Man, I love this guy...
missing a link?
I love him too.
I think the OP wants us to imagine just how great it must have been.
Now I dont have to imagine anymore....you're right!
Epic Hoke Point Achieved
Are the Inside Michigan football videos online anywhere?
If you listen, and don't watch, it's Bo 2.0.
with John U. Bacon. Haven't read it in a few years... It's amazing how Coach Hoke mirrors so many lessons, especially the early chapters.
I love Brady and remember when many people (myself included) were pretty upset or confused as to why he was hired. This guy is such a good coach. Most people (M people and outsiders) simply looked at his record and said it was a bad hire. Granted, the most important thing is the W/L columns, but look at RR. He had a pretty good W/L record and was a colossal failure at M. Some guys just fit better in some places and Brady is perfect for this program.
My concern with Hoke was that he would implement the DeBord 2.0 version of "Manball" football. I thought he would be Kirk Ferentz, only cheaper.
One of my most frustrating moments as a long time Michigan fan was in the second half of the 2006 season Rose Bowl. Both USC and Michigan wanted to run the ball in the first half. Niether could. The score was 3-3. In the second half USC adjusted and went to the air. Michigan kept trying to run. Game over. This was the "We always knew what they were going to do" comment from one of the USC players game.
Hoke gives lips service to old school Manball and leaning on the Defense, but at game time he is not afraid to light it up. He gets when he needs to lean on the offense to match his opponent's rate of scoring. He even mentions it in the speech. It was in his game plan all along. He coaches sound football but he is very flexible in using his weapons and what the opponent gives him.
Not your father's Manball.
Agreed. A fear of mine as well. Ferentz is very Carr like in coaching style. And I am glad Hoke is more of a flexible person. He also takes a few more risks in game as well....he is not all "Les Miles-y" but enough to differentiate from Carr. I am very happy with Hoke but as he says Big 10 titles are what matters at minimum. If the 2015-2016 teams are not winning Big 10 titles the view of Hoke will not be so bright. He is still in honeymoon phase as he gets his players into the system. Starting in 2014 they will be the bulk of the team.
The thing about Hoke is that, yes, he is old school and still plays the Carr type of football at times, but he also understands what football is today. He knows what it takes to win and old school man ball just isn't it. Having a solid running game is obviously important, but you MUST have a quarterback who is able to throw accurately, which is what he finally has with Devin. Football is way more dependant on passing now than it used to be.
There was manball, but there was also pistol, inverted veer, and a lot of passing. It's "manball" but similar to Carr and Ferentz in name only, they're smart enough to focus on manball and toughness, but know when to and have the ability to light it up downfield when needed. Thats how Borges thoroughly pwned the ND defense on Saturday.
It was almost as beautiful as the opening of the 2010 Illinois game as far as offensive beauty goes
I wonder how much the conference title will matter once the playoff system starts. Will there be any/many at-large teams that get in, such as a Michigan with maybe one loss (i.e. in its conference title game). Who do they choose? A one-loss Michigan over a 2-loss LSU?
It'll be interesting to see it unfold.
He's Gary Moeller 2.0. Minus certain of Gary's less good things.
Was right about to post this. He is certainly more Moeller than Carr in terms of coaching game day. And I love that about him.
I don't know that he is demeanor. Brady always seems calm no matter what's happening. Mo sometimes seemed like things were going out of control on the sidelines at times.
This is profoundly true.
I was at that game and Lloyd came by me in a golf cart after the game headed to the press tent. It took everything for me to keep my mouth shut. It was so disappointing, he made no half time adjustments and my SC buddies enjoyed the 2nd half. Now the tables are turned!
I even thought rich rod would come around. But I didn't know Brady Hoke as a man. He has brought Michigan football back in a big way. Better than Lloyd. He has inspired the fanbase to buy in. He has convinced recruits to sign on to the team the team the team. He has brought expectations back in line to where they need to be.
Brady Hoke is the best coach in college football as far as I'm concerned.
...but Saban just raised a hand adorned with four national championship rings up to his ear to see if he heard you correctly.
