This article is spot on. Agree 100% with everything he said.
Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
This article is spot on. Agree 100% with everything he said.
You write like someone who is having a psychotic break.
I stole all of his ludes. It was a pretty wild weekend.
Not sure? U can be sure
After thread you run your trap. Blah blah blah
I read this earlier today and it reads like everything you read on here in a much more tempered manner. When articles like this start coming out in the MSM then it speaks to how bad things really are. We as fans are knee jerk but journalists usually wait a while before they come in. Blood is most certainly in the water and everyone sees it now, not just us.
Borges = Gerg
Funk = Gipson
There were no changes in the previous regime - why would we expect any now? For those who point to Ball State as proof Brady isnt afraid to "shake things up" take a look at who he got rid of and how long they had been with him. None could really by tabbed as "his guys" like the current staff is.
My guess is that Hoke, like Rich, values his personal relationships with his long-held friends more than the results they produce. So when Borges tells Brady nothing can be done because we're too young Brady belives it.
Did anybody catch Hokes presser yesterday? He sees absolutely nothing wrong with Borges's playcalling. And I truly believe he meant that when he said it.
We are fucked.
Hoke = RichRod
This isn't a Kill-Clayes relationship. I'm certain that Hoke will relieve Borges and Funk of their duties if his own job is on the line.This is Hoke's states dream job. I doubt that he will jeopardize that.
Not even Lloyd was that stubborn.
But I think you're missing a key point. Hoke doesnt think they're is a problem! Look - I know absolutely nothing about a lot of things. So if an "expert" (like Borges) tells me that the reason for failure have nothing to do with him I think Brady believes it.
There will be no changes because there is no problem that increased experience won't solve.
Just because he doesn't throw them under the bus in public doesn't mean that he actually approves of their performances. Good leaders praise in public and criticize in private.
Since when is the simple acknowldegement of a problem equate to "throwing someone under the bus?" Saying there are clear issues with the playcalling (cause.....like they dont work) is different than saying "And it's all Al Borges fault".
Hoke refuses to acknowledge there are even problems. And that is a problem.
If you read the last paragraph, Brady practically mentions everything going wrong with this offense.If that isn't a round about way of saying something about the offensive coordinator then I don't know what is. But you are wrong in the way you want this issue handled. There is no good reason why Brady Hoke should publically criticize Al Borges. What potential coach would want to be hired by Hoke if he is going to turn around and criticize that coach to the media?
At Michigan there is a reason why we attract some of the best talent in the country and its because we don't do stupid stuff. The athletic department will fix this problem with time but it will work in a way that will help the program long term and not damage it.
"That’s something we're trying to get fixed, to be honest with you," Hoke said. "Is it a concern? Yeah, it always is. Not tackling, not blocking, not covering, not throwing the ball, not running good routes, all that stuff's concerning."
Where do you see ANYTHING in that indicting the coaching? I read nothing but criticism of the players, not his coaching staff or anyting they are doing.
Just so I'm clear. It's ok to throw your players "under the bus" publicly by being critial of their performance but you cant throw your OC "under the bus" by saying anything about his play calling?
It's classic coach-speak and exactly what you would want and expect at this point. He didn't criticize individual players - you can say what he said without blaming it on individual players. If he specifically criticized the coaching there would be no doubt of the individual he was criticizing and that would be wrong. He said as much as he could without creating more problems.
What is accomplished by Hoke saying that Borges is doing a bad job? It doesn't magically fix the problems, but does undermine the credibility of Hoke's OC with the players. It's just a poor thing for a leader to do.
But it's ok to say the players are doing a poor job? Help me understand the distinction here.
And nowhere at no time did I say Hoke had to say Borges sucked. It would be nice, though unlikely, for him to simply acknowledge we have a problem that needs to be fixed. Read his comments again - it's the PLAYERS that are failing.....not his coaches.
Saying the players are failing falls on the coaches. Did you see his last interview? He must have said "we need to coach them better" about 100 times.
he admits there is a problem. The problem is the offense failing to move the ball and score points. You don't solve that problem in a press conference. Now if, as you seem to desire, Hoke says in a press conference "Yeah, the play calling is a problem," that IS throwing Borges under the bus, since Borges calls the plays. We won't know from a press conference whether Hoke agrees the play calling is a problem. Hopefully we will see either changes in the playcalling the rest of this year or changes in the identity of the playcaller next year, either of which would show recognition that there's a problem with the playcalling.
