Ever notice all the "coulds" and "mights"?
The media both national and local really seems to want us to feel better about the Hoke hire. As much as I'm ready to give the guy a chance, I can't help but notice the rhetoric they use:
Schlabach: Hoke won't bring a fancy spread offense or marquee last name to Michigan, but he might bring what Rodriguez lacked: a winning formula.
Wetzel: Hoke Might Not Be The First Choice But Could Be The Right Choice
Rittenberg: Hoke could very well end up being the right man to restore Michigan among college football's elite.
Sharp: Brady Hoke clearly wasn't Michigan's No. 1 pick, but he might be able to return the program to the success it enjoyed under Lloyd Carr.
Wojo: Once again, this is about the right fit for the right time, and Hoke could end up being a very good choice.
Rosenberg said the same thing yesterday, but the article is now changed to something just short of a pep rally. There seems to be a constant theme here. I'm not sure that the people who want us convinced are all that convinced themselves.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^
Is it Spring Ball yet?
January 12th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^
I don't think the Pimp Hand made a good decision, but this is sort of silly. How many new-coach articles can you find regarding other programs in which promises are made in the form of will?
January 12th, 2011 at 11:11 AM ^
They're inevitable with any new coach...said the same thing 3 years ago
"Rodriguez could be the guy to take Michigan to the promised land"
Not sure anyone could write about a new coach at any program without the mights and coulds
January 12th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
Yes, and a large percentage of people here said "If we give Rodriguez another year with a new DC, we MIGHT be better than 7-6." Nobody can predict the future with enough certainty to say "Hoke WILL win more games at Michigan than Rodriguez" or "Hoke WILL lose at least as much as Rodriguez did."
I think we all need to calm down and see how this season plays out. I'm just as frustrated as everyone else as to how things have gone in the past week or two, but Hoke is our coach, and I'm willing to give him a chance.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^
And you could be a little more supportive. He is our coach, nothing you can do.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:18 AM ^
But you can support a coach without thinking it was a good idea to hire him. Maybe OP's point was that buying into Hoke requires an even greater leap of faith than usual.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^
The media is going to take a contrarian viewpoint to the fanbase at large and tell them how to think. If Hoke isn't greeted with universal happiness and rejoicing (And why would he be?) then the press has to point out how short-sighted we all "might" be.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^
I noticed the same thing as I listened to ESPN last night. I was hoping that someone would come out and say with enthusiasm that this is a great hire, but instead it was more like, "Yeah, this could work."
January 12th, 2011 at 11:23 AM ^
I went into a discussion about process vs. results as it pertained to the coaching search/selection last week. My argument was that the process really mattered here, that the sportsnation was watching. Obviously, the results were important but so was the process. Now, with the results of the search in, I am clear that the process was totally f-ed. I don't care if Hoke was always the choice. The result is what it is. But the process was so misleading and expectations were so out of whack (if only because Brandon provided no information) that it affected acceptance of the result. And now, people are working overtime to convince skeptics like me that the hire is a good one. I'm sure it will turn out fine, but I blame Brandon's misinformation (by remaining silent as to what he was up to) as the main culprit of my skepticism.
January 12th, 2011 at 12:54 PM ^
By remaining silent, Brandon was guilty of misinformation? Silliness.
I didn't know Brandon owed an explanation. Maybe you should email him and DEMAND he explain himself to you from now on so you don't feel lied to when he says nothing.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^
'Sharp: Brady Hoke clearly wasn't Michigan's No. 1 pick, but he might be able to return the program to the success it enjoyed under Lloyd Carr.'
Carr did great against OSU and USC woohoo I'm stoked to lose to them again
January 12th, 2011 at 12:33 PM ^
I'll take that over 6-18 in big ten play.
Hoke will be judged based on his performance, just like RR was. And yes, hiring bad defensive coordinators and having so many freshmen in your secondary is part of the performance evaluation.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:24 AM ^
They're just trying to fill space. Nobody knows what the future holds, but there is a non-zero probability that Brady Hoke will be a good coach, just like there is he will be a mediocre or bad coach. I think he has potential, but right now the media is just trying to provide their takes on the story.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:25 AM ^
Drew Sharp and I agree.
I fear that Hoke will bring us back to where we were at in the final 5 years of Carr's career.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:33 AM ^
3 Rose Bowls & 2 Big Ten Titles. Those last 5 years of Carr's career were really horrible.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:54 AM ^
I can't get too jazzed up about going 1-4 against OSU and 1-4 in bowl games (including 0-3 in Rose Bowls).
January 12th, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^
January 12th, 2011 at 12:39 PM ^
Don't forget 3-9 and 5-7. Yeah, that's the kind of record that has everyone thinking "National Championships are right around the corner!"
January 12th, 2011 at 12:43 PM ^
That's in the past, mate. Commenter above me made a favorable comment about the last five years under Carr, and I was adding perspective. Going back to that is fine, but let's keep in mind that it wasn't all peaches and cream.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^
Ever notice all the "coulds" and "mights"?
Wow, it's almost as if human beings lack ability to predict the future, and thus must only speak in possibilities when assessing future performance. You really busted this story wide open.
January 12th, 2011 at 4:24 PM ^
Wow, it's almost as if human beings lack ability to predict the future, and thus must only speak in possibilities when assessing future performance.
Name me one sports journalist who believes that's true of sports journalists. When they're set in a belief, they let you know it.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:50 AM ^
They're about as accurate and credible as the ridiculous surety coming from this blogs leadership that we are definetly the new Notre Dame..
January 12th, 2011 at 11:55 AM ^
Pretty standard word usage when talking about the future, as it is unknown.
Here is another example: Auburn had a 7-5 regular seaosn record last year, just like Michigan had this year, and are now the national champions. If given another year Rich Rodriguez might have done the same.
You can't prove that statement to be wrong.
January 12th, 2011 at 12:23 PM ^
....I think statistically we might be able to prove that statement wrong....just saying.
January 12th, 2011 at 12:46 PM ^
We lost by lots of points to some teams and that means there is zero chance we will beat them the next season. That totally didn't happen against Illinois this year or ND the year before that so it remains impossible to foresee any future progress.
January 12th, 2011 at 1:53 PM ^
we return 20 starters, Denard has another year running the system but you see no way to predict future progress? Has Brian taught you nothing?
January 12th, 2011 at 12:57 PM ^
Is all the "didn'ts" "couldn'ts" "wouldn'ts" "Oops" "Aw F***" "Holy hell, that was HORRIBLE" "Worst coaching stretch in UM history EVER" have come out of the last three years.
January 12th, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^
Until he actually does something this is all anyone can say. At least it all has a positive tone.