December 8th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 10:50 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^
I know making fun of Brady Hoke is the new cool thing to go around here, but he would be a great hire for them and will have success. He recruits the west coast well and would have no problem finding a great staff. If I were Oregon State, I'd jump all over that.
December 8th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
would he walk to Corvallis?
December 8th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^
I don't know, man. After watching his teams here, it's just hard to see how he's a good coach. With RR, you could at least see the mistakes that he made when he came to Michigan and how he has corrected those at Arizona, like getting Casteel so that everyone is on the same page with the defense. But Hoke's teams just looked like they had terrible coaching. Not to mention his previous stops weren't terribly impressive. Who knows. I assumed he's learned a few things, but I just don't see him doing an impressive job at Oregon State. Doesn't necessarily mean he'll get fired from there though since their expectations are quite low.
December 8th, 2014 at 1:45 PM ^
If he can find a QB who isn't in love with turnovers he'll do just fine.
December 8th, 2014 at 2:25 PM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 7:56 PM ^
Not sure why you're getting negged for this. DG's career trajectory is sad and alarming and it's crazy to think he would have been the same QB if he had been at Oregon or any other good program.
It's also incredibly unfair and flat-out wrong to pin all of the team's troubles on Gardner.
December 8th, 2014 at 9:33 PM ^
Look - I like Gardner. But he would have never seen the field at Oregon. Most of their QBs have been quite good right out of the gate. That's on them, not the coaches. Gardner looked awful right out of the gate, and although he improved in many areas, he didn't improve enough in most.
And it's not just on the coaches. He went to elite QB coaches every offseason too, and he still could never get over the hump. At some point it's on the player.
December 9th, 2014 at 3:03 AM ^
That's easy to say in hindsight. Obviously we can't know for sure, but I look at this way...Which is more likely? That a 5-star dual-threat QB was just thoroughly mediocre and could not be helped and wouldn't have done any better at any other solid program, or that an offense which showed signs of poor coaching all around and played poorly also did the same with the QB? Our TEs couldn't block, our WRs couldn't get separation, our O-line was meh, our RBs couldn't find holes, and our coaches wouldn't use DG's legs as a threat, and you're really going to put it all on Gardner?
December 9th, 2014 at 6:57 AM ^
You know, it's possible that Gardner wouldn't have played QB at Oregon, partly because he might have been blocked by probably Heisman winner Marcus Mariota from 2012-2014. But Oregon did recruit him, and I think there's at least a decent chance that he would have been good there. They have a better running game and offensive line to take pressure off of the quarterback.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:11 PM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^
Brady is a class act, just too bad it didn't work out for him in Ann Arbor.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:26 PM ^
guy things out of the way, though, really Oregon St? I have no doubt the man could and should coach again, but I thought it would be more of the mid-major variety. What, specifically, is Oregon St. interested in from a football perspective here?
December 8th, 2014 at 1:30 PM ^
Mike Riley was a .500 coach at OSU.
Mike Riley is a significantly better coach than Brady Hoke.
December 8th, 2014 at 1:44 PM ^
That's a very subjective opinion that I happen to disagree with.
December 8th, 2014 at 4:29 PM ^
Oregon State has had 14 coaches in their history. Only 2 have a better career record than Mike Riley
#1 Dennis Erickson (who rode the coattails of Riley's 1st stint at OSU)
#2 Tommy Prothro (1955-1964, .618)
Mike Riley got an NFl head coaching job.
Mike Riley career (all at Oregon State):
.538 vs. school historic record of .463 (+7.5%)
.538 vs. school record of .219 in the 10 years before he became coach (+31.9%)
6-2 Bowl Record
Brady Hoke - At Ball State:
.434 vs. school historic record of .524 (-9%)
.434 vs. school record of .442 in the 10 years before he became coach (-0.8%)
0-1 Bowl Record
Brady Hoke - At SDSU:
.520 vs. school historic record of .536 (-1.6%)
.520 vs. school record of .333 in the 10 years before he became coach (+18.7%)
0-2 Bowl Record
Brady Hoke - At Michigan:
.608 vs. school historic record of.729 (-12.1%)
.608 vs school record of.632 in the 10 years before he became coach (-2.4%)
1-2 Bowl Record
December 8th, 2014 at 5:30 PM ^
The "school historic" records at BSU and SDSU were largely compiled in lower divisions. How are SDSU's three small-college national titles relevant to evaluating a coach's record in FBS? Why, if you're determining a baseline, would you care what they did when they were competing in the Southern California Junior College Conference?
In the 30 seasons prior to Hoke taking over, SDSU had a record of 154-191-6. To me that's a lot more relevant than Don Coryell winning 40 years ago in D2 with all-Juco teams, or C.E. Peterson's conference championships as a Juco team.
