (4) the top RB in the nation in last class, according to some scouting services; (5) the #1 guard from 2012, etc., etc. We don't have the talent to beat Akron or UConn by more than fluke and a prayer? We may not be able to get anything out of these players due to our coaches' ineptitude, but to think that we have "little talent on offense" is hilarious to the 100 (or more) other FBS teams that would trade their offensive rosters for ours in a heartbeat (provided they would have an opportunity to coach them up). Take a look at the roster of the teams that are beating us, or that we are beating with goal-line stands at the end of games, and reconsider.
I've looked at half a dozen mock drafts and have yet to find one that has Schofield even drafted, much less in the second or third round. Do you have a link to anyone that projects him that high?
There's a difference between no having faith in the coaching staff and this board quickly turning into MLive
It has already become mlive
Borges and Funk have not performed poorly at their jobs, and it's difficult for me to believe that there aren't better OC and OL coaches out there. I'm skeptical that Brady Hoke is capable of getting this program to truly elite status.
However, there's a vast gulf between having those opinions and being disappointed that Michigan wins. I will never root for Michigan to lose any game, in any sport.
Even though I changed my original thread title, I still think it has validity and isnt saying what it was being read to say.
My question was basically, removing your emotion from the equation, is winning better for the team longterm. Obviously you want your team to win, but if a win means sticking with an inept coaching staff, I don't think it's 100% obvious that the outcome of winning is better for your team long term. As an example, that kick yesterday going through the uprights helped us to win yesterday, but it has very little predictive value moving forward that we can win again--whereas the poor offensive gameplan and questionable 4th down play calling, etc. are probably better indicators of what will happen in future games.
There is no upside to losing when it comes to recruiting.
Reading comprehension is your friend.
"It's extremely hard for me to make the case that Borges and Funk have not performed poorly at their jobs..."
I did not write:
"It's extremely hard for me to make the case that Borges and Funk have performed poorly at their jobs..."
Notice the difference?
However, I will give you that my phrasing was less than clear.
Akron and UConn DO have better players than we do. Its sad to say, but also pretty straight forward.
The interior of our line against those two teams were also 0* RsSo, 3* RsSo, 5* RsFr. Not one of them had ever started a college football game before this season. Going into Akron, they had 2 starts apiece
Akron's defensive line was made up of Sr transfer from Colorado State who had 13 starts and played in every game since enrolling in college, Sr with 22 career starts, a So with 13 career starts, and a Jr who I could not find data on.
Akron's football players are better than ours. And they suck. Ours just suck more. And our sucky guys were just learning to suck in the stadium instead of sucking on scout team.
Its sad, man.
Akron's players are better than ours? It seems like you are saying that anyone with more career starts is better than someone with fewer. I will happily line up 3 and 5 star recruits with little experience taught by competent coaches against Akron (whose very good coaches are working with players who largely did not receive offers from AQ teams). (Akron's 2011 recruiting class had one 3 star recruit, nine 2 star recruits, one 1 star, and 13 recruits with no stars.)
Moreover, I thought that Hoke defenders' main point is how well he recruits. If recruiting ranks do not matter (because only experience does), why are we paying $4M to this head coach?
Our players are not the problem. We have seen what the defensive staff can give with all levels of recruits, helping individuals who have largely struggled get better. We have also seen what this offensive staff does. Based on my understanding of Borges' history, I think we have been set up for regression and disappointment.
And the hipster fans who want to be right at all costs. "I knew Hoke sucked when we hired him, etc." Those tend to be the most infuriating, as they can see their assumptions in everything. Gardner throws to a defender, Fire Borges. Gallon drops a wide open TD, Fire Borges.
I think that if they can show some progression and adjust to the strengths of the current players and their development then a case could be made to retain them.
It was encouraging to see more focus on shorter passes, and I hope the end of the game builds back some confidence for Devin, but I just cannot see Borges resisting going back to infuriating stretch runs and longer passes in better weather conditions. If Gallon and Funchess made a few more of the typical catches a few drives and TDs would have happened, but overall were pretty good considering the conditions.