Definitely will not let Borges and funk go this year. If next year goes like this, probably because then Hoke is coaching for his job in 2015. Problem is who will he attract once his job is in danger and any new assistants could be gone in a year.
If 2014 goes like this year Hokw wont have a job in 2015
we are just a 180 of RR's team.
RR's offense was a hell of a lot better than this defense. At least we were improving then. We're getting worse every year with fewer wins and playing less competitive.
that Hoke knows enough about offensive football to really secong guess too much about Borges--that is why he doesn't get involved at all with play calling, and delegates everything to Al. In a way, it's a good thing that he recognizes his limitations and therefore delegates. But in these situations he, and this team, are handicapped in trying to fix things on the offensive side.
And secondly, since there is in fact many execution problems on every play, Hoke sees that and therefore assumes that if only Fitz would block better (or name other examples) then a certain play would have worked.That is why we constantly hear "execution" from him, and nothing about strategy or scheme on the offensive side. He doesn't recognize that we are sometimes causing poor execution by a poor scheme. Spielman, like Blackedge last week, had questions not for the execution, but for the scheme itself.
Hoke, and that everyone here knows more than Borges, who has worked at a pile of U's, makes huge bucks, and overachieved--by most knowledgeable people's reckoning--the first few years.
Borges MAY be not up to the job, and Hoke may not--managerially, etc. But I think it's safe to assume that Hoke knows enough about the offensive side of the game to run rings around all but a small handfull of people here.
I also think that it's extremely hard to judge anything, including game plans, given how awfully the O line has played.
Blackedge et. al. who do know more than me or most here, not really mgoblog. They not so subtly the last couple weeks have criticized the offensive scheme. Granted I'm making assumptions, but I think my main assumption has good evidence behind it--Hoke himself says he has little input into play calls or game plans. I think if he had more offensive knowledge that would not be the case. He quite rightly delegates that which he knows little about--does he delegate the defensive line coaching? Nope, because he knows a lot about that.
Check the rushing numbers for the last 2 weeks. It really does not require much more than a monkeys intellect to understand the problem with Borges. South Dakota State ran for 8.2 yards a carry against that sorry Nebraska defense, do you think they have better offensive line talent than Michigan? This is not a poor rushing game, it is unprecedented how pathetic and embarrasing it is. There are no excuses for this, NONE!
"His guys" have done a great job for him up until this year so he has had no need to not be loyal to these coaches.
If a coach cares more about his personal relationships with his long-held friends than the success of his players and team, then he is a shit coach who doesn't actually care about the team or his players and doesn't deserve to coach them.
Personally, I don't believe Hoke is that guy. But we'll see.
"He sees absolutely nothing wrong with Borges' playcalling."
The fact that Hoke was wearing a headset after going down 10-0 and not moving the ball has him wanting to know WTF is going on.
Hoke will stick up for his staff and players in the public eye but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him getting after people behind closed doors, not bashing them to the public. I'm fine with this. Simiar to, "So and so has a boo boo." You're not going to get much more than that, especially the media. Hoke isn't going to give anyone anything to run with even if he is unhappy about things.
The players have been taking the same lead as Hoke. Gardner putting it all on himself the same way Hoke does. Lewan trying to be positive and build confidence to his team during press conferences though he'll rip into them if there's a problem like you saw on the sidelines yesterday. He just so happned to be doing it on camera and not in front of one. Big difference.
Hoke knows what's up. Just because he doesn't verify it with the media doesn't mean he doesn't know what's up. Some coaches do verify it. Hoke isn't one of those guys.
But if Hoke knows what's up and was getting after people behind closed doors, wouldn't we start seeing some change in play-calling? Like some actual attempts to rectify the problems?
Simplified blocking schemes, slide protections, rollouts, max protection, etc. I have no idea if Hoke was responsble for it but the playcalling changed pretty noticeably as the game progressed.
@ yeoman - except for the PA on 2nd and 20 where Gardner turned his back to the D....that was a repeat from last week with the same predictable result.
One of Bear Bryant's cardinal coaching rules for success was that the head coach takes the blame for a loss, and never calls out the players or staff publicly. Issues were handled inside the confines of the staff and team.
Lots of successful head coaches handle things that way.
I'm not saying Hoke's a great head coach, but at least he understands the principle that you don't throw your players and coaches under the bus.
I don't think Hoke = RR. Despite horrendous defenses, despite young players, RR's teams were actually improving in the win column from year to year.
We are seeing the opposite under Hoke.
It's clear that he isn't the answer for Michigan football, but at the same time, I'm not confident that Dave Brandon is capable of finding "the guy."
