January 12th, 2011 at 1:56 PM ^
wow, this board went from meltdown to "on board" in 1 hour.
January 12th, 2011 at 8:47 PM ^
Its called supporting the team.
January 12th, 2011 at 1:56 PM ^
I'm not sold until it is announced Denard is staying with the team. If we lost him and Tate I have a hard time seeing how we exceed 7-6 with a redshirt freshmen quarterback. His comment about "moulding" Denard to what is best for team has me on red alert. I would take Denard over Hoke any day
January 12th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^
But otherwise I agree with you. This is a big deal, and if Hoke can sell Denard, he'll gain a lot of ground quickly with those finicky 'blog types.'
January 12th, 2011 at 2:01 PM ^
that Denard is not leaving and Hoke even mentioned how special a player Denard is and how he will mold the offense around him.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:12 PM ^
Wasn't Denard the equivalent of a redshirt freshman this past year?. He's a special player, no doubt, but I think it's a stretch to think that he, and he alone, will determine the success of this team in 2011 and beyond. Gardner got his feet wet this year, as Denard did when Tate (Adios!) was the starter. I believe he's capable, especially in an offense that doesn't place as much importance on the QB's in-play read (on ruinning plays). It will be great if Denard stays and is effective in the new offensive scheme, but it also would have been great if Mallet stayed. Just as we did then, we'll find someone who can run the offense if Denard decides to leave. And Tate... is anyone really that upset that he may be transferring? He consistently demonstrated poor decision-making when he got the opportunity to play against Big Ten competition. I don't believe he would beat out Gardner for the QB position in 2011, anyway.
How can you justify the comment that you would take Denard over Hoke? Denard had a great season, but failed to shine against the the Big Ten. You think we should choose that over someone committed to returning the program to greatness? If he leaves, we can all take comfort in the fact that Denard only cares about Denard, and Denard wants to play QB, wherever. Most of us put Michigan above 1 player.
See "The Team"
January 12th, 2011 at 4:00 PM ^
will back up Gardner?
2. I absolutely loved Tate's decision making against Illinois.
3. If he Denard does leave, it'll be because he doesn't feel like he's going to be utilized in a way that is best suited to his ability, and not because he is some prima donna. Don't be a d-bag.
January 14th, 2011 at 4:45 PM ^
1. I'm sure a QB vacancy, even as a back-up, would fill itself rather quickly.
2. One game doesn't make up for the rest of the season.
3. Denard's staying, so untwist your panties.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:13 PM ^
Wasn't Denard the equivalent of a redshirt freshman this past year?. He's a special player, no doubt, but I think it's a stretch to think that he, and he alone, will determine the success of this team in 2011 and beyond. Gardner got his feet wet this year, as Denard did when Tate (Adios!) was the starter. I believe he's capable, especially in an offense that doesn't place as much importance on the QB's in-play read (on ruinning plays). It will be great if Denard stays and is effective in the new offensive scheme, but it also would have been great if Mallet stayed. Just as we did then, we'll find someone who can run the offense if Denard decides to leave. And Tate... is anyone really that upset that he may be transferring? He consistently demonstrated poor decision-making when he got the opportunity to play against Big Ten competition. I don't believe he would beat out Gardner for the QB position in 2011, anyway.
How can you justify the comment that you would take Denard over Hoke? Denard had a great season, but failed to shine against the the Big Ten. You think we should choose that over someone committed to returning the program to greatness? If he leaves, we can all take comfort in the fact that Denard only cares about Denard, and Denard wants to play QB, wherever. Most of us put Michigan above 1 player.
See "The Team"
January 12th, 2011 at 3:49 PM ^
I'm glad you posted this twice so that you could make it to Bolivia faster.
January 14th, 2011 at 4:42 PM ^
I thought I was just seeing double because of all the booze I had to choke down to deal with the fact that Brady Hoke is the new head coach and the fact that DB completely f'd up the search process...
Wait, it was the media (and bloggers) that turned the search into a fiasco and Hoke seems to be off to a pretty good start...
January 15th, 2011 at 3:49 AM ^
You seem a little testy. Everything okay man? There can't be any way someone is this much of a prick on their first post.
January 15th, 2011 at 10:41 AM ^
I've been a reader of the blog for a long time, but never felt the need to post until the blog as a whole did an about-face and began to do exactly what it spent the last three years condemning. Of course, there are a lot of people who have a positive attitude about the new direction of the program, which is nice. I was a RR supporter throughout his tenure, and am now a Hoke supporter. I just have a hard time with the hypocrisy, and don't think I'm the only one who feels that way.
Now, I don't think that warrants you calling me a prick. Pretty classless, don't you think?
January 12th, 2011 at 1:57 PM ^
That exchange was definitely endearing.
January 12th, 2011 at 1:57 PM ^
Hoke's a good guy and I like him but how about we wait until football season starts to actually assess if he's any good or not...Because being a nice guy doesn't mean you're successful as a football coach, otherwise this press conference wouldn't even be necessary....
January 12th, 2011 at 2:03 PM ^
This board has been unreadable, from Brian on down, with the Hoke-hate, before he's even coached a game here. How you go tell them wait " to actually assess if he's any good or not."