Call me when he does it without oversigning. Hoke has not only managed to bring in top talent, but the right type of talent for what Michigan is and wants to continue to be, on and off the field. I'll take that over an oversigning used car salesman with rings.
Cmon sir, be realistic. He is a very good coach and from all accounts an excellent man and now we see a stellar recruiter. But to call him the best coach in America is a bit over the top. Can we at least wait for say a Rose bowl win? Or making the 4 team playoff? Or winning a road game against a top 10 opponent? Etc. Fitzgerald has done much the same thing at Northwestern - a team with some limitations due to academics and far less prestige. He has not recruited at the same level (nor will NW ever be able to) but he has his team competing for this divison title with less talent than UM has and found systems, especially offensive, to offset the lack of elite talent a program like that gets. That's top end coaching. You could make a case (today) that he is a superior or at least equal coach. And until someone kicks in Urban's teeth he is the top of the coach tree in the Big 10. Let's revisit in 2 years. And yes, I am a big Hoke fan.
I was actually commenting on not being that impressed with Saban. I agree with you that Brady is not the best coach in College Football, but to be honest I would rather have him than Saban or Urban.
I meant to reply to letsgo, not you, hit the reply button on the wrong post.
...can--and most do---oversign. This occurs in other leagues, too. Texas has loads of talent, as does Florida State, who plays in the pedestrian ACC. Why aren't they winning titles? How come Saban regularly wipes the floor with them?
and Hoke's record as if all this talent is on the field. Most of it is soph, rsfr, or frosh now. Most of his biggest recruiting wins are neither on the field or even on campus. He is doing this with a skeleton of a team from terrible recruiting attrition fleshed out with those young guys. Give him three more years and hopefully we will see what he can do with his guys.
Hoke won a BCS bowl in his first year.
Look Fitz is going a good job but let's not act like he's even had as much success as Barnett there yet.
but he did get to two Rose Bowls so I generally agree with your sentiment.
It was one Rose Bowl, but yeah, he was good there. Never should have left them for Colorado.
I am not saying Fitz is the end all and be all. But "coaching" (the verb) is not all about wins. Coaching is about taking a group of players who start at A, and pushing them as far along as they can go - to points B, C, or D. The great coaches get to D - even if their talent starts at 2-9 and ends at 7-6. Kids at lower level schools only have so much ceiling; the best coaches take them to their ceiling. So bowl wins is not a judgement for many schools. If Hoke went to Northwestern and had the same budget for assistant coaches as Fitz did (i,.e. could not afford a NFL defensive coordinator), and had the same recruiting pipeline, one wonders how he would have done. Of course no one knows. There are MANY built in advantages to coaching at Michigan - there is a group of 10-12 schools in the entire country who have this advantage and any coach here has a running start. This is Michigan fergodsakes. It is impossible to control for all the variables but saying "well Northwestern just won its first bowl game so Fitz is meh versus Hoke" - well it is not as simple as that.
Aside from developing men off the field (which Hoke is great at it appears) and recruiting (also great) it will be about wins versus ability to win. By that I mean Mack Brown is a disaster in relation to his resources and recruiting. So is the past decade of Florida State. So is current USC. So was Rich Rod. So was Notre Dame for 3 coaches and 15 years post Holtz. Fitz (who i think is sorta a tool on the sideline) has done very good things with less resources and hence you have to judge on that sort of curve. He also got there very young and could now just be figuring it out the past 3 years. (this is not a defense of Fitz, I am using him as a surrogate example) It is just not easy to do apples to apples comparisons - a coach at Michigan can really only be compared to a coach at about 10-12 other schools. The best coach in the country (or 2nd or 3rd best) right now might be at a MAC school or a Mountain West school or wherever - he might have a 7-6 team but in 4 years we will all know his name. But if you just look at his win/loss or what bowls he went to, you'd never find him. See Bo.
p.s. I could care less about "doing cool speeches after games" other than for hype videos - that is about #92 on the list of important things to define a great coach.
He took one of the worst programs in the MAC to 12 wins, and took a team with almost as long a stretch of bowl futility as Northwestern and won a bowl game in his second year.
