Hot Seat
This is my first time doing this and a lot of people don't like my real and sometimes unintelligent posts but isn't this hot seat talk getting carried away? All the Big Ten stuff and then on sportscenter. Then they have the next clip on Braxton the Miller's daughter primed and ready to go. I guess, whatever. Even when you are down they know they must keep you down. Hail! Probably the most worthless post ever but it just bugs the hell out of me. These people who write this stuff, make it televised and keep bringing it up are the ones pouring the gas on the fire. Not that it's a fire though because we going to whoop some ass this year!
If the team suceeds, he looks awesome because he saved Michigan's offense and the team did better as a result
If the team fails and (worst case scenario) everyone is let go, he's still a-ok because all he has to say is "I had one season, we all know that's not enough time to turn a team around. Look at what I did at Washington and Alabama" and bam, he's an NFL OC
IDK man, 7-6 might just do it. Think about it- that's either 6-6 and a win in a crappy bowl or 7-5 with a loss in a slightly-better-than-crappy bowl.
The schedule this year looks pretty tough b/c the big 3 are all on the road- but realize that M skips Wisco, Iowa AND Neb from the West division this year. The home schedule is infamously turrible.
M should have a floor of 9-3 this year. 8-4 is worst case scenario.
a four legged stool (nice!), pre-hot seat. This is great, valid points all, but I say Hoke will win and will build the program back to prominence. Go Blue
the current media culture (let's call it the Bleacher Report mentality) makes that usage nearly irreversible. Talking heads get that little gleam in their eyes when they use the term, like it's a new toy or gadget that they just invented. The only expression that rivals it's supposed novelty is "quarterback controversy." Both expressions become all-consuming, ensnaring a mess of people into arguments about whether the seat is hot or not hot, or whether it's okay to have two good quarterbacks or whatever.
When a promising team hits the skids like ours did last year (and 2009, 2010), even the dope reporters who can't spell can count - 11-2, 8-5, 7-6 is not a good trend.
Inexperience at key positions and overly complex offensive strategy were the biggest problems last year. Time may fix the first and Hoke's replacement of Borges with Nussmeier may fix the second.
For many reasons:
1) Mattison and Nuss are awesome coordinators
2)Hoke recruits well
3) Hoke presents Michigan the way that the we want him to
4) He's Lloyd (and therefore Bo) approved and backed
5) Former players love him (Tom Brady came back to campus to speak to the players)
6) Aside from Harbaugh (pipe dream), who would replace Hoke that is a significant upgrade? If you present such a man, who would the coordinators be?
Jesus people go back and re-read the Nuss hiring post or the requiem for a Borges thread that Brian wrote. Hoke had a gaping hole on his staff and he FIXED IT - I am optimistic as Hell about this year regardless of the schedule because:
1. Borges is gone & Nuss replaced him
2. We have an excellent SENIOR QB
3. We have an excellent Defensive Coordinator
4. We are in year 4 of excellent recruiting
I've said and will continue to say this year ends up 10-3 with Michigan a pre-season top 10 pick next year. We are all going to be sad Panda's at the losses but damn it 10-3 is not going to get Hoke fired nor should it. Funk is a legitimate question mark but I believe the absence of Borges is going to make everybody on the staff (Hoke & Funk included) look a hell of lot better.
I wish this stupid "hot seat" crap would go away. It serves no purpose other than to fuel the negative recruiters against our team with ammo.
No hot seat for Hoke, unless the absolute worst happens; they win only 3-4 games and the team quits on him.
But, most indications point to most if not all the players loving Hoke and the coaching staff. The program was bogged down in a funk, no momentum, no energy. They have changed things up by replacing Borges (*who I feel may have had a negative impact), switched up the coaching duties. All attempts to jumpstart the team.
I think it will work and if they get something figured out regarding the offensive line, this could easily be a 10 win team. Right now, July 29th, they have a better roster than almost every team they will face during the regular season.
If we go 8-4, 9-3 and lose to OSU and MSU, AND someone like Jim orJohn Harbaugh, or some other no brainer, is available, then of course we'd be fools to not hire them. Hoke's at the point where only a clear upgrade would be worth changing coaches (assuming he continues his trend of being a .540% winning coach).
