Wins and losses
How do we evaluate Hoke's first year?
We evaluate it by looking at the W-L column
It would be unfair to treat him any differently than RR. Therefore, if Hoke doesn't win 8 games, their may be a problem considering all of the firepower UM returns on offense and experience on Defense.
It'll be hard to TRULY evaluate until we are seeing what he does with his own recruits, etc.
However, if he has a worse year (somehow) than last year (with the talent he has), there will be critical evaluation.
Do you mean when his recruits are upper classmen or when they are freshmen and sophomores?
He seems to have his mind set on winning B1G championships so I guess I do too.
I am stealing it. "Giving you full credit of course."
i belive RRods team wouldve won at least 9 games next year before the bowl game. For me to say Hoke was the right choice next year they need to win at least 8 and beat MSU and OSU.
That would probably qualify as an amazing season. Considering how not competitive Michigan was against anyone that was good, I'm hoping for a movement toward average on defense (no school records for points allowed for a third straight year would be great). Competitive against OSU and actually beating a legit top-25 team would be a good season for me.
The first year for any coach is basically a gimme anyways.
I'll evaluate him like I would any other coach. By his fashion sense and the use of the word "tremendous". So far he's not doing so well.
please tell me your joking. i think you are but i've seen some stupid people say very identical things and be dead serious.
yes, because he is actually gonna evaluate a coach because of what words he uses in his vocabulary.
He must be joking. I've heard Hoke say tremendous A LOT.
Did you see that? Something just passed overhead!
Is the use of tremendous bad? The guy uses the word all the time.
I don't think you can look at just wins and losses, though it's a big thing. I want to see how the defense improves, if the offense is worse, how recruiting is. With any coaching change, you might have a step back, but wins and losses sometimes don't tell the entire story. If our defense improves a good amount and we have a good recruiting class, then I think he can get away with a 7-5 season. I hope he does better, but I think there are other tangible things to look at than just wins and losses.
That's exactly how my brother-in-law (State fan) is evaluating him. The first thing he said to me this weekend, "I saw Brady Hoke walking around in sweatpants the other day." I guess State fans have higher standards than sweatpants for their coaches. I personally could care less, but that's just me.
Being better than 3-9 overall and 2-6 in conference.
To me, though, it seems as if the expectations are to return to what Michigan was back when Lloyd left. With that, it involves an 8-4 record with a bowl win. Hopefully the 4 losses won't include any horrors and such.
maybe the theme for 2011-12 can be "A Return to Mediocrity"
Is that better or worse than "A Continuation of Crapulence?"
You won't get a lot of data this year. The W-L column is good as always, but in this case, I think discipline / mechanical improvements might mean more.
It would be good to see defensive guys do what was called in the days of Yost "tackling."
BH drops about 30 lbs. He really does need to shed some weight. It's not good for the joints to be carrying that extra baggage around at his age.
Is that you, Charlie Weis?!
is the team better at the end of the year than at the beginning of the year?
How effective he is at using the talent that we have. Competitiveness against solid teams. Of course wins and losses. Personally, I would love to go 6-6 or 7-5 if those wins include finally beating OSU.
Have you even looked at the 2012 schedule? It's kind of brutal. I wouldn't have even expected ten wins with Rich Rod with that schedule.
I will be most interested in how the defense improves through the season. I think this is the season when many young men on the defense will grow and develop into a solid group by season's end.
My goals for Hoke this season:
1.) Beat OSU at home.
2.) Win at least 8 games.
3.) Our conference record to be at least .500.
4.) Our defense to improve to within the top 60 defenses in div 1.
How do we evaluate Hoke? It will be a good sign if Brian submits a post-OSU game UFR this year. If we are mired in a post-apocalyptic state after getting demolished, demoralized, and manhandled by the Buckeyes again, there will be no UFR. No UFR=bad evaluation.
I'm hoping for mega muppet video clips on the site after the last game of the season.
It's going to persist throughout this coming year, and probably well into the next.
This particular post is well put, and doesn't make me want to stick my finger in my eye, but the way it is framed does boil down to "How much credit should Rodriguez get for this season?" People are going to want to weigh in on this question, but I just don't care. Coaches matter, but THEY DON'T PLAY. The players have a new coach, but it's still the same team. That's what I'm interested in.
Seriously, though, here's the answer: Hoke will be evaluated on the performance of the defense, which is what he was brought in to address.
1) be competetive against teams with a number beside their name.
2) not regress on offense
3) the D overachieve.
4) a trip to a bowl (lower level bowl a win, upper level bowl be competetive [a win wold be better, but whatever])
5) a good recruiting class.
If BH delivers these things I would call this first year a success.
We evaluate Hoke on a game by game basis and then complete the story when the season (including a bowl game, we hope) is over. DB already taught us how to do this, right?
90% of success/failure in college football has to do with evaluating and recruiting the kids who end up becoming good football players when they reach their junior/senior seasons. On that front, we'll probably know very little about the kind of program Brady Hoke can/will build here at Michigan for quite some time. Recruiting rankings will offer some predictions and we'll start to see the occasional underclassmen cracking the lineup to give us a few hints, but nothing definitive will really be known for another 4-5 years.