Fitzgerald is actually the bigger question because he took over a program already built back up by Randy Walker and took awhile to match or surpass it.
Saban is a good coach.......buy......I'd like to see Saban win a MNC without utilizing oversigning the way he does. When you can basically bring in an entire extra 25 kids in a 4 year span at a program......that gives you a huge advantage.
blah blah blah oversigning blah blah. The guy went to MSU and in 3 years took that program out of shambles and got them to 9-3. He went to LSU and won. He went to Alabama and not just won but is putting together a run that is historic. Let's be happy with who we have, and not say everyone else is worse because they cheat.
And why is being a great coach and a big cheat mutually exclusive?
It is very skeevy, but there's nothing in the by laws that says you can't offer 50 scholarships when you only have 25, as long as you're down to the limit by first day of practice or something.
It is also a little boggling that kids keep going there, but it's Alabama and I guess they all think they won't be the one.
Anyway, I too would rather have Hoke as a fit for our program. I won't sell Saban short though - he's a great coach who has found a loophole that allows him to try out high schoolers and is ruthlessly exploiting it.
Because I doubt too many think that "oversigning" is the only thing Saban does wrong, or turns his eye to.
The guy went to MSU and in 3 years took that program out of shambles and got them to 9-3.
It took him five years. His records at MSU:
Actually, he had a very similar record there as Dantonio does now. He wasn't considered a great coach until his time at LSU. Being at a program with a lot of built-in advantages is important.
Sorry my error, I thought he was there a bit shorter. But to your point Bo was not considered a great coach until he arrived at UM. Does the record below strike you as a sure fire "top 3 greatest coaches of his generation"? That is my larger point - there is more than records; great coaches often walk into clusterf**** and it takes time to develop and they only have so many resources at lower schools. Once Saban got to schools with resources he crushed it; before then he turned around a major cluster**** in EL.
|Miami Redskins (Mid-American Conference) (1963–1968)|
I'm not really disagreeing with you; even great coaches can only go so far at so-so programs. Saban had enough smarts to get out of East Lansing while the going was good. Dantonio should have followed his advice two years ago.
If recruiting is indeed the lifeblood of the program, as is oft quoted, then it would be advantageous to receive an extra quarter portion of it.
Because no team asks little used 5th year seniors to bow out...or have medical hardships ...and/or offers to younger players that their current situation is not the best and an opportunity at Ferris State or Western might be to their advantage? Mike Jones anyone? Marvin Robinson? Kaleb Ringer? (and others) Why no outrage over Washington and Oregon State?? Vandy!!?? Oh that's because they generally suck so the same things Alabama does is not a big issue with those schools. Yes Alabama pushes it more than anyone - but by a factor of 25% versus what everyone else does is just over the top silly.
" The closest to Alabama, numbers-wise, is Washington, which also lost just 12 scholarship players from last year's roster but just signed 22, bringing its unofficial scholarship count to at least 91 (not including any former walk-ons who may have earned scholarships). Among teams from the "Big Six" conferences with automatic BCS bids, current rosters indicate Virginia (90 scholarship players), Vanderbilt (89) and Oregon State (88) also have some relatively intensive trimming to do between now and August:"
The rest of the conference...combined.
5th year seniors aren't the same thing at all. You're promised four years. The 5th is an option, up to the team and player agreeing on it. (Yes, sometimes players are actually offered the 5th year and turn it down).
Looks like you have some reading to do:
I used that as one example of how you "find extra roster" spots - I am not saying it is the only way it is done. I offered 3 ways it is done at plenty of schools, including ours, and including Alabama. Maybe Saban also has "other ways" but just about all teams have the 3 ways I listed. Once more where is the moral outrage that Washington, Virginia, Vanderbilt, and Oregon State did it in just about the same magnitude in 2013? As for finding loopholes, I bet a great number of our alumns work at Goldman Sachs (or Morgan Stanley) which I believe the entire business model is "find loopholes to exploit and profit from". Many would call those alumns brilliant and milking the system, and they'd be paid excessive amounts for finding holes in the system to exploit. But when Saban does it, we are morally superior? I realize it's apples to oranges but you get the drift.