The firing of Borges and hiring of Nuss was good news in my book. But if the offense doesn't improve a lot this season, does it mean we placed too much blame on Borges?
to play football, not to play trumpet
Conversely, if it improves a lot, were we too easy on him?
No, because we put a significant amount of blame on him.
HI AL BORGES
But we didn't burn his house to the ground when he was fired.
is cold war. it's on!
Fired after Penn State and publicly shamed.
First we should check his bank account to confirm we were too hard on him.
I have no doubt that Nuss is smart enough to not bang his head in to the wall like Borges did. So I think I'll be happy either way.
Is Nuss going to try to run play action wattles on 3rd and 20?
Waggles. Damn iPhone.
emblem of our land...
The "complexity" of the [Borges] offense still doesn't excuse some of the worst play-calling I've seen out of a major program. You can use the "complexity" excuse for the line play but that's about it.
"Complexity" shouldn't be an excuse anyway. If you have a young offense with limited practice reps, you shouldn't have an overly-complex offense.
if nussmeier does what he was supposed to do, he's going to take a bunch of first (now second) year OL and have them work on ONE scheme, and a few base plays.
If you took a bunch of college freshmen, threw advanced trigonometry and statistics courses at them, varying wildly from week to week, while having them compete against experienced upperclassmen/ grad students, they would probably fail miserably as well. I spent all of last year on "Borges Hill" as Brian put it earlier. But the fact that we looked so bad in the Nebraska game at the end of the year, after a season of what should have been progress and improvement, was unforgivable.
Spamming QB draw plays and RB's averaging 1-2 yards a carry made the offense look like they hadn't practiced all season. Total failure.
I agree with spicey wiener
Clown sauce goes well with spicy wieners?
was too hot!
Mama Bear's bowl of porridge was too cold!
But Baby Bear's bowl of porridge was just right, so Goldilocks ate it alll up!
Likewise, if Michigan's offense improves just about to where we want it to be (in other words, just right ), then that means our assessment of Borges was correct.
Will Nuss run a draw out of I formation on 3rd and long with Vincent Smith?
Didn't think so.
Oh, that was the other unforgivable part about Borges - turtling and expecting his players to succeed in tight contests after opposing defenses already proved they can stop it.
I'd like to think Nuss would be clever enough to figure out that the Ohio State defense was keying in on Denard for run plays and Gardner for pass plays.
Well if the players would just execute...
Other than the fact that Vincent Smith is no longer in the program.
Borges still called the 2013 Penn State game...so the answer is NO.
I don't see much difference between the two of them. Glad they are both gone.
The Mike DeBord that was OC for what was probably the ~65th ranked offense in the country in 1997.
You're right. Mike DeBord was fucking awesome.
Yeah, that 1997 Michigan offense vastly underachieved, as crazy as it is to say. I mean, they basically had an NFL offense.
Their offensive line was essentially an NFL O-Line. Hutch, Jansen, Backus, Adami, Brandt, and Ziemann. Tuman and Campbell at TE, with Aaron Shea as a sort of H-Back. Griese at QB. Chris Howard, A-Train, Clarence Williams and Chris Floyd as backs. Tai Streets and Russell Shaw at wideout with Woodson double dipping at times.
Producing just the 65th best offense with that dragon's hoard of talent is vastly underachieving.
That O-line had players that would become NFL stalwarts, yeah. But at the start of the 1997 season only Jansen had ever started a game. Backus was only a sophomore, and Hutch and Ziemann were defense linemen before they had to switch because of need. Not exactly an NFL line yet.
That being said, there was definitely a lot of firepower on that team that didn't get used.
I think the Nebraska game might have been worse
I'll never forgive Borges for the second half against ohio in 2012. I can't say we should have won that game but we were definitely in control until his dumbass runs up the middle that went nowhere.
This. I seriously thought he should have been fired after that game. He had a couple other duds that season (MSU, Iowa?) that led me to conclude he was just an awful game planner/play caller.
Ohio State 2012 and Ohio State 2013. Watching the Ohio State game from last year (and I just watched it again today, at least our first two offensive drives) was like oh, so this is what our offense is capable of. Interesting.