You know, we've had young O-lines before. And the program has its ups and downs over the years. They all do to some degree.
What is troubling isn't that they've dropped 3 games; it's the way they've dropped them that has many of us wondering about the future.
Whatever Dave Brandon is thinking about creating special atmospheres at the Big House, seeing the team play like this, and hearing the fans boo the team isn't one of them.
You are not seeing the opposite under Hoke at all. Look at the recruiting classes. Oh and many of us really means the vocal minority who because they scream and say the most outragious things think they are actually the majority.
I was at the game and the majority of the crowd was moved to boo at one point. Does that count in your assessment?
Booing and ranting insanely that the coach needs to be fired are two entirely different things.
Take a step back. You typically bing a lot to the blog and I look forward to your posts, but I think you need to take a break. We are at game 9 of a 13 game season. Firing anyone now does nothing for anyone. You don't have to like what is going on, but I don't think carpet bombing the site with we are fucked helps either.
As for the RR and hoke issues, I think that during the season you keep from getting divisive. While not well played, Michigan had their shots yesterday and I think they can win 2 more games, maybe a bowl. The thing is, hoke has given Borges enough rope to hang himself. There is no one on staff to replace him as either Oc of qb coach, so you just have to stick with him. Same with funk.
Additionally just because the excuses are played out does not mean they are not true. If it all starts in the trenches as we screamed during the rr years and that is where the majority of this teams flaws are, it follows to think that this team is bound to have a rough go of it.
So when is it OK Trip after we lose to Northwestern? Afer Iowa? How about afer we get destroyed by Ohio State?
Why do I have to wait until the disaster is over to say what is happening is horrible?
I wish we had a way of making on-line bets on things cause I'd wager you a beer that our offense staff at next year's spring game is exactly the same as it is today. Because Hoke sees no problem that firing anyone will fix.
Considering you are a grown man, I would save NEVER is the answer for when you should "trip out" over Michigan Football. I have seen multiple people tell you to take a step back over the past few weeks. You may wanna listen. It is and forever will be a game played by college kids.
And exactly how am I "tripping out"? What's funny (no...actually sad) is that the reason people told me to back it down a notch is because I've been probably the most vocal anti-Borges poster here outside of Brian himself. And it would seem that the vast majority of posters now agree with my assessment of Borges's abilities as our OC.
@bklein09 - Played by kids and coached by multi-millionaires whose sole job is to put these kids in a position to succeed...to maximize potential. These coaches are failing horribly at their jobs and the kids are paying a high price for it. We, on the other hand, are just paying high prices so I think we have a right to demand a better outcome than what we are getting.
If by "demanding a better outcome" you mean raging against the team on a message board, you can go for it.
My point was not about whether or not we have the right to freak out over Michigan Football. Rather I was trying to say that, to me, it seems silly to do so. We can yell at the players, but they're just kids. We can yell at the coaches, but we don't know what is going on in practice and behind closed doors. I think the most important thing to remember is that NOTHING you or I can do will effect what happens in the field. Nothing. Not writing letters to Dave or canceling your season tickets or posting on this blog. It took me a long time to figure this out, but my Falls are much less stressful these days. Try to enjoy the good times and let the bad times roll off your back. That's my advice.
Thanks for clarifying your post. FWIW I am in COMPLETE AGREEMENT with everything you just wrote.
Thanks. And I completely agree with all your frustrations. I apologize for singling you out in my first post. It's just hard to read all the negativity around these parts.
Well, this is one of the few places I get to vent my frustrations with Michigan and I firmly believe this place is more influential then any of us realize.
But, I agree with what you said and I am lessening my involvement with the teams. It's hard to walk away from something that was so pivotal to my collegiate development but I suppose it's for the best.
enough of this kid shit, at least half of them are in their fucking 20s, they aren't kids
Times are strange when we see posts like this from TWID. Thoughtful thoughts, though, and a welcome calming influence in these confusing days.
in the world makes you think the future is brighter under Hoke?
not his in-game coaching (sorry, hand clapping)
not his clock/time out manegement
how about his unparalleled excelence in D-line development, particularly pass rushing?
He recruits well, fantastically well so far. but that is it. will it last if this trajectory continues?
How in the world can mighty Akron play us to a standstill with 1% of the recruiting resources?
Borges has to 1st on Dantonio's Christmas card list!
I give Hoke 50% of the credit for going after Mattison as DC and the other 50% to Dave Brandon for learning from his previous blunder and opening the checkbook to hire Mattison.
