Unnamed coach: We'd be better off mediocre

Submitted by blueinbelfast on

This Travis Haney article on "how long the honeymoon will last" contains one of the stupidest things I've ever read:

As rousing and surprising as the starts have been for Florida and Michigan, rejuvenating suffering fan bases in the process, at least one Power 5 coach told me it’s not always the best thing to set the bar this high this early.

“Look what happened to Brady [Hoke at Michigan],” the coach said, referring to Hoke taking the Wolverines to a Sugar Bowl win in his first season in 2011. “He was great right away, and then you saw what it turned into. It can make it tough to keep expectation in check. A slow build is the way to go, in my mind anyway.”

Yeah, we really need to cut out this winning thing.  Wouldn't want to get anyone too excited.

Here's the link:

http://espn.go.com/blog/travis-haney/insider/post?id=4820

MGoBoard
Football
Harbaugh

Blue Since B.C.

October 15th, 2015 at 5:33 PM ^

Edit: Completely missed the point of the article the first time around.

This unnamed coach sounds like a sandbagging salesman - set the bar low, lower the goal, and then crush it for a big payday.  

Thankfully, Harbaugh Always Be Closing.  

Joined: 09/17/2013

MGoPoints: 2861

Nitro

October 15th, 2015 at 7:39 PM ^

This team is entirely different than 2012.  We went 11-2 that season primarily because of Denard, Mattison, and the schedule, but Hoke's dysfunctional offensive scheming was evident even that season.  Hoke just had the benefit of Denard being there to bail him out.  Without Shoelace, 2012 would've looked a lot like Hoke's other years at the helm.  On the other hand, Harbaugh is a major reason for our success this year, and I'm not seeing any latent issues to be concerned about.

Joined: 04/27/2013

MGoPoints: 17041

Nitro

October 16th, 2015 at 12:52 AM ^

I don't understand what you're getting at. You were pretending you thought it was Hoke being bitter. I don't see you making a comparison -- that was in my post (or really, a contrast - the comparison was made in OP's quote). Also, what's a "literal" comparison as opposed to a non-literal one? Not sure if this answers your question since I'm not quite sure what you're asking me, but my post was explaining why I thought OP's quote was wrong. This seemed like a good place to drop it since you brought up Hoke in your post, I was expressing why I agreed with your point, and I didn't want to scroll all the way to the bottom. Let me know if you have any more questions, and I'll try to answer them as best I can.

Joined: 04/27/2013

MGoPoints: 17041

Nitro

October 16th, 2015 at 2:17 AM ^

Oh wait -- "nosedive" is a metaphor. So I guess that's at least a third reason to go with (a). Yep, that's my final answer. No comparison made, nosedive is not literal, and joking about thinking it was Hoke. Also, meant *not* literal above. I'm not so great at making sense. Although my intent should be obvious to anyone without this note -- no one would be silly enough to read that literally...

Joined: 04/27/2013

MGoPoints: 17041

Big Brown Jug

October 16th, 2015 at 12:09 AM ^

Also the miracle comeback against Notre Dame in UTL 1, barely holding on against the worst OSU team in 20 years, and overcoming near zero offensive output in the Sugar Bowl. Not to mention uncompetitive road losses to Iowa and MSU. 2011 should have been an 8 win team with a mostly garbage Big 10 schedule.

Joined: 06/10/2009

MGoPoints: 980

Templeton Peck…

October 15th, 2015 at 5:32 PM ^

As David Glass, the esteemed owner of the Kansas City Royals said last night, "losing is for losers." Jim Harbaugh is a winner, therefore there is no "slow build," just an expectation that the UM football will continue to be tough, competent, and competitive. Those three factors generally lead to a winning football team.

Joined: 10/14/2015

MGoPoints: 3173

PopeLando

October 15th, 2015 at 5:28 PM ^

Any current coach who deliberately fails to improve his team as much as he is capable of, primarily to minimize the number of people who think he's a good coach...is a soon-to-be-former coach. "Don't be good, or else people will think you're good, and that's bad mmkay" is some fucked up logic, and I want no part of it.