This is a dumb question. Too many extenuating circumstances to compare apples to apples. Feel free to make any inferences you want, as I'm sure arguments could be made either way after this season.
My opinion, it was a good hire and an upgrade but I don't expect major revelations on offense.
will have fewer "wrinkles" for each play set.
...and the offense will get to the line with time to review the D and adjust.
Still thinking about play action waffles.
I guess this is where we have to revisit the idea that one year of data does not a trend make, and the differences in styles and schemes between Borges and Nussmeier make such a question extremely difficult to answer without uncomfortable stretching, to say the least. One might say that three years isn't much of trend either, but as the deed is done and Borges is gone, the first year of a new OC doesn't mean anything towards what the previous OC did or didn't do.
Let's not forget that Borges was seen as something of an offensive wizard after the 2011 season.
That said, I'm happy for the change. I think it was the right and proper move to make.
I've seen the fire in Nuss's eyes. I liked what he was able to do, even if he was throttled by the puppet strings of Master Saban. I believe he really developed AJ McCarron from a player who could reliably hand the ball off and not throw an INT on 3rd down, to a player who could hurt the other team many times during a game. Obviously Bama had big murderous dudes on the OL who could bulldoze with the absolute best in CFB, but just because you have some big athletic guys doesn't mean its automatic pot of gold. I believe they developed those guys with repetitions.
I've seen Borges come trotting out on game day with body language like it was a major inconvenience to detour out of his elevator ride to the OC box.
Borges, in his career, has had wild successes followed immediately by weird fails, in terms of seasons.
I have no doubt Borges was a mad scientist when it came to designing plays...but when it came to the bottom line, so many times it was yang when the defense had bet the house on stopping yang. The young and stirred cauldron of OL players obviously did not help. But I have to believe there was some element of formation or lineup that tipped off defenses over and over. Nebraska players outwardly claimed it.
We will probably never know. Johnny U probably won't get a tell-alll interview with Gorgeous Al. Me, I have faith in Nuss until he proves otherwise.
Welp, im convinced. Just let my life savings ride on M winning the conference.
Borges was clueless. Just look at his track record, he's gotten around.
This will be Nussmeier's 4th OC job since 2008.
Borges has had 9 OC jobs since 1986.
Your assertion might be true, but your argument is just awful.
I don't think another guy not getting our offensive line to outperform the statistically second worst offensive line in the FBS exonerates Al Borges. And honestly, this is a really depressing thought experiment.
Hoke should fire Nuss and rehire Borges for 2015. Kiffin will get canned for running a no-huddle offense that wears out the Bama D by week 8; Kirby will leave to head a Florida after Muschamp goes 7-5; Nuss will return to Bama as the HC in waiting as Saban claims only 2 years until retirement. Muschamp will come to UM as the heir apparent to Mattison for 1 year and eventually Hoke.
Instead of rehashing history, let's just hypothesize about the future. Yes, Borges is history and he's not coming back.
The Kirby Smart to Florida thing doesn't sound too far fetched, actually.
I dunno, would Florida really go after another highly-touted Defensive Coordinator? I would bet they're gonna look for someone with HC experience
Hard to say ... they might go looking for the second coming of Spurrier / Meyer. Or they might think they can tap into the motherlode of Alabama football. The SEC folks love their defenses, and Kirby Smart is a good DC. Get a good OC to balance him and Florida could work its way back.
If Muschamp is gone after this season, Florida is the hottest job in the country. They can basically pick from amongst available candidates. If they think Smart is the next Saban, sure. I would guess that they'd look at someone like Jim Mora if he is still hot, or whomever has a great year at a midrange school.
If the offense doesn't improve a lot then we might just have to come to the conclusion that the offense just isn't very good.
If the O-Line continues to struggle, then maybe that's on the players for just being bad and the coaching stuff foor doing a poor job of evaluating talent, and/or finding the right talent to fit their system, and/or developing talent.
If they do make vast improvements, all hail Nuss.
