LSJ Column says Hoke should've followed RichRod's lead
This column sets up a thought experiment -- what if Hoke had followed RichRod's lead and tried to move to a pro-style system immediately? It suggests that Hoke should have moved to Denard to receiver, and that his current problem is that he has tried to run something he doesn't believe in.
http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/sports/columnists/graham-couch…
To me this makes no sense. Here are few reasons just off the top of my head:
1. Other than Denard, Hoke had Devin, Steve Wilson and Jack Kennedy on the roster in 2011 with Bellomy coming in. Since the author thinks that Devin also doesn't fit Hoke's philosophy he's basically saying Bellomy, Wilson or Kennedy should've started in 2011.
2. RIchRod didn't start Justin Feagin his 1st year -- he went with Threet/Sheridan neither of whom was a classic read option QB. .
3. RichRod was, to some extent, defined by his expertise with the read option. Hoke is a defensive coach, and still coaches the interior of the d-line. To me a better RichRod analogy would have been to argue that -- just as RichRod might have been better off giving Shafer more leeway with the defense and his staff -- Hoke might been more successful if he found an offensive coordinator who could run the spread and gave him free rein.
4. Hoke followed this advice when he switched to Shane this season against Minnesota and we all saw the results.
5. Finally, he ignores the fact that Devin at his best is much more of a passer than Denard, and was recruited nationally as a QB (whereas some schools wanted to move Denard out of HS).
October 25th, 2014 at 11:36 AM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
vs. anyone with a pulse (not named ND).
Rich Rod's offense sucked vs. MSU, Wisconsin and OSU.
Last year Hoke vs. OSU was better than Rich Rod ever did versus a quality team after Oct. 1st.
But damn, it sure was fun to watch early in the year!!
October 25th, 2014 at 4:46 PM ^
I know I'm guilty for even responding given that both sides of the argument are irrelevant, but Jesus, you seriously believe that OUR offense the last two years is superior to Rich Rod's? You cannot make that argument, either factually, or in any other way. Sorry. Our WORST Rich Rod offenses against good teams were WAY better than what we have now.
October 25th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^
Maybe Hoke should have looked around and realized that every good team, including a lot of NFL teams, are adopting spread principles rather than running an offense from the 1990s.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:36 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^
Right. And Nick Saban's stubbornness has made him king.
Yet another missed analysis of what is actually wrong with our program.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:53 PM ^
...Nick Saban's defenses, exceptional recruiting, and over recruiting are the keys to his success.
His offenses, relative to his recruiting and ridiculous defenses are just ok.
October 25th, 2014 at 1:11 PM ^
I would say his offenses are really good, but because of his lights-out defenses, the O can take the second half off a lot of weeks.
October 25th, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 1:34 PM ^
Being stubborn when you are continually wrong or behind trend can be the key reason for your demise. I think Hoke fits this description pretty well.
October 25th, 2014 at 2:33 PM ^
Hilarious! Employing a "pro-style" offense his first year would only have served to erase that first 11-2 season. In which case Hoke would have been fired even sooner.
The most comical part of the Hoke tragedy is that his insistence upon, and his recruiting to, a pro-style offense has yielded far, far worse results than trying to run a half-assed spread with the last guy's personnel.
"Pro-style" is the hubris of Hoke, write large.
October 25th, 2014 at 11:43 AM ^
Jeff Tedford. You heard it here first, seven years ago.
October 25th, 2014 at 3:31 PM ^
he's available!
October 25th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^
The fanbase would immediately have hated him for moving Denard, his first season surely wouldn't have ended 11-2, no Sugar Bowl, no goodwill from fans... in short, no.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:10 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 1:05 PM ^
Plus -- coaches are judged on wins and losses. Hoke won when he let Denard do what he does best. I suspect that 2012 would have ended differently if Denard hadn't been injured.
October 25th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^
instead of bringing Funk with him.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
Assistant coaches staying after HC was fired.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^
Yeah, I mean it's not like Michigan has a coach on staff right now that has been here since the Stone Age or anything right?
October 25th, 2014 at 3:18 PM ^
Fred Jackson is the exception to the rule, not the norm.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 12:42 PM ^
I don't think Borges was the best OC, but to say he forced an abrupt transition in 2011 doesn't seem fair. Our O was rolling for most of that year, prior to the Sugar Bowl.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:48 PM ^
Borges had a harder time working with a young, unskilled, and inexperienced offensive line. There was a gap left by the tail end of the Rodriguez era in OL talent and development that Hoke has basically been a victim of for two years. Then too it begs the question of the OL coaching and S&C OL development, which we're all well aware of.
October 25th, 2014 at 3:55 PM ^
McGee is a recruiting tool, he doesn't actually run the O
October 25th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^
Ths issue is that Hoke is just not that good of a coach, no matter what the style.
Rich Rod made a mistake by going pure spread in his first year without the players to run it. He was able to run a more conventional offense pretty well with Minor, and live to fight another day, but he didn't do it. He underestimated how much the welll would be poisoned by breaking the bowl streak.