We're at the point where the next hire has to be the perfect one. Here's hoping that means we're just bumping up Nuss in a few years after Hoke has a successful run, but we can't do what we did with Rich Rod and just start making changes to make a change.
It's just a worn-out line that untalent media hacks use to push their HOT SPROTS TAEKS and pretend that the endless stream of inane bullshit oozing from their mouths isn't totally worthless.
I'm rather enjoying the media counting us out this year, all the hot seat idle speculation, etc. I think we're going to surprise some people and make some "experts" feel pretty silly at the end of the season. I'm sure it hasn't gone unnoticed in the team either. A little extra motivation and a chip on the shoulder never hurts.
Honest question - Outside of offensive line (2 NFL tackles), is there a position group that people feel is going to go backward in 2014?
Maybe I'm underestimating the loss of guys like Gallon, Gibbons (still a good kicker, regardless of his off-field problems), and Washington, but I just really don't see a group outside of the mess/question mark of offensive line that gets worse next season. The team is certainly losing some starters and depth, but they're adding so much and should improve so much given how many guys are back.
Even look at special teams, where Wile is back and Hagerup will be playing again. Again, off-field issues excluded, Gibbons was a pretty good kicker, or at least pretty consistent, but you're returning a good kicker with experience and adding a potential All-B1G type punter.
Maybe I've moved too far into the optimism part of the summer, but I'm just finding it hard to see these team move backward in terms of performance and talent. The schedule will be tough, but I think there's a lot to say this team will be better.
And even on the offensive line, I can't see us getting any worse. What would worse look like? Will our two tackles in 2014 be inferior to the two tackles last year? Yes. But for overall O-Line performance, there's no direction to go but up. I'm optimistic that the O-Line will turn in at least a below average performance this year, which is a marked improvement from last year. A below average O-Line last year would have enabled us to beat PSU, maybe one other game, and win with more breathing room against Akron and U Conn. You take that team and improve in other areas, and 10 wins is not an unrealistic result.
Yes. As long as we are competitive in those three games. Sure, it would suck to lose all three, but you have to look at the whole body of work. 10-3 would mean the team is playing better, talent is getting developed, and we can continue to recruit that level of talent. The expectation being that by 2015 we will go back to being up there with Ohio and superior to Sparty. After showing that improvement, would you really want to start over again with a new coach? That would be insane.
Gone Too Soon
I define "hot seat" as:
1. The fans are getting restless
2. There is a W-L record for the upcoming year that would get the coach fired, and you don't have to squint very hard to see that record materializing.
"Check" and "check' for Hoke. If he doesn't win big this year, he has got to show encouraging signs that big wins are coming in future years.
All this talk about the "hot seat" -- whether from the media or the fan base -- is illustrative of a complete lack of perspective and totally unrealistic expectations based upon the reality of Michigan's roster.
Pundits who purport to know CFB should know how the cycles play out, and how many times when a program has a hicup the results of that spasm aren't felt until several years down the road.
I've said this many times and my resolve in my position has only strengthened over time. Michigan's pipeline was broken, or at least reduced to a trickle, and its facilities were substantially subpar relative to those of its biggest rivals. The recruiting cycle that is the lifes blood of a program BROKE DOWN -- most noteably in the OL -- and low and behold Michigan saw its worst OL play ever 4 years after the 2010 recruiting class debacle. While programs like Wisconsin and Alabama are flipping over OLinemen like shark teeth, Michigan was forced to start true freshmen, walk-ons, and guys who had not come up within a culture of a "wait your turn" development cycle -- and it showed.
If your espousing that Hoke's job is in jeopardy and you DO NOT mention this, IMO, you're not giving the discussion it's full due.