He got fired for doing his job poorly. It has nothing to do with the person hired after him, or the success of the offense this year. They are independent of each other. It's possible that Nuss does worse than Borges, but that doesn't mean Borges didn't deserve to be fired.
Yep. Results matter, and this is a big-boy business. Ultimately the bits and pieces of "why" stop mattering.
I agree with almost everything you said but I think that Hoke may have kept Al if a great option like Nuss didn't come available. His seat was extremely hot but unless a guy like Nuss came along I don't know if he was going to get fired. Just my feeling on the matter, but I am glad we got the Nuss!!
That's possible, but can you imagine the what the outlook would have been for this season with Borges returning? I think the consensus would have been...not too optimistic.
If the offense does not improve enough, we may have a whole lot bigger fish to fry than Borges.
As hard as that is to believe...
I did a diary after one of the particularly rough games trying to assign blame one each play that didn't work and IIRC it worked out to about 25% Borges fault. As unscientific and nonrigorous as that was, I think that's about right.
That probably won't mean we'll be 25% better without him. Most of the time, plays failed due to a combination of things so even if the OC called better plays, there's no guarantee someone else wouldn't screw it up. One the other hand, I think some improvement in playcalling and a more consistent approach on offense will likely have a cumulative effect that will allow people to get better throughout the season.
Gun to my head, I think we'll still struggle but have less groan inducing plays. It'll be more of a steady grind type of offense that struggles to make first downs by not getting enough yards consistently each play, rather than an offense that put itself behind in down and distance by shooting itself in the foot with negative plays.
One of the things I believe I have observed is that Borges would call "sound" plays but that his plays tend to have a lower margin of error relative to other philosophies. That is, there is a lot more that can go wrong and bust the play. Related, his tendency to install new plays (remember, just last week an anonymous opponent mentioned that they had to watch a lot of film because there were so many different plays they could potentially face) limited the offense's ability to get really sharp at what it ran.
Contrast with golden-era Chip Kelly Oregon teams that could sprinkle maybe three pass plays with inside and outside zone and crush everyone with pace and execution.
So while Borges often called the "right" plays, the chance the play executing properly was less than it would be for other teams. And the bad plays were accentuated because of the offense's inability to do basic things like gain three yards on the ground.
I don't know about assigning random percentages, but yeah, Borges definitely got too much blame last year. The play calling overall wasn't as apocalyptic as people were making it out to be. It certainly wasn't good, at times it was absolutely horrible, and no matter how you slice it Borges is to blame for the offensive struggles last year in one way or another. No tears should be shed over his firing.
I think the reality is though, that the offensive players last year just weren't very good.
Our number 1 receiver was Jeremy Gallon. Our number 2 receiver was Jeremy Gallon. Our third option was an occasional Devin Funchess, who was at times spectacular, but then would have a 1 catch for 2 yards performance and just totally disappear. That was essentially the entirety of our receiving corps.
Our running backs were a horribly out of shape Derrick Green, and Fitz, who started for 3 years but basically only looked good for one half of one season,and failed to recapture the magic from that run he had his sophomore year. The injury could have played a part in that, as well as the offensive line play, but outside of a handful of games (largely against the Indianas, Illinoises and Purdues of the schedule) he didn't produce much.
The offensive line, regardless of whether they were put in a position to succeed or fail, was awful. At a certain point, when nobody is blocking anyone and guys who are supposed to be 4 or 5 star maulers are getting blown off the ball, you have to put it on them. The play calling might not have helped, but it certainly didn't seem to matter. The MSU game can't be put solely on the shoulders of Borges. They flat out got beat on every play. That was something that happened with frightening regularity.
Apparently the players who were supposed to be leaders on the team last year did a very poor job of doing that and setting a good example for the younger players, which probably only exacerbated things.
Devin Garder is a hero and a saint, and the only thing bad you can say about him is that at times he tried too hard to make something happen, and shouldered too much of the load.
To be frank, I'm not that optimistic about the offense at all, which I doubt is a particularly novel opinion. None of the running backs have proven anything. The offensive line lost their two best players, and the only person presently on the roster who has shown anything in the receving game is the supremely talented yet inconsistent Devin Funchess. Once again, we're going to be overly reliant on our QB to make every play and perform at a consistently spectacular level in order to win.