I think the best runner for this line is actually Smith so I hope he gets a few more carries as he just hits the line and goes which I think really helps given the struggles there. Iowa is a much better defensive team than NW so it will be interesting to see what happens there first, and if Borges reverts immediately back to previous tendencies.
A win over Ohio goes a loooooong ways. So say 8-4 with a win over Ohio looks pretty good.
EDIT: To be clear, I think the game has passed Borges by. The game has changed and he hasn't.
I think the game has passed Saban by too. The days of winning with a strong defense and a great power running game are clearly over...
That's not quite what I meant. Look at Borges's career. He has never been a top flight OC. He has had 1 or 2 great seasons many years ago and the rest have been pretty mediocre. Sorry for the confusion.
I am sure this will erase the memory of an underperforming season.
As much as I dislike Borges & Funk's results to date I have zero issues with them personally so if they somehow turn this ship around and manage to provide a coherent and sustainable offense over the next three games I would be happy to see both return.
That being said I dont think we can point to the game yesterday as some sort of watershed event or turning point. It was more of the same suckitude with the exception of the Freshmen RBs providing a much needed lift in the running game. And I sincerely hope it continues next week and more importantly the week after.
I am solely interested in wins. Whether they come via spread, manball or Borges hybrid-fusion cusine matters not to me.
Slight OT but holy shit that kick at the end of the game was badass. Talk about 11 people moving as one and delivering under pressure. Now THAT was evidence of some serious coaching!
That was pretty cool. Dileo slid into postion like he was Luke Duke. I watched the GIF on the main page for about 5 mintutes. That was one of the best football plays I've ever seen.
Luke Duke. Solid pull right there.
T I E B R E A K E R S
If the Michigan AD pays any attention to reactionary fan base we're screwed. Not saying that all the fans are wrong, just that you can cherry pick any opinion you want. Do you go with the loudest voice? The complimentary voice? The optimistic view? The negative nancy? the voice of reason?
In the end, I'm sure that the AD has measurables in place to review goals, progress and expectations. While these three games are a part of the whole, they are not the end. College football has programiatic and cyclical issues to contend with, the view going forward will need to take the short term data (game to game) and be able to appy it to a long term vision for the program.
OLine coach should be gone no matter what. There is a clear regression and that is on the position coach. I am not saying fire him because freshman are not getting a 4 yard push. I am saying fire him because the line in week 9 is so much worse than the line in week 3. This season has demonstrated a failure at that level.
OC gets one year. He has not worked with the position coaches to understand were the strengths and weaknesses are and changed strategy to fit the reality. To me this is like the Colonel not understanding what the Captains have prepared and going into battle.
I wouldn't fire Borges over that yet. He could be seeing a team that plays one way in practice and another when on the field. That said the play calling is terrible. He gets one year but with the understanding that he is on borrowed time unless he can prove next year that he can stay.
Hoke gets a year beyond that. That is 5 years so he is working with the players he recruited.
I does little good to fire Hoke in year three because then you just go into another rebuilding cycle. Hoke and company need to receive a clear message though that they cannot just accept the bottom half of the division.
I think our coaches are doing a better job of developing players from a mental standpoint. The past few games Gibbons has gotten pretty cocky and has been trying to bank field goals in. This past game he didn't try it once.
I'm not gonna root for them to lose. I also don't think winning the next two games should get Borges and Funk their jobs back. I've seen enough of them to know things won't change with ''the players they recruited''.
I'd be willing to bet if Borges isn't fired a lot more people don't reknew their season tickets. At least that's the impression I got at the Nebraska game.
The theme for this year has been OL inexperience, and a lot times I feel like the OL just needs more practice time together to gel. I am hoping that the bowl practices will be instrumental in the gelling process, an opportunity to get back to basics, and that the OL will look competent in the bowl game. What makes me leery is that I expected the same for the MSU game; with the bye week, they had a couple weeks to gel, and they couldn't block their way out of a wet paper bag. If the OL comes out for the bowl game looking like crap, I will be disappointed.
I won't ever trust Borges. I have watched him lay too many eggs that have left the entire fan base scratching their heads with wonder.
I was not nearly has negative about Borges as most people were after Penn St but the last few weeks especially the Nebraska game has sold me that there might have to be a change.