These are factors that are BEYOND the control of the current coaching staff. They've been tasked with doing what they can while reestablishing the pipeline -- which they have. I think last season started with these issues firmly within the mind of the coaching staff, but as soon as the OL was exposed, Borges basically flailed about trying to find something, anything, that would work, and it actually made things WORSE -- which is why he was let go. Of course, all this falls on the desk of the head coach. But, again, if you're constantly dismissing the reasons why things are happening as "excuses" and continually looking for someone else to come in and save the day, you run the risk of finding out the hard way that it wasn't, in fact, the former coach's shortcomings, but the short comings of the roster that was the major factor. Unfortunately, by that time, it's too late and your roster could potentially go to shit again and the whole shit storm starts all over.
so if you want to place blame where blame is due, you'll have to go back a bit farther than the transition from '07 to ''08. You can honestly state we needed more OLmen, but decisions have to be made at some point and it's difficult to maintain the consistency on one side of the ball if you are tasked with almost completely rebuilding the defensive roster at the same time. Just as Brady has had to spend an unusual number of ships on the offensive side of the ball, RR had to use far, far more ships on the D side just to get the numbers close to what they're supposed to be on. It is difficult to play in this league when your defensive roster is less than 50% capacity. I don't know why people are so eager to give LC a pass on the bullshit he pulled his last two, three years in coaching, especially when '07 proved that '06 was a result of '02, '03 recruiting. After that, with the English/Hermanns fiasco as the best example, it was a given that he was just trying to finish up his time extending forth as little as possible in terms of effort. Actually, allowing DeBord to use the offense he used in the bowl game following the '07 season was his best work in his final three year period.
Just as I am not comfortable dumping on the man in charge, I think we should let those that no longer have a say in UM sports actually enjoy that status. So why so quick to jump to the defense of RR? For that very reason, coupled with the fact that truth should always play a role, however inconvenient for those that don't want to hear it.
That is why I think Brandon should let BH do his job and not even worry about what temperature his ass is until his contract is about to expire. It's obvious he's building this team based on the type of athlete he wants to see on the field. No, it hasn't been proven whether he can lead once he collects the other pieces of his grand scheme, but it does bother me a bit that Brandon's ego is so large that he might not allow Brady to finish what he started. He has shown a tendency to become a bit paranoid of how people may judge him, as if that's part of his job description. It's my guess that Hoke will answer his critics this year and then he'll probably not be bothered for awhile. As he said, "8-4 sucks" and once he hits the double-digit mark in Ws with his players, even if it's in the manner LC seemed to favor, in the bowl game, Brady's seat will become climate controlled at a comfortable level and then we can discuss restocking every off season and that, my firends, is actually the Michigan way.
5
The thing about using the youth & recruiting excuses is that the coach has to show progress towards fixing those probelms. We have seen examples in our football program of young players getting better as the year went on, but last year's O-line reminded me of a Brian Ellerbe basketball team that would start off shaky and then just tank worse and worse as the year went along. The same goes with RichRod's defenses. They started off bad and ended terrible. On the recruiting front, Hoke has restored the program to where it needs to be, but the development side has been very poor so far. That includes not just last year's young guy, but the disappointing crop of seniors that graduated after 2012. I don't think that anyone's denying that it would be nice to have a couple of 4* fifth year seniors available to start this year, but has Darrell Funk shown any evidence that he could develop those guys the way that we need them? We need to see that evidence this year, along with progress from the young stud recruits on the other side of the ball. If the sophomores on the O-line don't look considerably better than they did as freshmen, then at least Funk has to go too.
"The thing about using the youth & recruiting excuses is that the coach has to show progress towards fixing those probelms."
I agree 100% Hannibal. However, I would phase your point a bit differently. I would say that in an ideal world, the coach would show progress towards fixing those problems. Unfortunately, sometimes that is not possible as the causes of those problems are just too much to overcome. To me, it seemed that the main guy who should (I hate using tha word) have effectuated progress might very well have been making matters worse, and he's no longer with the program. I posted about Borges, Funk, and the OL specifically above.
"On the recruiting front, Hoke has restored the program to where it needs to be, but the development side has been very poor so far. That includes not just last year's young guy, but the disappointing crop of seniors that graduated after 2012."
I don't know if one can genuinely make that assessment of the young players just yet -- I think we'll know a lot more after this season. But, in regards to the 2012 senior class, they were few in number and, IMO, relatively low in talent -- remember who recruited them. I respect them for what they gave to the university and the program, but they personify what I've been saying for a while now, the program was in a very low state in terms of both quantity and quality.
"has Darrell Funk shown any evidence that he could develop those guys the way that we need them?"