I'm also putting 100% of the Borges misery on Hoke. He's responsible for the actions of his subordinates. Make them improve, or replace them. I'm willing to wait til the end of the season (muttering) but what miracles will Al have to pull out of his ass to keep his job?
For any of you who like Hoke but have had it with Borges, what should Brandon do if Hoke won't make any changes?
I agree with Grow's assesment. funk=gibson, Borges=GERG . at least this time I bet Brandon is willing to throw some $ around to help.
@Mgro - except Hoke didn't have the success RRod had before coming here....which makes him worse than RRod in my opinion.
Rich Rod trajectory vs Brady's - Three years in
2008: 3-9 (Lloyd's players for the most part)
2001: 11 - 2 (Rich's players for the most part)
2013: 6-3 (and heading down)
So we agree that Hoke is worse than RRod? Good.
as you argue trajectory. The only problem with your argument is
11 + 8 > 3 + 5 + 7
Hoke could literally have gone winless this year and still have four more wins than RR in the same amount of time.
Point is, three years is just not an adequate sample size for either coach. RR is probably better than that. But just the same, who the heck really knows how good or not Hoke will turn out in the next season or two.
The fact that he has coached an 11-win season has to count for something, though.
actually 2013 and 2014 will be the season with mostly RichRod's players. In 2011 most of the upperclassmen would have come from Carr's last class.
Any "trajectory" argument about RR needs to take into account that Michigan went 9-4 the year before he arrived. We dropped off a cliff his first year, and then even after getting better the next two years, we were still worse than we ever were under Carr.
If you want to compare the two, Hoke's first two seasons were better than any season RR had, and this year he only needs one victory to match RR's best season.
Just let the RR stuff die already.
We should be able to let RR die. Unfortunately, he left the cupboard bare, as the Lloyd Car haters so often repeated. Take a look at the rosters and depth, and you tel me which team is more bare, this one RR's first.
2008 was miles worse off depth and talent wise over team 134 and it's not even close.
that Carr left more than RR did?
on defense maybe. Carr left next to nothing on O, at least nothing applicable to one of the godfathers of the spread that was hired.
He built a very good O and hamstrung (with a little AD help) his own D
but he left a fine O for Hoke to scatch his head at.
I also think Mattison's praiseworthy turnaround spoke to the fact that there WAS talent on D being horribly underutilized.
still think Carr left a fuller cupboard than RR after leaving?
Who would you rather have been left with . . .Threet/Sheridan or Robinson/Gardner
"Who would you rather have been left with . . .Threet/Sheridan or Robinson/Gardner"
That's pretty much the point. Under RR recruiting energy was very much focused on a small number of critical players like Pryor and Denard. There wouldn't be anything wrong with that, I suppose, if any attempt had been made to fill out the classes with even minimal-quality recruits in sufficient numbers to keep a program alive.
Who would you rather have been left with: Dorrestein/Schilling/Huyge/Molk or Bryant/.../.../...?
That's one lineman from two recruiting classes. How do you maintain a program with one scholarship lineman in two years? At that rate you'd only have 2 1/2 on a roster. The rules require 5.
And hell, Bryant is constantly injured. It wouldn't even surprise me if didn't play next year.
Why bum me out like that?
All fan message boards are filled with "We know Coach X will never, ever change" rants after a loss. In reality, most coaches will make changes when the pressure gets strong enough. Lloyd Carr went through five OCs and three DCs in 13 years, and he never had a losing season (overall or in Big Ten play). Only really old, really secure guys like JoePa can be expected to stand pat. If the team doesn't improve, I would expect Hoke to let some guys go.
I've been calling Borges worse than GERG for a month now, and Hoke as RR's equivalent since the Akron game. Glad more of you are removing the maize/blue colored glasses and seeing the obvious.
I remember starting a post a month ago asking how many top notch coaches are so hands off of the other side of the football like RR is with defense and Hoke is with offense, and of course I got negged to high hell and it was deleted.
Hoke defends the play calling on offense because HE HAS NO CLUE ABOUT OFFENSE AT ALL. And the part where he can't toss his coordinator under the bus with 4 games left to play (shitbowl included).
Come January Hoke will fire Borges and Funk, but he should already be consulting with Brandon and key advisors re best OC replacement options.
If Hoke does not fire Borges this off season, next year we'll see the string of games with 100,000 in the seats broken. I for one won't tune in. As long as Al Borges remains a Michigan employee, I will continue to love and root for the players and the school, but the football program will be dead to me.
The Hoke is Rich Rod thing is premature at best and absolutely delusional at worst, and if you cannot see why that it's he case we will be unable to have a discussion.