Joined: 08/01/2015

MGoPoints: 68478

901 P

October 15th, 2015 at 5:50 PM ^

How does someone even go about doing that? "Okay guys--we've jumped out to a 3-0 record. Let's lose the next one, then split the next four after that. Then we'll decide how hard we want to play in the last couple of games." Or, "We have some five-star recruits who are interested in committing. Let's turn them down so we have a better chance of going 6 and 6 next year."

Joined: 01/12/2015

MGoPoints: 9976

MotownGoBlue

October 15th, 2015 at 5:28 PM ^

*11-2 including the Sugar Bowl win. Harbaugh rubs a few people the wrong way (see Carroll, Schwartz, and Cowherd, for examples) so these asinine statements will always be made. Ironically, I believe all three of those mentioned respect the heck out of Harbaugh as a coach and what he's doing with our football program. Some people just don't like Michigan.

Joined: 08/09/2014

MGoPoints: 25343

michigandune

October 15th, 2015 at 5:47 PM ^

biggest failure was not bringing in and grooming more QBs.

I don't care if Harbaugh rubs people the wrong way, especially press people.  They don't get it.  Harbaugh only cares about winning and winning right now.  Anyone that wants to sit back and slowing build something is an idiot.  Those people need to coach the Lions, oh wait, we already have those people coaching the Lions. 

Joined: 03/10/2011

MGoPoints: 1542

Steve in PA

October 15th, 2015 at 6:15 PM ^

"Harbaugh only cares about winning and winning right now."

That is the SEC mentality.  

Harbaugh cares about the individual players being better tomorrow than they were today, the team being better tomorrow than they were today, and competing with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind.  Winning is the product of that preparation.

Joined: 08/10/2009

MGoPoints: 6327

stephenrjking

October 15th, 2015 at 7:37 PM ^

False. Hoke's biggest failure was the disastrous offensive line situation he completely failed to identify and to fix. It was clear to fans that the OL was a problem in 2012. The running game was very shakey, and the inability to get crucial yards at crucial times cost Michigan games and hurt the offensive flow. The fans knew it. We hoped, foolishly, that the issue was just some mediocre linemen; we assumed that the young guys Hoke recruited would be an upgrade in '13. They were not and Hoke should have known it. He should have addressed the issue right away. Replace Funk, or change the responsibilities of Borges, or add a staff member, anything. Guys like Patrick Omameh were good enough that he is still kicking around the NFL; that Michigan somehow couldn't run with guys like him and future first-rounder Taylor Lewan on the field is a scandal. Instead, he did nothing. And the OL was a complete embarrassment in 13. The team was mediocre; his ultra-talented QB was getting slaughtered, and the team could not run the ball to save its life. It was, literally, a line that performed worse than an average MAC school. And running the ball was supposed to be the calling card of the Hoke regime. He talked about it when he came in. It was central to his very identity as a coach at Michigan. And he totally failed to do it. By the time '14 came around, it was too late. The Quarterback was ruined, the line too far behind. Yes, Hoke handled the QB situation poorly. He should have done better. But it was the offensive line that destroyed his teams.

Joined: 03/15/2012

MGoPoints: 20143964

Ray

October 15th, 2015 at 5:31 PM ^

Harbaugh is winning with (mostly) Hoke's recruits.  If the coach's point is that it takes 4 years to build a team because recruiting, the results so far this year completely undermine his argument.  Unless he believes Harbaugh will do worse with his own recruits, which makes absolutely no sense.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 7044

aratman

October 15th, 2015 at 7:05 PM ^

That a coach comes to a program after a coach who recruited exactly the same type of player they would.  Basically we have a coach who has the same philosophy as the guy before him.  Cultural they are worlds apart, but the way to win is the same.  One guy is good at it the other wants to be.

Joined: 10/02/2010

MGoPoints: 3942

BrokenRhino

October 16th, 2015 at 9:51 AM ^

I am pretty sure we have seen almost the same situation with Meyer. He came in and Tressle's guys were a pretty good fit for him. He proved the fit was better than OSU's administration thought it was. They made a huge mistake not taking the bowl ban during Fickle's year and iCoach. 

Joined: 10/01/2011

MGoPoints: 519