January 12th, 2011 at 2:31 PM ^
Spare me. I want him to be successful, because that means the team is successful. But waiting to anoint someone as being a good football coach before he actually does something coach-like doesnt equal hating hoke. There's more ppl on this board whining about ppl hating hoke then those actually hating him. So calm down.
January 12th, 2011 at 3:02 PM ^
Calm down? Okay bro!
January 12th, 2011 at 1:58 PM ^
I'm definitely warming up to him after the presser. Love the passion for M and hate for that school in ohio.
Although hearing "touching kids" over and over is going to take some getting used to.
January 12th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^
Me too...
For now... Lets wait and see what happens with this recruiting class and attrition.
January 12th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^
Brady Hoke for President.
Dave Brandon for Emperor.
Domino's for lunch?
January 12th, 2011 at 1:59 PM ^
He passed the first test. Keep Denard at QB and lets see how the recruiting class ends up...
This was a definately a good start!
January 12th, 2011 at 2:01 PM ^
was RR's first press conference pretty blah? Because this was a well-spent hour in my day watching a guy who completely sold me on how great this program has been and will be.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:52 PM ^
The Lion King will forever be linked to Michigan Football...
<br>
<br>I think Rich's presser was fine. Probably more polished than this one, but less visceral.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:01 PM ^
Can someone recap the conversation between Hoke and Sharp?
January 12th, 2011 at 2:01 PM ^
I wouldn't say that I'm "On board" yet but I'm definitely trying to be supportive, why hate when the guy hasn't even coached a game for us yet (As a head coach). On the plus side maybe we can actually field a defense next year :)
January 12th, 2011 at 2:01 PM ^
January 12th, 2011 at 3:27 PM ^
I agree he had me fired up. I love his passion for UM.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:01 PM ^
January 12th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^
Win games, beat OSU and make progress and he'll have my respect.
With respect to Sharp, it was good.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:53 PM ^
From all your posting I thought you were on board with Rich. And he only did one of your three requirements.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^
I'm on board, that school from and ohio and drew sharp punkout sold me. DB also mentioned that how the new coach would adapt to the existing talent was big in the serch. That leads me to think he will find a way to use Denard. On a side note, what the deal with the DG I'm gone tweet?
January 12th, 2011 at 2:19 PM ^
what the deal with the DG I'm gone tweet?
Wat?
January 12th, 2011 at 2:27 PM ^
That was from last night and I don't think had anything to do with uofm fball.
January 12th, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^
It didn't seem to have anything to do with football. If it were a real story someone would have brought it up by now.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:03 PM ^
He's going to be a winner.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:05 PM ^
No doubt Brady Hoke impressed a lot of people today, and this should be a good start to both recruiting and keeping Denard. Hearing the Tate news is disappointing, but if Denard stays he was going to be third string anyway. Let's pick up a QB and finish this class strong, and I think we'll be looking good.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:05 PM ^
The fire and passion is palpable. Hope it translates into success on the field. Overall, he rocked that presser.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:06 PM ^
I fully support Hoke and this team, but David Brandon, Lloyd Carr, and many ex-players can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.
Go Hoke, Go Blue
January 12th, 2011 at 3:54 PM ^
and is a great man.
January 12th, 2011 at 4:52 PM ^
Hurrr
January 12th, 2011 at 2:08 PM ^
Hokeamanic? Present
January 12th, 2011 at 2:14 PM ^
I'm sure this is just me, but I just don't really give a shit whether our coach loves Michigan or understands our traditions or hates Ohio State.
I just want him to coach well.
January 12th, 2011 at 2:21 PM ^
not sure if it is just you - but it definitely is not me
January 12th, 2011 at 2:55 PM ^
Who can do all of the above.
January 12th, 2011 at 3:22 PM ^
I'd actually prefer the guy who didn't give a crap about Michigan's traditions. The only reason we think our traditions are superior to Texas' or Georgia's or Notre Dame's is because we're fans of Michigan, and I think the program's rigid adherence to tradition has been really destructive for a while now.
January 12th, 2011 at 3:40 PM ^
A guy who doesn't give a crap about our traditions sounds like a guy whose heart isn't 100% in the job, and probably has his sights elsewhere.
I think you are confusing tradition with cronyism. Both of our last two head coaches had a problem with keeping underperfoming assistants on staff. That is hardly a Michigan tradition. That's just poor management.
January 12th, 2011 at 3:44 PM ^
I just firmly disagree with the belief that traditions are important.
That's just a personal opinion of course, but I do think the belief among large swaths of our fanbase that our traditions are incredibly meaningful has caused problems for the program (Aaron Shea's recent comment that he just wanted to get back to two tight end football being a solid example).
January 12th, 2011 at 3:57 PM ^
Interesting perspective, given that our program, which had posted 40 consecutive non-losing seasons, collapsed after we brought in a guy who instituted wholesale changes. We didn't need that. We needed some tweaking, but the foundation was solid. The irony is that Les Miles, Carr's archnemesis, would have preserved more of the foundation than RR did. Oh well.