Hiring coordinators and in-game strategy and all the other things fans obsess about are really only going to impact the season a game or two in one direction or another. Before the 2006 season, Coach Carr (almost certainly handcuffed by a cheapskate athletic department, so he isn't entirely to blame) made two very lackluster coordinator hires (promoting Ron English from DB coach and re-promoting Mike Debord). That team still went 11-2 because Carr had recruited a ridiculous collection of talent that made up the junior/senior class that year (Long, Hart, Henne, Breaston, Crable, Woodley, Harris, Burgess, Hall, Branch, etc.). The seasons before and after that one weren't as good because the talent in those junior/senior classes wasn't as good, not because the coaching was better or worse (if anything the 2007 team stole a game or two considering all the injuries they had to deal with).
As far as Hoke is concerned, he doesn't personally bring a whole lot to the table on that strategery front (has never been a coordinator and has taken a hands off approach with the guys he hires to run his offense/defense). On the other hand, I think if Carr had hired Borges/Mattison instead of Debord/English, that team could very easily have won the national title. At this point I'm very optimistic that Hoke will end up getting as many wins as possible out of the team he inherits in the near future. As for building his own program here at Michigan, we'll have to wait a while to see, but I expect most observers will have their opinion of the guy locked in place long before that day comes.
I really don't think we can evaluate him based on his first year really. Even Saban sucked in his first year at Bama, and that dude is probably the best coach in college football whether you like him or not. We just need to be patient.
He is implementing a new system so there will be some growing pains (but not 2008-type growing pains, god forbid).
He also will have a team that is not all freshmen and sophomores, so the ole' "wait till next year" to see some success won't fly.
BH 1st year success =
- Min 7-5 overall
- Min .500 Big Ten
- Win over two of the Bigs - OSU, MSU, NEB, IA, ND
- Still in the conversation for the B1G West (or whatever the F it's called) at the end of October
- Competitive New Years Day Bowl game
- No blowout losses
- A pulse on D
- A competent O that uses Denard effectively
- No punts on 3rd and 6 at the opponent's 35 yard line
- Some Field Goals
He needs to beat Michigan State. Got no problem saying RR would have done (and if he hadn't even this RR supporter would've turned), and Hoke needs to as well. Preferably into the ground.
Really? I know its important to beat Sparty so we can return to being big brother, but i think a win over OSU is much more important. Maybe that was a given in your post though.
Personally, I'd really like a win over Nebraska. Maybe more so than a win over Sparty. Michigan-Nebraska is going to develop into a big rivalry, in my opinion, and I want to see a win to start (kind of like in the PSU series).
I think important in this case means "must". We aren't expected to beat OSU, so if we lose we really shouldn't get our panties in a bunch. Let me ask you this, be honest, after which game were you more depressed MSU or OSU? I'd argue a majority of the ppl here would say MSU upset them more
Basically, yeah. Lloyd lost to OSU more than RR did this decade. RR got fired for not beating MSU, essentially. Because that's a baseline expectation. Part of our identity as Michigan is a rivalry with OSU, and beating MSU except in the event of improper timekeeper intervention. It's like: Beat OSU, but don't lose to MSU, if that makes any sense.
Definitely makes sense. I've just never cared about MSU as much as OSU. Maybe because I'm not a Michigander. Or maybe because I believe that Michigan needs to beat OSU more than it needs to beat MSU if it wants to be a national power. So, for me, a loss to OSU is worse than a loss to MSU, especially since the last 10 years of the rivalry have been very one-sided.
I grew up in Ohio and i went to College in Michigan. When i lived in Michigan i was very surprised at how big the MSU rivalry is. I think it is bigger for the fans because when you live in Michigan you have to deal with all the damn Sparty fans. Living in Ohio the OSU game is bigger because you have to deal with all the damn OSU fans.
There's an awful lot of neg-banging going on early in this thead, and it confuses me.
Question: How do we evaluate Hoke's first season?
Answer: By how many wins he has.
I don't find that to be snarky or overly simplistic. Sure it could be expanded upon, but ultimately his win total at the end of the season will be the first thing we look at.
If we win 3 games this season, I don't give a shit if the 9 losses are all by 1 point in overtime, I don't think many people will consider it a successful season.
You asked for it.
Why I oughta....
I would like to punch you in response to this comment. Unless you were being sarcastic, that is.
From the mouth of Great Leader himself: We win the B1G Championship or we have failed. That is all.
They are here with their commemorative red wristbands:
The hardcore "Rich Rod got screwed at the door-step of greatness " guys.
Their platform: Hoke has to win x (insert high number) because Rich definitely would have. Gotta love the ultra brave opinion mixed in that Rich would have beaten good teams like Michigan State that owned him like a toolbox hammer, so Hoke also has to.
