LOL....there were butts in seats and that = Money. Dave is only concerned with money.
this week in unintentionally grim-sounding recruiting headlines
LOL....there were butts in seats and that = Money. Dave is only concerned with money.
Fans always overestimate the attractiveness of their school. The accomplished coaches are usually happy where they are and won't leave, unless it's the NFL.
Look at Florida. They were on top of the world not long ago. Still, the best they could do was hire Mack Brown's DC.
He turned around two programs. He's not a bad coach because of this one game/season. But he needs to make changes.
I would definitely prefer a guy who had success as a HC, even at a smaller school, over an assistant with no experience. Being a HC is very different, and it's hard to tell how a guy will make that transition. Muschamp may have been a good DC but he doesn't seem too hot as a HC.
Please explain the definition of "turn around"? He had 1 season at 12-1. His next best season was 9-4. The only other winning season was 7-6. If you call that a turn around, I have some beachfront property to sell.
Not sure what your confusion is. BSU went 2-9 in his second year - they were horrible. After that they got better each year. They went 5-7 (5-3 in conference) in 2006, 7-6 in 2007 and 12-1 in 2008. How is that not a turnaround?
At SDSU, he inherited a 2-10 team, went 4-8 in year one and 9-4 in year two. More than quadrupling the win total in two years is a pretty good turnaround.
I'm as upset about the game as anyone else, but let's keep a level head. Hoke was not a bad hire, and he's not incapable of succeeding here. He may need to follow the Beilein playbook of re-evaluating his assistants and letting a few go, though.
He's the HC and has put out a pathetic team this year. He is responsible for all game plans and all calls. So I don't think you can say he wasn't a bad hire at this time. I don't care who is calling plays this is Hoke's team and a representation of his coaching
Logical points have no place on this board anymore.
2000 5-6 (Coached by Bill Lynch)
2001 6-6 (Coached by Bill Lynch)
2002 6-6 (Coached by Bill Lynch)
2003 4-8 (Coached by Brady Hoke)
2004 2-9 (Coached by Brady Hoke)
2005 4-7 (Coached by Brady Hoke)
2006 5-7 (Coached by Brady Hoke)
2007 7-6 (Coached by Brady Hoke)
He inherited a .500 team from Bill Lynch. For the next four years, Hoke could not get them to .500. In his fifth year, he went 7-6. He had one fluke season in his sixth year.
If, after the 7 win 2010 Michigan season under RR, Hoke had gone 4-8, 2-10, 4-8, 5-7, and 8-5 in five seasons at Michigan, would you consider that a "turnaround"? I do not think that the term "turnaround" can apply to what happened at Ball State under Hoke.
And Harbaugh said no
Harbaugh wasn't really out there - he didn't want another college gig.
But how the fuck do you know when DB offers HALF (source:mgoboard, hope this rumor is not true) what SF offers?
A least put up a fucking fight you cheap fuck!
If we had to pay NFL money to have a chance, we didn't have a chance.
is making over 4 mill this year according to the USA today.. do you really think DB wouldn't have given Harbaugh 5?
Hoke's initial salary was just over $2M. Harbaugh is making $7M a season. And there is no particular reason to believe Harbaugh would have come here even if we paid $7M a year - his wife reportedly didn't want to leave California.
Harbaugh became a non-option the moment the 49ers job opened up.
In my mind he became a non-option when he threw Bo under the bus.
I think Brandon still offered him the job and Harbaugh turned him down.
No facts to back that up, just a feeling from the way things went down at the time and comments made from people around the stiuation. I think Harbaugh was at least in the loop on the decision and told Brandon how much money it was going to take and Brandon balked (rightfully so--he couldn't possibly pay that much).
I think you are factually correct. I'm saying I would have been really pissed off if he was hired after what he did.
Hahahhahahahha!!!!! Mullen, the guy at Stanford, the guy at a&m Dana holgerson. LITERALLY ANYBODY.
Calm down. Hoke turned around two programs before he got here. There were a hell of a lot of worse options. There were people advocating Mike DeBord and Ron English, or assistants with zero experience.
BTW, "The guy at Stanford," David Shaw, went there. Good luck prying him from his alma mater. And Holgerson has a career record of 21-14, four games worse than Hoke.
James Franklin is becoming a name to watch in the coaching world. I didn't think anyone could win at Vandy.