December 8th, 2014 at 5:51 PM ^
The "school historic" records at BSU and SDSU were largely compiled in lower divisions.
No - Hoke would look MUCH, MUCH, MUCH worse if I was including the data from SDSU in D2.
The entirety of the football record I cited for SDSU was in D1. I ignored all games prior to 1969 when they moved up to D1 in the Pacific Coast Athletic Association (the proto Big West Conference). I included none of the record from the 1921-1968 when SDSU was a D2 team.
In the 30 seasons prior to Hoke taking over, SDSU had a 43% winning percentage. Hoke went 13-12 (52%) which is slightly better.
The entirety of the football record I cited for Ball St. was in D1. I ignored all games prior to 1975 when they moved up to D1 and joined the MAC. No games from their days in Indiana or Heartland Conference.
We can't even go back 30 seasons for Ball St. - but in the 29 seasons in D1 prior to Hoke taking over, Ball St. had a 52.2% winning percentage. Hoke went 34-39 (46.6%) which is noticeably worse.
December 8th, 2014 at 6:30 PM ^
What they did in 1975 is hardly relevant. In fact, it isn't relevant. In the 5 years (a few cycle) before Hoke arrived at Ball St they were 17-39 (30.4 win %). Hoke's first four years were better than the previous 5, and then he went 7-6 and then 12-2 (with a peak at #12 in the AP). The 5 years after he left the team was 31-31 (50%). So Hoke immediately improved upon the previous 5 years, the improved the program to the point it easily had its best year since the 1970s, and then left for SDSU.
I would say SDSU is in the same situation, where prestige of the program isn't relevant. Teams at that level fluctuate outside of a very few (Boise St for instance). SDSU hadn't had an above .500 year since 1998. The five years prior to Hoke was 18-48 (30.5 win %). Hoke won 52% of his games, with an 8-4 (the four teams he lost to had a combined 9 losses). The 4 years after he left SDSU is winning 63% of its games, without a year better than Hoke's best year. In fact, SDSU hasn't had a better season than Hoke's last at SDSU since 1996.
So Hoke left both programs much better than he inherited them. He improved those programs in his time while coaching, and had the best seasons those programs had while he was there. So yeah, he's had some success elsewhere and turned around some programs, despite your utter disdain for the guy. Hoke wasn't successful at Michigan. He wasn't an obviously great candidate with an obviously great track record. But quite trying to make him look like a completely mediocre to bad coach; he was successful and turned around the programs he was at.
December 9th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^
The goal posts around here sure jump a lot...
So why 5 years? Why not 10 years? Or the entirety of the previous coaching regime? Or the BCS era?
Even given 5 years - we're comparing Hoke vs. Mike Riley... and you can pick anyone of the above terms you'd like, and in every one Riley improved Oregon St. more than Hoke improved his team.
5 year horizon -
Ball St.
Hoke: 34-39 (46.6%) vs. 17-39 (30.4%) = +16.6%
SDSU:
Hoke: 13-12 (52%) vs. 18-41 (30.5%) = +21.5%
Michigan:
Hoke: 31-20 (60.8%) vs 35-28 (55.5%) = +5.3%
Oregon State:
Riley: 93-80 (53.8%) vs. 12-42-1 (21.8%) = +32%
Winner - Riley.
10 year horizon:
Ball St.
Hoke: 34-39 (46.6%) vs. 50-61-2 (44.2%) = +2.4%
SDSU:
Hoke: 13-12 (52%) vs. 39-78 (33.3%) = +18.7%
Michigan:
Hoke: 31-20 (60.8%) vs 79-46 (63.2%) = -2.4%
Oregon State:
Riley: 93-80 (53.8%) vs. 24-84-3 (21.6%) = +32.2%
Winner - Riley.
VS Previous coach:
Ball St.
Hoke: 34-39 (46.6%) vs. 37-53 (41.1%) = +5.5%
SDSU:
Hoke: 13-12 (52%) vs. 9-27 (25%) = +27%
Michigan:
Hoke: 31-20 (60.8%) vs 15-22 (40.5%) = 20.3%%
Oregon State:
Riley: 93-80 (53.8%) vs. 13-52-1 (19.7%) = +34.1%
Winner - Riley.
Riley has better record following up worse coaches than Hoke... at a school with worse short term history, worse medium term history, and worse long term history than the places Hoke coached.
December 9th, 2014 at 12:56 PM ^
SDSU hadn't had an above .500 year since 1998.
...and when Riley went 5-6 in 1998, that was the best record at Oregon State since 1971.
and had the best seasons those programs had while he was there.
Not so much...