For winning NC and B1G titles. But for winning 8 or 9 games a year and finishing 2nd to 4th in the B1G, he's the coach DB wants.
At least someone is providing an accurate account of what is happening. Not that anyone at Michigan will pay any attention to it....because WE'RE MICHIGAN.
Imagine that! Pretty much everyone on espn was roasting Michigan yesterday, and rightfully so. Now we've moved on the local papers.
Dave Brandon can't be this dumb can he? If no assisstant coaches are let go in the offseason you can bet THOUSANDS of people don't renew their season tickets.
With pretty much everything he's saying here. That's about the most measured column we'll see this season criticizing the team.
The biggest thing for me is the lack of adjustment week to week. Even the Nebraska fans behind me were shocked at how good their defense looked. There was much eye rolling.
Yesterday was the breaking point. People are tired of the same excuses. We are tired of the same mistakes. We are tired of being a has-been in a joke for a conference. And frankly, how can you blame us?
"And I'm sorry, just waiting for young players to get older is not an acceptable answer."
I agree with this 100%.
We canned Rich Rod for having a historically bad defense, which was partially due to having the youngest secondary in the country. At some point, we recognized the problems went beyond youth.
I'm seeing the same parallel on offense. There is no improvement to be seen on the offensive line, though obviously we know youth is a big problem that permeates the line this year. And continuing to insist on running power when you know it isn't working is much like insisting to run the 3-3-5 defense when your DC clearly has no idea how to do it. It's stubbornness for no reason.
I'm not saying Borges should abandon running altogether. But whetever happened to the concept of "passing to open up the run"? Not every pass has to be 30 yards downfield.
He was the bigegst and most wonderful HOMER we've ever had, but this coaching is making Bo's 6-6 1984 season look brilliant. At least that team had an excuse (Harbaugh's broken arm).
As Ufer used to say about LUCK: if we didn't have BAD luck, we wouldn't have had any luck at all.
One can apply the same to our offensive staff: if we didn't have BAD coaching, we would have had any coaching at all.
I'd rather run the game plan from the stands as fans text in the next play than see Big Al call 'em.
Brandstatter saying? From what I understand, he was pretty vocal especially during the Penn State game. . .
Everything he said was spot on. Has anyone noticed since Kalis/Miller was benched the OL has gotten significantly worse each game?
I noticed that was well. I am surprised they haven't stuck Miller back in. With him in, they were getting the calls right and seemed able to pick up blitzes, even if he was getting shoved a few yards into the backfield. Better than free running linebackers.
I thought the number of bad snaps actually went down after miller was benched, no?
You have to take opposition into account. Those guys were playing CMU, Akron, and UConn - mixed with ND. Devin was on the run all those games except CMU. There was never a stable line. MSU looks like the NFL compared to Akron and Neb looks like the CFL. The only game that there seemed to be some stability was Minnesota and I cannot even remember who was starting that game - Bryant?
Does anyone else just not care any more? There would have been years where I would have been furious about yesterday and the loss would have ruined my weekend. Instead I shrugged, went to get dinner with friends, and went out for a pleasant evening. I'm numb to losing at this stage.
The same way last night. Except I had a 2 1/2 hr drive back home from the game. And will not be renewing my tickets next year.
Ironically all the losing and crappiness has made my relationship with sports all the more healthy. I have wayyy more perspective on things when the team (and coaching) straight up just sucks.
Ditto. I was losing my shit watching the UConn game, but I was kind of laughing at the ineptitude yesterday. My friends say I'm much more tolerable during M games now.
I was pretty irritated, but quickly shrugged it off after Akron.
I was near disgusted after UConn. It festered for a day or so.
I was downright furious watching that debacle of a 4th quarter and OT against Penn State.
Since then? Nothing. I've felt nothing during these games since. I've become numb to the ineptitude.
Although, the occassional flairup of irritation does occur during instances of chickenshit and boneheaded playcalling rears its ugly head. Times like the back to back stretch plays that went absolutely nowhere after amazing field position caused by the muffed punt.
Same here...blessing in disguise.
my wife couldn't even tell that UM lost afterwards, I was in such a normal mood.
Worse than Purdue or Illinois? Worse than Indiana?
They're fifth in scoring defense, sixth in total defense. Eighth in DFEI if you like the advanced stats, though that was before yesterday and I'll bet they moved up a couple of spots.
I understand being dissppointed after a crappy performance, but it seems like it's worth writing and saying things that are at least possibly, arguably, true.