We should admire the loyalty. Also, whose to say they are wrong? It is super hard to flash forward on things like this. My idea: We should pledge to all give Rodriguez all the credit if this is a 10-win team that is playing tough in all three phases. They will be his recruits doing it. That is an undeniable fact.
If we win 10, odds are it means we played in Indy against Ohio State. We'll all be so giddy, we won't care who gets the credit. The other cool thing is we currently have a coach that could care less about who gets the credit.
..is Nate, who can be proud that he was shoveling BS on RR before it was "cool."
RR doesn't even coach here anymore, but you still find a way to shit on him in almost every post you make. I get it. I understand. You hated RR from the start, you're happy he's gone, and you want your opinion heard. And heard. And heard. And heard.
As Groucho Marx once said to a "You Bet Your Life" contestent with something like nine kids:
"Lady, I love my cigar, but I take it out of my mouth once in awhile."
I know Nate more personally than most, if not all, on this board. And no, he did not hate RR from the start. In fact, he loved RR from the start and defended him to great lengths for nearly three years...as did I. He felt it was time for a change after the third consecutive OSU beat down. Can he be faulted for that? I don't think so but you are entitled to your opinions.
For someone who hates all the RR talk, you sure goad the supporters at every possible opportunity.
Double postin' like it's cool. Neg me; neg me and call me a dirty whore.
Unoriginal. Plus, you didn't answer the OP's question. Since you're so on board with the new regime, how do you evaluate the first year? This ought to be good . . .
The dreaded double post. Time for bed!
we do in the RED LETTER games. Thats why RR got fired. I thought we would win at least 10 games with RR next year. So at least 9 wins,going 5-3 in the big ten. We need to beat msu and osu and norte shame.GO BLUE!!!
Feels like only yesterday.
how about the number of position switches and non-injury-related shifts in the depth chart that occur midseason.
Results against ND, MSU, and OSU....
Win those...how bad can anyone bitch?
I'm going to evaluate him on the number of WWRRD posts that hit the board. The fewer of those the better he's doing. And God help us all if the ghost of Jimmy gets brought up EVER during the season.
1) I don't get shit from Tom dick and old ladies in Madison for sporting my M gear
2) people stop penciling in "W" for their game against Michigan that year
3) our hope for winning games no longer relies solely on scoring 40 points against teams
4) making a gd field goal
5) being ranked in november
He should be evaluated by how many players he touches.
He should also be evaluated by how many times he touches each player.
And everyone in this program that touches players better be touching them well.
...good touches are better than bad touches?
In Soviet Russia, Hoke's first year evaluates YOU!
first to grade Hoke you have to take your expectations of what RR was giong to do and then compare your expectations to what actually happens under Hoke.
i saw us going 7-5 under RR next year.. everyone is stating that our schedual is so much easier next year, but i still think it is pretty tough. we get our tough games at home which is a plus kind of, but we still have to travel to Iowa, MSU, and ILL. Also NW is no joke. ND showed great progress last year and as excited as i am to play a night game, it is going to be a battle.
what i hope from Hoke is this
1st i want the defense to be able to stop the run
2nd i want the offense to win the TOP battle. A lot of people don't think TOP is relavant, but if you have a bad D then you can help them out by keeping them off the field.
3rd i want to be competative if we loose. if we loose 5 games by a total of lets say 30 points that shows progress to me.
4th i want to win a game or two we arn't supposed to win.
If we can do these things and have a good recruiting class next year i would say Hoke's first season would be a success.
With the talent Hoke has coming in, I see anything less than 7-5 as a disappointment. That being said, the more important thing will be to see steady improvement throughout the season. Yes, our team was young last year, but to show absolutely no improvement on defense and special teams was quite alarming.
But a few other items.
1. Can he take over his predecessor's team and transition them successfully to his scheme during his first year. That would win him a lot of points with the fan base and give a big bump to future recruiting.
2. Can he land a solid class of 4 star and some 5 stars--fast?
3. Can he start the pendulum swinging back in our favor over OSU in the way Tressel did to Carr? Winning there could crack OSU's recruiting stranglehold that has held solid through Carr's last years and RR's 3 years.
Together, these three would put Hoke in a great position to get us back on top of the Conference and into the NCS.
"I have 100% confidence that Rich would have won at least 8 games this year, followed by 9-10-11 win seasons every year after."
I think that is an unreasonable prediction of what RR was going to do. Now it "could" have happened, but did you see our defense last year? We won 6 b10 games in 3 years. Why would you be 100% sure that RR was going to win 8 games next year and at least 9 every year after that? If DB was that sure, RR would still be the coach. I think you're crazy.
I have an idea... Why don't you all stop giving your opinions on how Hoke is to be evaluated and use the same evaluation scale he is using for himself and Michigan Football. Brady Hoke's quoto when addressing football team before press conference: "If we don't win a B10 Championship...WE FAIL. And we will work hard to get it to where we are winning B10 Championships!" B10 Titles and Rose Bowl appearances have been how UM coaches have been evaluated since FIELD YOST, THERE IS NO REASON THINGS SHOULD CHANGE NOW!!!!!!!!!!