That's a mistake Hoke did not make. He (and Borges) were smart enough to use Denard's strengths and work in manball over time. It wasn't perfect (Iowa game) but he made it through his first year in a position of strength.
It's what he's done since then that's the problem. He's had plenty of time, he just can't get it done. It would not have mattered if he started it a year earlier.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:08 PM ^
of his entire coaching career was to hire an OC that would instantly remove 20 points per game from his own side of the scoreboard. Michigan has never. I repeat never, experienced such a dramatic offensive production drop off year over year. Not even the transition year of 2008 is near comperable. That was only a six point year over year drop.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:16 PM ^
But the collapse really was last year from MSU onward, when Gardner was "broken". In the first seven games we averaged 42.4 ppg, and the last six we averaged just 20.3 ppg, and even that is inflated by scoring 18 in the three overtimes against Northwestern. In regulation we averaged 17.7 ppg those last six games.
This year we are essentially performing at the same rate as last year's second half.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^
This year won't realize the same second half collapse? And please, could you explain the 41 points against OSU? I believe Gardner was a bit broken during that game as well. While you're at it, could you explain how Gardner was able to look so good against Appy St? That would be back to back stellar performances by Gardner after he was "broken".
October 25th, 2014 at 12:32 PM ^
We really can't collapse offensively from where we are now - there is little room to drop further.
OSU last year is obviously the outlier from that 6-game stretch; without it our regulation average plummets to 12.6 ppg. Even with the OSU game factored in, 17.7 ppg is catastrophic.
The main explanation for the OSU performance is that it's the one game Hoke's staff points to all season and devises a special gameplan for. We haven't played them yet this season, so we'll see what happens. (He may be all but fired by that game, though, so we don't know how fired up the team will be.)
October 25th, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^
they don't have the player to run it. Threet and Sherdian does not inspire confidence at QB. They were doomed to suck no matter what IMO. Rich Rod adapted to his players in his first year by throwing the ball more than he ever did at WVU with Pat White at QB
October 25th, 2014 at 2:04 PM ^
Look at this depth chart that scout projected for 2008 and tell me anyone would have been able to run a "run a more conventional offense pretty well":
http://cfn.scout.com/2/751995.html
Neither coaches were left with great offensive personnel their first year. The difference between the two is that Hoke had a superlative offensive playmaker at QB, while the guy you say RR should have based his offense out of - Minor - spent 2 years on NFL practice squads before washing out of professional football altogether. Hoke also managed to get insanely lucky in drawing the worst OSU team in a long time and winning flukey games against ND and VaTech.
RichRod has shown he can build offense out of bruising backs and pass first quarterbacks at other stops, he just didn't have much talent at all to work with at Michigan.
October 25th, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^
Denard was the Big Ten offensive player of the year in 2010 playing the offense's most important position. This guy's brilliant insight is that Hoke should have made Denard play a different position?
October 25th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 11:59 AM ^
How about "Shouldn't have hired Hoke?"
October 25th, 2014 at 12:09 PM ^
What was it about his 47-50 coaching record that you didn't like?
October 25th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^
Regardless of whether an offense is spread or pro-style, it needs to block. I don't think it really matters that much.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:03 PM ^
Perhaps Hoke will do things differently at his next coaching stop. Who knows and who really cares at this point?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
October 25th, 2014 at 12:35 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 3:28 PM ^
Michigan Man =/= prior experience with the University.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^
so it's no wonder Rodriguez didn't start him
October 25th, 2014 at 12:19 PM ^
Really.......WTF (who) gives a shit about what some asshole in Lansing thinks? When did he become the genius football analyst?
Go Blue!
October 25th, 2014 at 12:23 PM ^
October 25th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^
Move Denard to receiver and have Bellomy at QB? Shades of '08 if you ask me.
Except worse. Much worse. Even Hoke knows better! Although I wonder what Coach Rodriguez would've done with that team had he been given the year he needed!
October 25th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
This is quite possibly the dumbest assertion I've ever heard in my entire life. The universe is worse off for having it's time and braincells that it has given to the author expended on such a purely idiot idea.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
Thought experiments are great over beers and good food but don't really do much in hindsight. Hoke wasn't in a great position just as RR wasn't. Each had to deal with out a ready to go QB to fit what each coach wanted to do. It's that trying to fit a square peg into a round hole situation that we are all too familiar with at this point. The bottom line is this team doesn't have an identity and hasn't had one for many years. But if you want to talk about theories, the theory being presented at Michigan in full glory is Murphy's Law.
October 25th, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^
Why would one expect the LSJ to write anything that is the least bit intelligent or accurate about Michigan?
October 25th, 2014 at 12:59 PM ^
How's his man ball thing working out?
October 25th, 2014 at 1:11 PM ^
Do people still read the paper anymore? It's all old news, fluff and filler. This piece is straight garbage.