That bs. u rip everyone but the starting qb who time and time again, failed to convert.
Borges became the sole scapegoat for a series of issues for which responsibility should properly be spread around. For example, a lot of people who gripe about certain play calls cannot supply any reasonable alternatives in situations where the offensive line is incapable of achieving any push or protection beyond the level of a mid-table MAC team.
Now, it is quite reasonable to believe (and I do) that Al's constant tinkering harmed the OL's ability to grow and improve. You can also reasonably argue that certain philosophical choices (slow huddles, no bubble screens, etc) limited the offense's ability to perform.
I do believe that the season would have looked a lot different if the offensive line was even adequate, and some of the "bad calls" wouldn't have looked nearly so awful. (For example, depending upon the game, people criticized him for running when Michigan couldn't run, or passing when Devin couldn't stand upright or hit his own players, without remembering that Al was dealing with an offense that at times could do neither).
But I also believe Borges had flaws and stunted the offense's growth as the season wore on. He was and is smart and knows a lot more about football than we do, but his philosophy and his methods are incompatible with a team limited to 20 hours a week and he tends to decrease the margin of error on stuff he does run. Something had to change, and he was it.
Even if Nuss doesn't work miracles this year (and he might not), Borges was never going to get Michigan over the hump.
This year because the offensive coordinator seemingly forgets basic offensive principles and we some consistent common sense play calling then we made the right decision. I count at least 4 or 5 games the past three years we lost because Borges, if we could just stop doing that I'd be happy.
But every loss has to be blamed on someone, and the OC is the easy target, right or wrong.
So if we lose any games, chances are some people will claim is is because Nuss "seemingly forgets basic offensive principles".
"Gorgeous" Borges dug his own grave. The players have said multiple times that there were to many schemes to prepare for.
Yet opposing players in post-game interviews said that they could tell what play was coming simply from the set. What a horrible combination (if it's even possible)!
Averages from last year are completely misleading. So many huge games and awful ones will average out to ok numbers, but reality is quite different
The answer will always be: one more.
Truth be told, as ugly as our offense looked at times last season, our defense was at least as big a problem.
Whoa. AT LEAST AS BIG A PROBLEM? Wrong.
I get the point you are trying to make, but you should just make it rather than nuke the whole world.
Michigan Total Offense: 86th in FBS.
Michigan Total Defense: 41st in FBS.
Comparing the units to different teams over different eras is pretty silly. Comparing those units to others who played last season seems a better idea, no? Particularly as football has become a much higher scoring game.
Also, your analysis is deeply flawed. It only concerns PPG and the average margin of victory. I can easily say that because our defense couldn't stop teams as well as they did in 2011, our offense only needs to score 5 point more per game. That's not even a touchdown!
Rivals board vs. Statistics?
The total offense stat shows our defense was not "absolutely terrible" but in fact, right outside the top 1/3. The defense was inside the bottom 1/3. Much closer to "absolutely terrible".
I think you believe I loved 2013s defense. I didn't. But I'm trying to use data instead of your gut feeling, or the opinion of opponent fans on Rivals.
Right. If we don't let anyone score, we don't need to score a lot. That's how MSU did it, and it works.
It is entirely possible to let them score a lot and we score more. That's how OSU did it, and it works.
If our defense is better this year and our offense stays the same, we will probably win 9-10 games. If our defense is the same as last year and our offense improves, we probably win 9-10 games. Which scenario is more likely? I say the defense improves before the offense does. Why? Because the offense was a much greater problem last season.
Close to....not at least
Georgia - Auburn game from past year as one of the 25 best on ESPN.
What's striking is Auburn's resurgence on O. I attended the UGA-AU game in 2012 and it was a bloodbath. 1 year and Malzhan later, they completely transformed the O. Scheme, timing, execution. Talent hardly changed and they went from 2-8 to 12-2.
Coaching matters and our O laid multiple eggs last year. UM requires better than Borges whether it's Nuss or another solution.
