Bodogblog

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:50 AM ^

I wouldn't call 165 yards destroyed. Plus his D was put in a bad spot with the turnover and screwed by the special teams roughing the kicker. A better argument is the complete lack of preparation for Maryland's tempo. Maryland picks up the speed and Michigan reacts as though aliens have landed and using a futuristic, otherworldly technology to advance the football. Look at the sideline with your hands in the air, with all too common "what the hell is the play / what do we do?" gesturing from these players under Brady Hoke. Call a time out. Also annoying as hell and symptomatic for years for this D: we show blitz too early, offense sees obvious blitz and changes play, Michigan sends obvious blitz anyway / does not change play, offense profits. These coaches don't believe that's needed in today's game. More important to spend practice time on fundamentals than those type of in - game adjustments, they don't want to overload the players. Never mind that a few miles down the road in EL they manage to do both and make it look easy. The approach is too old school, and a little bit lazy in ideology.

Kevbo714

November 22nd, 2014 at 9:58 PM ^

What are the chances that the interim AD is retained.... I was thinking quite low, but I read (albeitit on espn) that  he is in charge of deciding Hoke's inevitable fate... Seeing if anyone had any intel otherwise

JMac

November 22nd, 2014 at 11:27 PM ^

I agree Manning would deserve a spot for recruiting.  But seriously, our cornerback play sucks this year.  I know he tried to learn something from the Chicago Bears but it didn't work.  There must be another job he could do.  I agree that the play calling wasn't horrible today.  Execution was.  Devin was consistantly throwing behind receivers. There may be an argument that the play calling should be adjusted to how your quarterback is playing.  But Funchess sucked today. 

WolvinOhio

November 23rd, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^

if we can get a "name" head coach (e.g., J. Harbaugh), I don't think we'll need a holdover with supposed recruiting chops. The chance to play for - and be coached by or under - such a coach should be a player magnet. Better to get rid of everyone to remove the taint of the present regime. "Continuity"? Why on earth would you want continuity from what we have now?

mdonley

November 22nd, 2014 at 11:34 PM ^

Nobody from this staff should be kept they're all horrible. Why would any good coach want to come here and keep a coach who's position he coaches is underachieving? I don't care how nice our coaches are they don't know how to win.

Sione's Flow

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:18 AM ^

Manning for his recruiting chops. But he's got to go back to coaching LBs. Smith if he wants to stay, both LBs and D-line have been consistent under his watch. Nussmeier because I think a upgrade at O-line coach is needed more than a new OC.

TheTeam16

November 23rd, 2014 at 2:58 AM ^

That we see a lot of attrition with the new HC, especially if it is JH.

It is painfully evident parts of this team are lackadaisical at best in thier preparation. There will be none of that if JH comes back to A2. It will truly be another "Those Who Stay" moment...which is exactly what this football program needs. 

slimj091

November 23rd, 2014 at 4:02 AM ^

It is quite simple. The new coach should put in place the personel that he want's to. A head coach shouldn't be hamstrung into keeping an assistant based solely on the fact that some fan's like him.

Manning might be a good recruiter. Winning football games however will always be the best recruiter.

Mgodiscgolfer

November 23rd, 2014 at 7:37 AM ^

I love the job coach Mattison has done with the D. I have never seen a defense hold together with all the sudden changes they were put through. I agree with most about Manning although I think he should be a recruiter. I was not very impressed with the DB's at all. So if the coach wanted to keep a couple guys around those two would be the only people I would be OK with IMHO.