A win like last nights can galvanize a team though, an us against the world type mentality. They could win the next two I don't really care about the bowl but if they beat Iowa and Ohio I think people will have to reconsider their thoughts on the staff.
My thing is that we do not know with complete metaphysical certitude that Borges OR Funk will be canned if we lose the next 3.
IME, the most likely scenario is that we lose all 3 remaining games, Jackson retires, and Borges & Funk are retained. We'll be better next year, but this staff isn't capable of beating OSU. It's not a big enough deal for Hoke, so with 3 more losses in a row to OSU (does this team seem spirited enough to beat Meyer?), Hoke & co get canned after 6 years at M.
Are you actually asserting that beating OSU isn't a "big enough deal" for Brady Hoke?
IA is a team we can beat! Then the team will finish at 8-4 for the season and meet my prediction and several others.
Play hard against OSU. I hope we can pull of the major upset but as long as it withing 10 points I will be happy. If OSU comes and blows us out then it will lead to a sour note on the season.
I'll let Hoke evaluate his coaches.
3-0 would be pretty cool
Regardless of the number of wins, I want no coaching changes this year. Of course, I think to win out, or win two out of three, will only help Borges and Funk. But I believe they are staying, and I'm thrilled with that.
I also believe coaching instability is terrible for the program, and the best possible thing is for them to stay. I really want to see what the OL can do next year.
Yeah, so the best possible outcome is for Michigan to win out, but regardless of wins, I want the entire coaching staff to stay intact.
Ed Ogeron and his 5-1 record after firing Kiffi-kins says Hi!
A. A coach on the proverbial hot seat who has lost the players
B. Firing said coach, and bringing in/promoting a new guy who can reach said players
I will go with Option A, when you loose the players you get what we are watching on Saturdays.
We are not talking about "fire the entire Offensive staff", we are talking about 1 guy out of 5 or so position coaches who has taken what should have been a good OL group and turned it into a sieve.
That a large % of the blogbase wants to fire our OC, with no clear successor, no suggestions of a successor, flush a lot of QB recruiting, and leave esteemed Davey B holding the bag and making him ultimately responsible for turning it around. Hoke, instead of recruiting, should be out combing the streets for people who want to interview for OC.
I don't know what to call that, a torch and pitchfork mob, a clear naivety of organizational dynamics, intellectual meltdown. Somehow we want Wisconsin under Bielema with a revolving door of coordinators.
Michigan has frustrated forever on offense as far as I'm concerned. Bo wouldn't pass until AC came to town. Moeller I kinda forget how it applies to this theory. Carr was conservative to the point where the game was about to go into the abyss and he had to open it up, then we came roaring back. Rod abandoned everything. And now we are in transition after the era of Denard. It seems everyone forgot about the last 30 years save for the last 3.
There's so much fruit about to ripen here...Funchess, green, smith, butt, chesson, and there are more on the way...gardner's not afraid of anyone wanting to knock his head off sideways...get the OL meshing instead of melting and there will be a lot of people eating their shorts.
Bielema took underwhelming recruiting classes and won the conference numerous times, making it regularly to the Rose Bowl. Those who lack our "clear naivety of organizational dynamics" would prefer more regression under Borges (who has not made it to the end of a fourth year anywhere in the past dozen years, being fired from Cal, Indiana, and Auburn) to actual success on the field?
Also, "flush[ing] a lot of QB recruiting"? We foolishly passed on taking any QB one year; Borges has done a really fine job of coaching up Bellomy and Gardner; and while I hope Speight turns out to be a star, he is a consensus 3 star recruit.
When you are willing to pay an OC enough money to make him top 3 in the country, you don't need a successor lined up when you realize that the one you have now is not only not elite, but is below-average. His offenses have regressed here, just like they did at Cal, Indiana, and Auburn. Given that we are now willing to write a big check for an OC, we could use that money this offseason to bring in someone who is worth it.
He also had that entire scheme, recruiting, and program set up by Alvarez. Hoke doesn't have that.
I'm still completely on board with Hoke and his staff. This season has been mildly disappointing, but not the disaster it's made out to be. This is year 3 of a 5 or 6 six year rebuild, if you're going to give them the opportunity to coach their own players.