It is just a game to me now. It used to mean so much more before the RR years. It has been such a long time since I truly got those butterflies and I actually napped through the first half and when I woke up and saw a 10-3 score at the half I just laughed. I don't really have the same love for the team anymore. It's just a habit that I've developed over the years and each loss is making it easier and easier to break that habit.
I care, but I have no expectations for them. Well, I expect they'll put 11 men on the field but thats about it.
1-2 against MSU....1-2 against Nebraska...soon to be 1-2 against OSU.....Terrible road record woeful offense and a team that DOES NOT improve....Its a disturbing trend
A disturbing trend is 1-4 or 1-5. Three games is not enough time for a trend.
However, the road record is an issue. I will grant you that.
IS a disturbing trend
Nebreska is not one of Michigan's big rivals. ND would be a more apt team to include, but oh waite Hoke has a winning record against them so that wouldn't fit your viewpoint.
You can throw in ND, cool. He's 2-1 against ND because of the magical play of Denard Robinson in year one, not because of scheme. He's been outcoached by our rivals in every game. His one victory against MSU came without scoring a TD. His one win against Ohio State came when they were 6-6 and happened because of a missed bomb by their freshman QB.
We hired a guy who never won a conference title and had an overall losing record in 7 years of coaching. He got the job because he liked Michigan alot and knew Lloyd and Dave Brandon after Harbaugh chose the 49ers.
It's fairly clear that Brandon thought he was going to get Harbaugh and didn't have a plan B (which should have been let Rich Rod have one more year and if he fails go after Meyer).
First when you use a phrases "except for" it just means that you don't like that data point as it doesn't fit your view point. Oh and guess what QBs miss passes. Its called football. Give the "because of a missed bomb" argument a rest. It is crap and eveyone knows it.
Nebreska has been a "divisional rival" for 2 years and starting next year will not be.
Are the Arkansas fans freaking about about Bielema? Is Cal freaking out about Sonny Dykes? Are Miami fans clamoring to fire Al Golden. He's had a lot less success than Hoke. Yes he has had NCAA issues, but he did not arrive at Miami after basically 3 disasterous recruiting classes.
Is that where we've fallen to? Are you kidding? Dykes and Bielema are in year one, not year three. And yes, Nebraska is a division rival. They're the best program in our division, and we're 1-2 against them. The except fors matter because we've been lucky to pull out a couple wins against rivals. Yes, that's football, but it doesn't mean that we should be happy to have beaten a crappy OSU team barely and an average ND team twice.
People are not clamoring the Al Golden to be fired because he's looking at a 10 win season and had his team in the top ten (and could very well win his division). The trajectory of Miami (ytM) is upwards, ours isn't. As a sidebar, Al Golden has as many wins against Ohio State as Hoke does.
No the except fors are because those data points don't fit your poinf of view. And we've also been unlucky to lose some games.
Nebreska is not a rival. No one comes into the season with that game marked on their schedule. And for all intensive purposes they aren't even in the division.
If you think Miami was actually a legit top 10 team at any point season you are high. Where are all these great wins for Miami? There best win is over GT. Beating ND and Minnesota is more impressive than that. Their D just got destroyed by a VT offense that has been absolutely awful.
No rantional person can say Michigan's trajectory isn't a lot better than Miami's. None. You might not like the fact that highly rated recruiting classes don't pay off until those players are juniors or seniors, but that is just how it is.
Golden-yes (they are)
No Miami fans aren't. They may be freaking that he will leave for another job.
Rich Rod had a winning record against ND, didn't help him much
The criteria is "red letter games" and Nebraska and ND would both fit.
If we lose to Iowa and OSU, then the trend becomes the following:
2-1 vs. ND
1-2 vs. MSU
1-2 vs. Nebraska
1-2 vs. Iowa
1-2 vs. OSU
I will reserve judgment, but if this is how the season wraps up, then I consider this a trend!
How about 9 games?
We would be Tennessee if we played in that conference. The bottom feeders of the Big Ten have kept us afloat IMO
Seems that the team's gotten worse since the beginning of the season, which was Rich Rod's problem as well. That screams poor coaching to me.
It was so painfully obvious yesterday it was basically black and white. Slow developing plays up the middle against the blitz consistently went nowhere, quick plays to the outside avoiding that pressure worked quite well. Yet for some inexplicable reason we favored calling slow developing plays that were vulnerable to the blitz. It's even more obvious that Fitz is a completely ineffective blocker. Ever since the ND game having him in the backfield doesn't even slow any defender down, at all, yet we still rely on his blocking to keep Devin upright. Its stupid, stupid, stupid.