Can you be too hard on a guy who A) would repeatedly run the same play even after the defense had shown him that it wasn't going to happen, B) find a play that worked and immediately burn it to the ground by overusing it, and C) not understand the particular skill sets of the people he has playing for him, thus not utilizing them properly?
Borges was out of his league. Bye Al and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
The answer to "were we too hard on Borges" is "Yes" regardless of what happens this season.
That line was very, very bad. It is hard for any OC to make an offense go with very poor blocking.
I am of the opinion that the line will improve to 2012 levels (still not great) because there will only be one starter with 0 career game reps as opposed to the 6 over 3 positions last year. Still, Nuss will struggle at times this year because the line will make his job difficult.
Borges was fired. He deserved to be. Nussmeier is an upgrade. But we lost our collective shit last year and blamed everything on Borges instead of sticking to his legitimate faults.
There will also come a time when we do the same about Nuss. That's the nature of being an OC. 115,000 in the stadium and millions watching on TV could have called a better play than that.
The answer to "were we too hard on Borges" is "Yes" regardless of what happens this season.
That line was very, very bad. It is hard for any OC to make an offense go with very poor blocking.
I keep seeing this strange dichtomy popping up - a college coach, to be any good, has to be a good "on field" coach, a good developed of players, and a good recruiter/judge of talent.
A coach who is good at scheming, but can't evelop players or recruit well is NOT a good college coach.
Borges bears some of the responsibility not only for how games were called, but also the "poor blocking" caused by lack of development and poor recruiting.
Sure. I never said he was a good coach. I'm on record as saying Al Borges is the definition of average. I still think we were too hard on him.
Our criticisms weren't about player development (Devin improved under him both from year to year and in-season). They weren't (nor should they be) about his ability to coach the line, as there is a line coach. They weren't about recruiting, as the staff were considered ace recruiters despite Al not going on the road much. The criticisms were about offensive philosophy and play calling. And having a coherent philosophy when the line proves unable to block a single scheme or play right is hard. Calling a game when the line has not shown the ability to run at all and pass protection is only marginally better is very hard.
The change had to be made, but I don't remember too many of us complaining after the IU game last year when we were 6-1 had just rolled up 750 yards and were on pace to break records.
Borges was a good coach, but for some reason he lost his mind for several games. I also think the MSU game robbed the offense of any confidence they had. Nussmeier has a nice pedigree and I'm anxious to see what he has in store, love his record with QBs.
But he didn't lose his mind. He's not a mad genius that sometimes invents the next great smartphone and sometimes spends two weeks in his lab trying to invent a batch of silly putty that's just the perfect shade of lavender.
He's a coach and he works from philosophical principles and methods that he has used with varying levels of success for decades. Sometimes it worked. Sometimes it didn't. And overall he didn't get it done when he needed to.
Borges has been a swear word and something of a joke in my family since Ohio '12. Not only were the play calls horrid, the blame was shifted to the players. Last year it seemed like the offense regressed until Ohio, and then everything that was accomplished was undone with the failure to call a different 2 point play after they called a timeout and adjusted. In modern football you can't adjust a week late. Borges established no offensive identity for the program.
Thank you for writing everything within my heart out on paper, or internet paper, or whatever. Fuck it, thank you.
If Nuss crashes and burns this year, and the O-line is a house of cards again, everyone will be blaming Funk. short of calling lousy plays this year, Nuss will be fine. . .
No, piss off. He was incompetent.
Read the subject in the comment. Put on second glove. .
100% behind you. Same boat when rr was fired. Very deserving
Ace said it best in a podcast last year: Al Borges is only a good OC when put in a position succeed.
That is, he walks into a great situation and looks like a good coach. When it came down to him coaching players he developed, he failed miserably.
amen to that...
Eh. He turned McNown into a first round pick. Lindley made the NFL. Gardner improved. Denard did not.
His ability to develop players he coaches (he's a QB coach, guys) is pretty mixed, with some success stories.
As offensive coordinator he is responsible for the heirarchy beneath him.