Again, I think we'll see more during this season. But to answer specifically, yes, I think Funk has shown he can develop OLinemen. Watch the results of players pressed into service too soon and making that the benchmark of a coach's ability a bit unfair. I thought he did a very nice job with Molk, Schofield, Huyge, and perhaps a few others.
Is this 'hot seat' talk pointless and counter-productive? Sure, but it's hard to take your opinion all that seriously when after multiple games last year you were guaranteeing that the entire staff, Borges included, would be back for 2014. You don't seem to grasp the fact that many reasonable people are getting fed up with this team's lack of progress.
If we see another 5 loss season, the negativity might reach toxic levels, and at that point, all bets are off.
I was wrong about Borges, and admitted such. Further, after I read the post-mortem after his departure, it was clear that he had a lot of trouble dealing with the challenges of the roster.
I said this to you before DB (and I think you threatened me), I do not have an unquestioning support for Hoke. I have an unquestioning support for Michigan. I too am "fed up" with the lack of progress that Michigan has shown. However, I've been fed up since 2005, and thus have a different perspective on why things aren't progressing as quickly as we all would like. To me, the struggles are indicative of from whence the program is coming. To you (seemingly) and others, it's indicative of inability on the part of the coaching staff. Personally, I feel that I am taking a holistic view of the issues -- I am trying to view everything together -- while you're looking at them like you can simply drug and cut them out and everything will be better. While not wanting to start a holistic vs. western medicine debate, I am reluctant let to people whom I feel are shortsighted and impatient, and thus have irrational opinions, poison and mutilate the program I love because they think it will work.
Here's the thing, almost everyone on this board cares about michigan, and the football team, as much as you or I. Some people have seen enough to believe that Hoke can't get us to where we need to be. I'm not quite there but I'm pretty close. That doesn't make me less of a fan or supporter of the university than you. I get your point that coaches need time to build a program, but assuming that Hoke isn't the guy who can fix this mess, wouldn't it be better to cut ties sooner rather than later?
But I think he will. In his most important assisngment, he nabbed Mattison, a guy I don't know if he would have been able to had it not been for his daughter going to school here. Worked out nice for him there too as a bonus on his salary, although I never even thought of that angl before. Damn, he's done nice by his kids, MI, ND, MI. No wondering he's so good, always thinking.
I think he's got everything he needs to get the job done now. His choice of OC is going to cut down on the need for these kids to overthink on the line and go back to what thy were recruited for, play football and have fun. He's got the talent. In fact the only two non-proven are he and Funk, and as I'v said, judging by Nuss and Mattison's salaries, he's apparently received the green light from Brandon on who he could hire, so I think he has total faith in him.
Ideally, we'd have RR on offense, Mattison on defense and Brady as recruiting coordinator. But seeing that won't happen, I think your support will prove to be well placed. I think our return starts this season and will just grow from there. He really does have himself surrounded by some of the top in his profession, read..............recruiting.
While programs like Wisconsin and Alabama are flipping over OLinemen like shark teeth, Michigan was forced to start true freshmen, walk-ons, and guys who had not come up within a culture of a "wait your turn" development cycle -- and it showed.
While I generally agree - even for the quality of those "true freshmen, walk-ons, and guys who had not come up within a culture of a "wait your turn" development cycle" they weren't acceptable. It's one thing to get pushed around by Ohios State. It's a whole other ball of wax to get pushed around by Akron.
These are factors that are BEYOND the control of the current coaching staff.
I diagree. They were CHALLENGES to the current staff - but the failure to prepare those freshmen/walkons adequately and the failure to attract qualified transfer (either Juco or Grad transfer) offensive lineman were not beyond the control of the coahing staff.
"the failure to prepare those freshmen/walkons adequately and the failure to attract qualified transfer (either Juco or Grad transfer) offensive lineman were not beyond the control of the coahing staff."
This wins the "Asinine Statement of the Day Award."
So what I hear you saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that coaches are failures if they're unable to get true freshmen OLinemen, whose well known developmental cycle is usually a minimum of three years, prepared. Further, that their inability to coerce an OLine transfer or JuCo guy to come in and save the day is another strike against them?
Ok dude, if you say so.
I guess you don't get out on the internet much...
What point do you disagree with?
1) Freshmen/Walkon offensive lineman at Michigan should not be dominated by Akron and the like.