Serious question for people: why is everyone convinced that Hoke won't make serious changes to the staff after this year? Everyone seems to be telling themselves that basically if Brandon doesn't force him, he'd be more than happy to keep Borges and Funk until the end of time. Where does this come from? Past history retaining underperforming coaches/coordinators? Something else I don't know about? If it's just going based off of his comments, I don't take much from those. In most cases, even if he was thinking about making big changes, he would probably be publicly defending his guys until the end.
He said he liked the play calling after the game.
Saying that he likes the play calling turns an unhappy fan base to an enraged one.
Mack Brown fired his DC. That is how you show that you do not agree coordinator as a head coach.
Serious answer for you. Because I have seen absolutely nothing from Hoke in either his words or his actions that give me the slightest hope that he even sees there is a problem. And if he doesnt see a problem why on earth would he think anything needs to be fixed. Here, IMO, is the offense world accoding to Hoke:
Now why would any changes be needed? The problem (according to Hoke) will be resolved with time - not coaching changes.
Like I said earlier - we are fucked.
What do you think he is going to say... Ok guys I know our big fat jabba the hut offensive co. Sucks!! He's just up there eating pizza an corn dogs and calling bad plays!! But it'll get better when we execute. Blah
It doesn't have to be about his physical stature.
@bluesuave34- if he thought there was a problem, we wouldn't see the same bad play calls week after week. The fact we are, leads me to believe he doesn't see a problem with the calls, just the execution.
Because I have seen absolutely nothing from Hoke in either his words or his actions that give me the slightest hope that he even sees there is a problem.
That's a bit of a straw man argument, isn't it? You say you haven't seen or heard anything, but what would you expect to see? We know he isn't an offense-minded coach, so there is only so much he will do before he just shows the Al the door. For one, we have seen offensive line shuffling. We have also seen Funchess moved out to more of a WR role.
Obivously there are still issues, but do you honestly think Hoke doesn't believe there are any issues? Do you honestly think Hoke is satisfied with how things are going?
Hoke is a defensive coach, do you believe he doesn't see what EVERY other team sees when they face our offense?
No I honestly don't. Because if he did he would do SOMETHING about it and not just blindly support Borges. Something, ANYTHING that indicated he didnt think all was rosey with our offense.
I'm sorry guys but there's a lot of room between "I see nothing wrong with the play calls" and throwing your coach under the bus. You could say "of course there are issues - everyone can see what we are doing isnt working as well as we'd like and we're all committed to fixing it."
I don't see why acknowledging what is painfully obvious to everyone is somehow disloyal.
You have your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But, as a defensive coach and a defensive player, I assure you that he is very in tune to field position. I think you are clearly mistaken. The question, though, is what should he do about it. I saw major deficiencies in QB play yesterday. Do you want him to take Gardner out? I see lack of blocking from the RB in blitz. Do you want him to take Fitz 0ut? If so, then please tell me who is coming in.
If he is in tune to what has been going on, why is his OC repeating the same mistakes. This felt a lot like the play calling from the PSU and MSU game. The running backs in this game had 17 runs for 17 yards, but they thought it was a good strategy to run on 1st and 2nd down after the muffed punt.
If Hoke is aware and fixing things behind the scenes, why am I not seeing any changes in the playcalling when we could have put more distance between us and Nebraska.
What mistakes? Please articulate what them. I presume we're talking about play calling. If so, what should have been different? If not, what is the mistake?
I don't remember if they ran on first and second after the muffed punt. I guess I'll go look it up. I do remember that after getting the ball in NE's side of the field, we threw a bomb on first down unsuccessfuly.
I get that we can't run. I also get what happens with Gardner if you throw every down. Is there a backup who you think will play better, more consistently, or make throws instead of eating the ball while watching the d rush/ Who is that? Same quesions regarding the O line and running backs? Who are these subs that will perform?
You are correct. I am a bit shocked that there are still apologists around after yesterday. Apparently you have found one of them. Grats I guess.
I'm going to have to disagree with you strongly. Let's assume for a second that firing an OC mid-season is bad and regardless of what will happen to Borges eventually, the administration will try to avoid this. Given that, almost regardless of what happens in-season, it seems to be in Hoke's best interest to circle the wagons until the changes actually need to be made at the end of season. He gains little by publicly throwing his staff under the bus mid-season before the changes, so the fact that he says little and defends the play calling, in my mind, reveals very little information about his true intent. The only time I could see this helping a coach is if the head coach is on the hot seat as well, and needs to buy some time. Hoke isn't, and doesn't.