He's recruiting well too
Its a results based world. Was Jim Tressell the most atractive candidate at OSU to take over at the time before he took over? I have a difficult time believing that.
The point was there is no "right hire" before there are results. You pick a guy and then he either gets the job done or he doesn't.
Hoke won 12 games his last year at BSU with a team he entirely built. He won 9 games his last year at SDSU (their first bowl in forever). He's not a bad coach.
Let's be fair: there was no reason for him to make changes before this year. It's not like we could know in advance that we were going to have back-to-back negative rush yard games in November 2013.
Hoke should make changes after this season. I think he will. I'm not sure why people assume otherwise. My understanding is that he let a lot of his original BSU assistants go after he struggled out of the gate.
AFTER Brandon fired RR?
RichRod and his shitty defense and recruiting weren't going to be the answer. Not to mention that the team pretty clearly quit on him in the Gator Bowl.
This comment is typical of the vacuous, empty-minded reasoning frequently found in complaints about Brandon.
The reasoning goes like this: Brandon is making decisions that make some money, and he has made some decisions that we don't like. He's a businessman--so he's probably just like those evil, soulless CEOs I see in movies. He hates regular fans like me and only cares about the almighty dollar. So naturally he won't do anything to improve the football program, which is what I care most about.
This reasoning is silly. Here's why:
1. DB is indeed concerned about money. That's a big part of his job in running the athletic department. A big reason for this, though, is because revenues fund the programs and proper use of them (say, a nice renovation of Crisler Center) leads to success on the playing field. He's also willing (to a fault, I don't like a lot of the decisions either) to think outside the box to raise revenues and keep the athletic department in the black.
2. A financially successful athletic department is an athletic department that is prepared for an uncertain future in college athletics, where stipends or even salaries for players may become a new reality.
3. The football team is the engine that drives the money machine. If it starts seriously flailing, people stop buying tickets, corporations stop investing in suites, donations go down, and advertising takes a hit.
4. The landscape of football is changing rapidly. Pictures of pathetic crowds in usually robust places like Florida were going viral on twitter this morning. There is a lot of talk on this board and in other places that attendance could be a serious issue with next year's lousy home schedule, even if the team is good.
5. For this reason, anticipating serious competitive trouble is a priority. I believe that this was the driving reason in DB's firing of RR; not just that the program was losing it, but that with the renovation of the stadium almost complete, Michigan needed to turn things around in a hurry.
6. Brandon heard the boos. He sees what's going on. He knows that money produces success on the field, and success on the field produces money. He knows that people have serious doubts about the football team next year. And he must surely know that season ticket sales (and their accompanying donations) could take a serious hit next year.
Conclusion: Brandon will not let the program disintegrate just because today's game is sold out. He is, surely, looking closely at the quality of the product. And, for financial reasons as much as anything, he will be very interested in the quality of Hoke's staff.
Expect changes, unless there's a major turnaround in the next two weeks.
My thoughts exactly. I'm just too lazy to type this on my phone. Well stated.
"Expect changes, unless there's a major turnaround in the next two weeks."
Pretty much this. I've had several conversations with people in the last couple weeks about this staff's openness to changes, but I think we do sometimes forget that who ultimately reads / signs evaluations in the department. I still believe that, if changes occurs, they might be a little more specific and strategic than Borges-level change. I think that's probably more likely with the dpeartment as it is.
General observation RE: this thread - it isn't really all that good overall. We'll see about this one.
In a perfect world you are correct. Unfortunately, I've seen enough people fail upwards or generally be in positions of power they shouldn't be in that I can't automatically assume what you say is what is going on. There is a lot of cronyism/blind faith in this world. Doubly so in athletics.
Brandon may not make moves quickly,There are some things which may make him cautious: 1. buyout clauses 2. if the replacements for the fired coaches are also bad it makes Brandon look even more incompetant. Right now the blame is on Hoke, the more Brandon hires or intervenes, the more the blame can shift to him. Brandon wants to fix this marriage- not get a divorce. I expect the main actors will still be in place next year- Brandon can deflect criticism that he is giving Hoke a fair chance (Hoke only has 2 recruit classes on the field).
It's difficult to claim that he's just giving Hoke a fair chance when he fired RR after 3 seasons. RR improved his record every year. The team that went 11-2 was his team. Hoke, in contrast, seems to be regressing each year.