Poor offensive line development and poor running back development? The buck stops with Borges and Hoke.
depends on what you think "a lot" is. personally i would be tickled pink if the running game could average at least 5 yards per carry this year.
I'm still not certain if if was Funk's fault that the OL never seemed to be on the same page, but I have a gut feeling it was due in large part to Al's determination to run every play he had earmarked leading up to that week's game. Many of them involved complex blocking schemes and I'd have to say the complete whiffs, lack of communication, etc., was probably based more on Al not having perfected the play than it was on Funk for not teaching the blocking scheme to perfection with so little repitition.
It's a given in teaching, and that's what coaching is you don't start teaching Lesson 2 until you've mastered Number one. If Funk told him they were ready for a certain play, he was somewhat liable, but I can't imagine a coordinator running anything until he is satisfied with his own eyes that it will work. It may have been the proper move regardless because he was able to acquire the services of Nuss whose offensive production and efficiency can't be argued against. Granted, he worked with the best program in the nation over the past 5-6 seasons, but you don't get to that point unless all parts are working to perfection and there is not a more complex part of an offense than teaching the line to work in complete sync. It's common knowledge that the offensive line worked well his first year when they ran the zone scheme and failed miserably when a play was inserted that called for man blocking and having someone not used to pulling attempt to do so.
This is a talented group of OLmen. They will perform better this year with the additional experience in addition to falling back on a much easier to execute blocking scheme. However, it still requires communication along the line, something obviously missing last season. I think the start of the season will have us looking like we're playing under Bo as to play selection, but as the unit matures and experiences some success they should be an above average OL by Game 8 or so.
I guess we'll find out soon enough. Let's compare how Michigan fares on offensive this year with Borges's NEW team. Obviously he got snapped up by one of the other 120 programs right?
Oh-he's still unemployed?
I guess the other 120 programs reject the OP's premise.
You cant really make that claim unless you are certain that no offers went out to him. Or that he is interested in coaching this season. He's also been an OC for 28 years. Maybe he's had enough. I've certainly had enough of him. Ba-zing!
at the end of next season
Total points scored in regulation against MSU for the other Legends teams, 2011-2013
1. Nebraska, 24+28+28 = 80
2. Iowa, 21+13+14 = 48
3. Northwestern, 17+23+6 = 46
4. Minnesota, 24+10+3 = 37
5. Michigan, 14+12+6 = 32
Just completely inept against that team
I think Al is a good schemer, but I also don't think it's a coincidence that his teams tend to lose their abilities to run after the first couple years.
I just hope that we never have to actually ask this question. We have tons of talent on this offensive line with a qb who could be a first round pick if he can put it together and running backs who were top recruits out of high school. Oh, and we have perhaps the most dangerous receiver since Mario Manningham in Funchess. It's time for the players to make plays and not excuses and it's up to the coaches to make sure they're in positions to succeed. I for one am tired of the blame game. Time for Michigan to play well enough that we don't have to waste time with blaming anyone anymore.
I give you Vincent Smith, up the middle, for no gain YET AGAIN.
He ran that play over and over and over. It NEVER WORKED. Everyone watching Michigan football, the fans, the coaches, the players, the other team, EVERYONE knew that play never worked, except for Al Borges.
Were we too hard on him? Hell no. He was not a good offensive coordinator. He had ZERO ability to watch his team, say "hey, this just isn't working" and move away from it. It was like he was like watching Charlie Brown try to kick the football. He was like "THIS time it will work, just watch us!"
Sometimes his initial plan worked great, and then he was fine. But when things didn't just work, he had no capacity to adjust at all. And that is just unacceptable in a guy making the kind of $$$ that he was.
Someone had to take responsibility for last year's offensive offense. Al was the appropriate candidate, given that the offense was his responsibility. He knew it, Brady knew it, everyone knew it. I suspect Al left with a full understanding of the situation and how he was the one who had to pay the price. Whatever happens this year is Nuss's responsibility, not Al's, and whatever successes will be Nuss's and not Al's. So no, what's done is done and Al has no more do to with anything related to the Michigan offense.