A lot of our offensive woes seem to revolve around Gardner and the line. We all know how bare the cupboard was in terms of o-line quality and depth. Gardner no doubt suffers from the sub-par line, but let's remember he isn't the QB Borges and company want. At his core he's a dual threat guy and long term the staff wants a more traditional pocket passer. My guess is as Morris moves in and matures, he'll be far more accurate, particularly since the line should be much better.
The D, youth and all, is effective and promises to get better.
As we keep rolling in elite recruiting classes, the future is bright.
Hoke's benched senior starters who played better and more consistently than our offensive coaches have performed. It's even worse given the fact that they're not scholarship kids, but paid professionals instead. No performance in the next few games will change how erratic, or even bipolar our offense is. Even if we win out it's a given that the coaches will get in the way with questionable decisions again soon and we'll have more games like Nebraska regularly in our future.
Other coaches across the country have shown they can get much much more out of kids with less talent in less time. We should fire the inconsistent, underperforming, overpaid ones we have and hire ones with the money instead.
Yeah that too. The players are there. Coaching pretty much leaves a lot to be desired. Way to conservative and stupid calls. I dont believe our offensive line is that bad. Those guys look lost out there. I doubt the line coach is back next year. He doesn't know what he is doing.
His father died mid-season. Not saying it is an excuse, but I might be a little distracted if that was the case. Plus he is coaching a bunch of 18 and 19 year olds who are running a new scheme. It is probably a combination of those things leading to this year. I have met Funk before and seen him in practice - he seems like a good, high-energy, teacher.
If we lose the last three games at least we'll get a higher draft pick.
If Gibbons doesn't rope that insane, game-changing field goal, I guarantee that people are whistling an entirely different tune about Borges' future moving forward. Lol.
That's not how things work. From what we can see from the outside, the current coaching staff seems to work very well together. We don't hear about power struggles or politics between the coaches. Now that might just be Fort Schembechler, but it certainly seems like the coaching staff comliments each other in style and orientation.
So say you ranters get your way and Borges gets nucked at season's end. Do you really think that the offensive coaching shake up stops with the OC? That additional staff changes on the offensive side of the balll aren't likely? If I'm a top OC and I'm being pursued by Michigan, I'm going to have a list of people I want working with me. Those staffing changes are going to be part of the hiring conversation. Especially if I'm expected to turn around a tire fire in a single season. I won't get them all but I'll get some, and that has a huge danger of creating factions within the staff. Now if I'm not a top OC or OC candidate, why would Michigan want me?
If you think that Hoke should stay, then whether you like a particular coach or not, you are saying that Hoke should get the staff he wants.
In case you haven't noticed, all evidence suggests that means Borges will be here at least through the end of 2014 and probably longer.
I don't want to start a huge fight and I will freely admit that there are many others on this site that know A LOT more about football than I do. Having said that, I don't think there is a lot of hope that we'll see much development in the next three games simply because we have seen so little over the past three years. If this staff can't point to even one position group and saw marked improvement over the course of their three year tenure (which I believe they can't) then I can't bring myself to hold out hope that this team will dveelop over the course of three games.
In my humble opinion, I believe at a minimum every position coach on the offensive side of the ball should be fired in the offseason. If there could be an argument made for one I believe it would be the WR coach becuase I do think they have shown some development, but other than that I can't think of a single position that has progressed in the last three years (in fact some seem to be going backward).
I am still not sure AB is the answer at OC either, but I don't really know enough about the finer points of football strategy to pass judgement on him in that area. What I will say though, is if even a relative novice can predict more than 50% of his playcalls with accuracy (which I have been able to do since startiing to try it 3 weeks ago) than I think there is some truth to the fact that he is far too predictable.
Couple that with the fact that he is the QB coach (none of our QB's have progressed since he came here) and responsible for the offense as a whole and I don't see a very good reason for keeping him around either, except for the fact that he seems like a genuinely nice guy.
So I guess in closing for me, anything short of a complete coaching overhaul on the offensive side of the ball during the offseason will be a disappointment.
I wonder if some of the folks "watching for improvement" noted the change between Nebraska and Northwestern in our O-line?