Snowflakes: Bowl Game Edition - Coaching

I was initially really happy with the Mattison hire, but I really just can't take watching losing football that implements a bend but don't break philosophy.  I consider it lazy, losing football.  That style is good for the 8-4 and 9-3 seasons, but is not championship caliber football.  Don't tell me you need 4 and 5 star dbs to be aggressive with blitzes, because somehow MSU has been able to have an aggressive defense with lesser stars.

A vast majority of the National Championship Teams have steller defenses that blitz and are aggressive in coverage.  Look at the attacking style of Alabama, Auburn (when they crushed Oregon), OSU (vs. Miami), etc.  You don't see teams that play off the ball winning championships.  Even MSU figured it out with lesser talent and developed them into the style they wanted and won against a far more talented OSU team.

Maybe Mattison is a dinosaur?  Bend but don't break burns clock and keeps the score low, but doesn't win championships.  Aggressive defenses cause turnovers and make their breaks.  They don't hope the other team makes a mistake.  They force the issue.

The fact that we held KSU to 31 is all smoke and mirrors.  They punted once the entire game.  What was the third down conversion rate, it must have been incredible.  The Michigan Defense failed in every big situation throughout the year:

Indiana - The defense never put up any real resistence the entire game.  If it wasn't for a record setting output by the offense that game is a loss.

PSU - 10 point lead in the 4th Qtr with epic collapse at the end of regulation.

MSU - Tight game in the first half.  Then they give up a TD drive with less than 2 minutes left before the half with MSU getting the ball to start the 2nd half.  At the start of the 2nd half when you needed a stop to keep it close, MSU rolled down the field for a FG.  A 10 point lead before UM got the ball back on offense pretty much sealed the deal.

Iowa - 21-7 halftime lead only to give it all back and blow the game in the second half.

Nebraska - The Michigan offense was bad but managed to go ahead late in the game. Michigan defense collapsed and let Nebraska go right down the field.

OSU - Defense gives up tying score before the half then lets OSU build a 14 point lead.  Michigan tied the game late and OSU went right down the field for the go ahead score before we get another late touchdown.  The defense virtually never stopped OSU.  Only giving up 42 points to OSU was a product of our offense having success against them and burning a lot of clock and limiting possessions by OSU.

Making a comment that Michigan did its job by holding OSU to 42 is just plain silly.   Any decent offense that UM faced this year ripped them apart on the field.  The KSU game is not close if not for some turnovers by KSU in the second half.

Defensive stats are as much about the offensive philosophy as the defensive philosophy.  If you play ball control and burn clock, there is less opportunity for the opposing team to score.  That really has little to do with the defenses ability to stop you, but makes the stats look better.  Also a bend but don't break defense works the same.  It bleeds clock and keeps the score in check, but does nothing to win games (death by a 1000 cuts).  The rankings really mean nothing.  The only stats that matter are wins and losses and whether or not you stopped a team at crucial points in a game.

Why don't you just shut the fuck up

I just want to thank you for consistently being a knowlegeable, fact-based voice-of-reason.  I can barely make it through the echo chamber of vitriol that most of these threads are right now, and posters like you are one of the reasons I'm still here.

We are really past the Bo coaching tree at this point from a hiring perspective.  The bigger problem that I see is the Lloyd Carr coaching tree.  I can not remember to many of his assistants going somewhere else and being successful other than Hoke with modest results.  If Michigan continues down the michigan man path, I am not sure you get a championship caliber coach.  Hoke was really the best shot coming out of the Carr era.

The best options all appear to be from outside the Michigan family, with the exception of Harbaugh.  But even Harbaugh was not from the Carr tree even though he wanted to be.

I think this may be the biggest failing of the program in the Carr era.  The inability to develop anyone under Carr that could come back and run the program.  I am not sure if he just didn't have many high end coaches on his staff or if he was more focused on making sure no one overshadowed him.

The defense wasn't great this year, but I'm wondering what's different besides the players.

Of course it's relevant - great coaches are the targets of other school's hiring desires. True in football, and true in other professions too. Recent example: Saban to Texas and other pipe dreams.

If no one else wants a coach, it probably says something - and that something is not too positive. 

Hoke would be the target for roughly 0 of the big openings this year, or frankly in any other year. That doesn't mean he can't succeed here, but it sure tells me something about his perceived abilities. 

Or maybe just every other AD on the planet is really dumb.