Ball St.:
1971: 10-1 (.901)
2008: 12-2 (.857) - Hoke
SDSU:
1969: 11-0 (1.000)
1972: 10-1 (.909)
1976: 10-1 (.909)
1977: 10-1 (.909)
1973: 9-1-1 (.864)
1970: 9-2 (.818)
1974: 8-2-1 (.773)
1996: 8-3 (.727)
1979: 8-3 (.727)
1975: 8-3 (.727)
2010: 9-4 (.692) - Hoke
2012: 9-4 (.692)
But quite trying to make him look like a completely mediocre to bad coach;
He IS a mediocre head coach.
Mediocre: Of ordinary or undistinguished quality.
Synonyms -
common, medium, middling, ordinary, passable, second-class, second-rate, so-so
he was successful and turned around the programs he was at.
He kept Ball St. at their historic norm and won at about the same rate as his predecessor... whether you consider being a .500 MAC coach at a historically .500 MAC program successful or not is subjective. I don't.
He turned around (or restored) SDSU following the incredibly horrid Chuck Long - basically returning the school to its historic norms. I would consider it successful because of the state of the program when he arrived and it's record after he left.
He was not successfull and did not turn around Michigan at all. He was not successfull.
So I see: 1 successful turn around getting a school back to it's historical norm, 1 maintenance project where he maintained mediocrity, and one abject failure.
December 8th, 2014 at 1:32 PM ^
New cool thing huh? I guess you must be repressing the past 2+ years...
December 8th, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^
If he "would have no problem finding a great staff" why were Funk and Ferrigno with him at UM?
December 8th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
I was really hoping they would go after Herman.
December 8th, 2014 at 10:45 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
No red in the jersey and he did work there back in the day. Michigan to OSU, it could happen.
December 8th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
Sources? I googled it and all I see are days-old articles just mentioning Hoke as a possibility. Maybe twitter isn't searched easily, or at all, with google?
December 8th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^
I mean c'mon, what more do you want?!
December 8th, 2014 at 10:49 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 12:26 PM ^
"Eleven Warriors - Your source for all things even tangentially related to Michigan, and an occasional discussion of OSU sports."
December 8th, 2014 at 11:38 AM ^
247sports writer on twitter. I'd embed but I'm on mobile right now.
This isnt really directed at youspecifically, but many. A lot of people are in such a rush to be the FIRST to post news on the MGoBoard that they do it from their phone and/or don't bother posting links, providing blockquotes, commentary/summation of thenews, etc. Is it really that important to be first? Can't people let someone else break the news and actually supply a decent OP?
December 8th, 2014 at 11:42 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
hoke's a great guy, just not a great HC on a stage as big as michigan's. wish him well, excepting if/when we play a team of his.
December 8th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^
That would be kind of funny...kinf of.
December 8th, 2014 at 11:39 AM ^
Not knocking Hoke but he's in the same state with Nike U. Unless he successful with Idaho and Montana's best, OSU will just return to being a 7-8 win team playing the Las Vegas Bowl.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:23 PM ^
Neither school relies on Oregon recruits--I'm looking at OSU's graduating class from their best recent team (the 2000 squad that memorably demolished ND) and more than half of them were from California. There's enough California talent to go around.
The important thing in a situation like OSU's in now is to distinguish yourself from your competitor, and I don't think Hoke would have any trouble doing that. He'd run a very different offense and defense than Oregon's--he'd be targeting different recruits and he'd be attractive to a different set of players. My guess is that he'd end up recruiting against Stanford more than Oregon.
December 8th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 11:10 AM ^
This would help me with my Chicken Littles bet of 2015 where I predict a PR and KR for a TD by Peppers and am actually RIGHT!
December 8th, 2014 at 11:14 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 11:44 AM ^
But can we bump that up to 3rd quarter? For the sake of whoever is our next coach, I'm hoping for a decisive victory over a team with 4 FBS wins in 2014. I want there to be no doubt that the right coaching move was made.
December 8th, 2014 at 11:44 AM ^
This is Michigan Football, so Brady will come to Ann Arbor with an Air Raid attack, crush us on special teams, and flip the bird on the way out of the stadium
December 8th, 2014 at 12:30 PM ^
I laughed while dying inside. The threat of Hoke going to Corvallis and then winning a road game in Ann Arbor is pretty petrifying. Doesn;t seem likely, but as you said "This Is Michigan...Where Terrible Things Happen to Us Constantly".
December 8th, 2014 at 1:37 PM ^
You left out the part about the hurry-up offense, which will be executed flawlessly. Also, he will call a crucial timeout right before halftime to give OSU one more score.
December 8th, 2014 at 1:47 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 8th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^
December 8th, 2014 at 10:55 AM ^