Sort of. Hoke has already achieved a whole lot more than RR ever did--we will probably lose to both MSU and OSU this season, but he has beaten them and that is important. And he has taken Michigan to a BCS bowl game and won it. And, unlike RichRod, he is a lights-out recruiter who even if he loses some prizes at the end of this recruiting push will still draw a solid class.
In fact, certain parts of the team have shown growth. The defense is improving, more help is on the way, and the offense has turned some so-so recruits into extremely capable receivers, a position group I was worried about.
The problem is the offensive line, and the offensive philosophy that is around it. Fix the line, reboot the philosophy, and Michigan's talented skill players will start really humming, won't they? We know they can, we've seen it happen. So why not give Hoke a chance to do that? Contrast this with GERG's defense that wasn't ever competent and, with an exception or two, appeared to have few competent players and few players coming that would improve it.
Hoke deserves a chance to right the ship with the right OC.
What Hoke has acomplished, in my view, is largely a result of what RR did in terms of turning around the team after inheriting a smoking crater. If RR had been allowed to coach in 2011, he would have done the things you cite Hoke for. (I think he would have beaten MSU that year since he didn't feel the need to prove he could beat them by passing in a wind storm).
In any case, it would be suicidal to fire Hoke now. After the way UM treated Rodriguez (waiting to fire him until it was too late for him to land another job and refusing to give him a bowl ring), I think it will be extremely difficult to find a good replacement. I think we were all surprised at how difficult it was to fill the position the last two times. Would you have guessed that someone like Schianno would turn us down?
We're stuck with Hoke. If Brandon fired him now it would be time to sing "We are Notre Dame."
I pretty much agree, but the souless CEO's are hardly a movie stereotype. They're pretty much real deal.
I believe that this was the driving reason in DB's firing of RR; not just that the program was losing it, but that with the renovation of the stadium almost complete, Michigan needed to turn things around in a hurry.
This is interesting. I agree with most of what you're saying but if DB was interested in turning things around in a hurry the hiring of Hoke with an entirely new system is questionable. That was all about perception - he just completely through RR under the bus and said "look, here is a totally different guy, a guy like us, now we're back to being Michigan".
Things looked great after year one at 11-2 and a bowl win. Now if you're playing devil's advocate you suggest that maybe that was with RR's guys? I don't necessarily buy that but you sure have a major PR problem as of today and this is going to be a very tense week.
The PR is bad, no question. It makes things worse than they actually are--the fact is, get the right coaching and the existing recruits coming in and the OL will improve significantly over the next few years.
I think Brandon justifiably felt that the football team was not going to improve significantly under RR. Maybe he could get a new DC and see that side improve a bit, but fan confidence was already shaken and if RR had produced anything other than the type of season Hoke did produce (unlikely with that defense) he would either have to fire him anyway or commit the program to mediocrity until RR stunk enough to fire.
I don't think things are the same kind of train wreck now. Fans are pretty upset, but that's because we suppress bad memories and live in the now, and the now is kind of depressing. Get the right OC and the right OL coach in, though, and September will dawn with real promise of improvement in key areas of weakness and the possibility of actually fielding a shut-down defense on the other side of the ball. And our current angst will fade.
Does he get credit for MBB going to the National Championship?
Shut up OP.
I didn't know Brandon hired Belien. hmph, learn something new every day I guess
In fairness, Brandon did publicly endorse Beilein in 2010, at a time when many fans were unhappy with him after the 15-17 season.
I wonder how things would be going with the football team right now if he had shown RR the same consideration and support. I think the OL would look better if Jake Fisher were here and Jack Miller had been coached up by Frey and built up by Barwis.
He doesn't get credit for their successes is the point.
He was not hired by Brandon! Research before insulting the OP.
Comprehend what was said before fucking speaking and looking like an idiot.
I saw A LOT of people flowing out of the stadium at halftime. Those butts won't be in seats much longer if this doesn't get rectified. 2014 schedule is crap and AD is asking for PSD for the majority of the seats.
Speaking of PSD - I appreciated getting the email from the AD on Tuesday asking for my 2014 PSD payment. The sting had not yet worn off from the MSU game and the AD is already asking for next years money. All hail the all-mighty dollar!
Have a little tact with your begging DB.