It is understandable to get manhandled by OSU/MSU due to youth. It is inexcusable for 2 seniors, 2 RS SO's, and a 5 star "college ready" RS FR to get manhandled by Akron.
Michigan shouldn't get manhandled by Akron starting 5 true freshmen scholarship OL.
2) It is the coaches duty to adequately fill the roster, using recruiting including transfers to do so.
Did the coaches not know the offensive line cupboard was bare? Did the coaches not only get 2 OL out of 20 recruits in their first recruiting class? Are the coaches not allowed to recruit Juco/Grad transfer offensive lineman?
Michigan's OLine wasn't "manhandled" by Akron. They weren't great, but Michigan ran for 5.53 yards/carry against Akron. That was the highest yards/carry average Akron allowed to any team all season, and they played #10 UCF. Also, Michigan also only averaged over 5 yards/carry two times, against CMU and Akron. If you want to talk about manhandling, talk MSU, or Nebraska, or Iowa, or running into Penn State's 4 DT defensive line.
says it well I think.
I agree with what seems to be the consensus from other posters that the idea that Hoke is on a hot seat is quite ridiculous. Otoh, I think too many here seem willing to let Hoke off the hook for last season's woes by blaming almost all the problems on Al Borges.
Now, there's not much anyone could do about how young the team was. However, Hoke is the head coach and he's just as much responsible for the offense, defense, and special teams as anyone else, and in some ways bears more responsibility. My one fear about Hoke has nothing to do with wearing or not headsets and not being intimately involved in playcalling (and again, I do not think he's on a hot seat at all), but it has to do with what seems to be his overall philosophy of winning by chewing up clock and just out-muscling opponents at the line of scrimmage. It seems like when Borges was given the green light to move the ball and score as quickly as possible, good things happened, but most of the season was spent trying to hold onto the ball as long as possible on offense and being paranoid about giving up the big play on defense. I would be surprised if those approaches were solely or even mostly from the coordinators instead of from the head coach.
is hot? and given how Brady dresses in cold weather I'm sure he's immune to heat as well. or maybe he'll start wearing a parka before going to short sleeves in October.
Seriously though, tough question. Hard to be objective when answering this. I think there are probably a good 20 or so coaches I would rather have over Hoke. I guess that puts him on the cusp of a top 25 coach.
To be clear, I don't want to fire him this year (unless there is a meltdown) - he deserves his 5 years.
One way I like to look at this is think about what other schools would rather have Hoke over what they currently have. I understand there are factors, such as fit, that look beyond the pure performance aspect, but looking at it this way helps you get to an "objective" equilbrium on his overall ranking.
I fully agree with the OP, and think this hot seat nonsense is ridiculously overblown. Obviously, in the 4th year, expectations are greater. And obviously the buck stops with Hoke. And we expect Michigan to compete for the Big 10 Championship, as Hoke does himself.
But I really believe that blame can be placed on the recruiting cupboard being rather bare under the preceding coach, both Carr & RR. RR was hurt by both the pipeline not being full, and by recruiting for a different stype of game.
Hoke has been hurt in multiple ways.
- First, RR recruited a very different style of player, looking for small and shifty dudes for the spread game, reaching out to a different kind of player.
- Second, RR was particularly bad in recruiting for the OL, and this is the single biggest factor.
- Third, the defense was atrocious under RR, with terrible defensive coordinators. No-one on defense in their right mind would come to Michigan.
- Hoke coming in only in mid-January completely hamstrung him with the first recruiting class. I do not blame that on Hoke.
Starting in 2015, Michigan should have both depth and experienced upper-classman in both the OL and DL. I can't remember when or where, but the mathlete or someone like him (Seth?) have done extensive analysis looking at who can come in and succeed immediately as a freshman. The numbers of true freshmen (even redshirt freshmen) starters who are solid is particularly bad on the OL, DL, and at QB.
You can blame Dave Brandon for many things. However, I strongly believe that he will give Hoke the time he needs to succeed. If Hoke just has a mediocre season, that will buy him next year, when he'd be on the hot seat. My personal belief is that the record is 9 - 3 this year. Not satisfactory, but certainly not some stupid "Hot Seat."