Once again we find ourselves in the morass of disappointed football fans seeking to scapegoat and be righteous in their anger.
Brady was correct to fire Borges because he found a replacement that in his opinion was better for the program. Once he made that decision it was his job to fire Borges. This would have been true regardless of the teams record or offensive progress. If Dave Brandon finds a replacement who is, in his opinion, a better head coach for Michigan, it's his job to fire Brady and hire the new guy. Such decisions must appropriately weigh all factors from contract costs, to program disruption, to fan reaction, to recruiting impact, etc. etc. etc.
Do not doubt that had Nussmieier or an experienced OC of similar stature not been found Borges would still have his old job. Borges' record through 2012 and 2013 was only one of many factors that caused him to lose his job. Undoubtedy the most visible, but still only one.
Was the most vocal and visible part of the fan base too hard on Al? Without a doubt the answer is yes. But it is the nature of an angry fan echo chamber to pile on their hated target coming up with ever more personal insults and vicious attacks, and as Al said more than once dealing with that kind of behavor comes with the job.
Did Al deserve another year? Did Al deserve to be fired? Irrelevant. Coaching ain't about deserving. Anyone who coaches in the top reaches of sports, whether a D-1 college team or in the pros, knows that they have their job only as long as no one perceived as a "better" alternative turns up.
As was mentioned earlier, the defense had its issues last season as well. If the offense plays NO better in 2014 but the defense saves three more games and Michigan stumbles to a 10-3 record, this part of the fan base won't be happy but the population calling for Nussmeier's and Brady's jobs will be vocal but small. It's not that winning fixes everything. Rather, winning enough games makes the majority of the fan base unsure about who would be a "better" choice than the coach they think responsible for their dissatisfaction.
I like Al Borges. I think he gave everything he had to the Michigan football program. I suspect that I'll like Doug Nussmeier just as much for the same reason. I think that both men are competent and gifted coaches, with different strengths and weaknesses. I strongly, perhaps desperately, hope that Nussmeier's strengths are what is needed to deal with the teams offensive issues.
Brady made the decision he felt best for the program. I support his choice because it's his job to make those decisions and I know that he'll be held accountable. I really hope his judgement in this case proves out.
No, because it does not excuse the trash tornado or OSU '12. Iowa '11 too. Those games were on the OC.
Moving along, I apparently am in the minority who thinks the O-line will not be much better.
Only hope is that the interior is actually average this year, instead of poor. That itself would be a huge improvement and hopefully enough to push the team to a 10+ win season.
Frankly I'm equally concerned about the DL , last year they didn't have much pass rush from the front 4, and then there was Ohio plowing through the D-line at will.
Could be an great year... could be a repeat of last year...
Question...if the offense still sucks next year and I'm willing to bet if that is the offensive line still can't block anybody, do we fire Funk? A lot of people wanted him fired as well, myself included, but Borges getting fired seemed to calm people down.
Part of why I don't mind retaining Funk this year is because Nussmeier is a zone-blocking guy. Apparently Funk's specialty is teaching zone blocking to O-Linemen. That means my baseline is a young line that struggles early but improves over the course of the season. Anything less than that and I want Funk replaced.
The man was making north of $750k and his offense was not in the top 50. And, you can be the is still being paid.
When you get paid at that level, you have to produce. If he had showed somewhat of a consistent, cohesive offensive strategy and game planning he might have made it. He could have done more even with his personnel. He was consistently puzzling in game plan, lack of adjustments and predictive play calling.
Borges lost my good graces when he continued to call playaction bootleg's despite nothing good ever happening from said bootleg's. The man is long gone now, lets forget he ever coached here. k thx bye.
I don't think so. If the offense plays worse than last season we will be looking at .500 record and Hoke will most likely be gone! My guess is the offense will not be as flashy but we will be able to run on the weaker teams in the B1G! Still the more aggressive defenses will probably keep our offense under control! 8-4 looks like our record though I'm hoping for 10-2! Hoke really needs a 10-2 record.
I believe it was a good move, I have no doubt that our offence will improve. Especially after the struggle we had last year at times.