"But all Nebraska and Bo Pelini did was copy the defensive plan employed a week earlier by Michigan State. Blitz, blitz, blitz, and when Michigan brought in extra guys to protect, Gardner held the ball too long, waiting for someone to get open."
It would seem then that I wasn't the only one that noticed the eerie similarities between defensive gameplans then. Yesterday's game dropped us to the #81 offense in Division I by total yards, if I managed to calculate the average right.
I completely agree with you 100%. This is actually one of the things I like about Hoke. He is the CEO of Michigan football (DB not withstanding) and I think he allows his coordinators to do their jobs without micromanaging.
That being said, this is Hokes time to take some action. He needs to make some changes on his staff and the vetting process better begin now (if it hasn't already).
I can not recall ever seeing a delegator/CEO type coach win anything substantial. The best college football coaches seem to be micromanagers.
Les Miles and Pete Carroll were delegators who won big.
Both Pete Carroll and Les Miles were coordinators before getting a head coaching job. I am not sure I agree that they are delegators. Their coaching experience would suggest they are more engaged then that.
Pete Carroll was a Defensive Coordinator and Offensive Coordinator at points in his college career as well as an NFL Head Coach.
Les Miles was an Offensive Coordinator during his college coaching career.
Great read. Unless our coaches live in a bubble, they probably already know these things. Question is will they do anything about it?
I blame adidas.
I hate you, adidas.
I wish we could bring back Nike. But that'll never happen.
It is plain as day. There need to be changes on the offensive coaching staff. If Hoke makes them and we see progress next year that will reestablish my faith that he is the guy. If he doesn't make changes and we see the same things next year he will be on the hot seat. If we don't make it to the Big Ten Championship game in 2015 and probably win it then he will be out.
If these things don't happen and Hoke is retained after not making changes then the infrastructure will probably take a hit and fans will not park their butts in the seats. The next thing to go will be viewing it on TV. Vicious cycle.
Please be the guy Hoke.
My honest prediction, barring a big turnaround that includes an OSU victory (doesn't seem likely, does it?) is that Borges and most if not all of his staff is shown the door at season's end. Hoke isn't gonna go down with the ship and get fired from his dream job just to save Borges. They aren't childhood buddies. They've coached together for 4 3/4 seasons now. That's it. I don't see why everyone assumes Hoke and Borges are soulmates.
All it takes is Brandon pressuring Hoke to make a change, and IMO a change is made. He may well choose to make it even without Brandon chiming in. There is NO WAY Hoke is happy with the rushing performance, all the tackles for losses, the inability to do ANYTHING out of the I formation. He's not just going to stick with business as usual in the offseason. This job is all he's ever wanted. He may not know how to fix the offense (that's where a new OC comes in,) but he's surely smart enough to see that it's broken.
Fred needs to retire (his kid is graduating, so it's a perfect scenario). Funk needs to be fired ASAP.
I think Borges could be good, if he has a really good team. He's not a create something out of nothing kind of guy. Nor is he creative, but in 2-3 years, with a solid senior class and great recruiting, Borges could be good, IMO.
I agree with everything you've said in this post, but is that the type of OC you want for a college football team? I mean, its not every year you're going to have the perfect team. Every college team in the country has some sort of deficiency and most teams have many. A good OC in college is creative, plays to his teams strengths and gets the most out of the players he has on the roster.
Having a "good" or senior laden team should not be a requirement for an OC. I would even agrue that Michigan has had "good" teams or offensive players every year since Al has been here.
I agree with what you said. If he is silly enough to stay the course with Borges, then he deserves to lose his dream job. There are plenty of good offensive coordinators to be had to be this terrible at offense.
Hoke is a glorified position coach. he spends all his time with the defensive line with greg mattison. he has no clue about the offense that is why he lets the offensive coaches and al borges do what they want. he doesn't listen to play calls. Hoke decides when to kick a field goal or punt, whether or not to call a time out. that might work in the MAC or Mountain West.. NOT IN THE BIG TEN. he needs to go to a Head Coach clinic this offseason and learn how to be a head coach or Dave Brandon needs to start thinking about a new head coach.
So, you're saying he is our Rod Marinelli? I don't agree. See Ball State and SDSU.
i did see Ball State and SDS. one good season at both schools. Michigan had a good season in 2011. not so much since then
Last I checked, he was H.C. at Ball State, and the last thing that school wanted was to lose him. He went to SDSU, and was an H.C.. The last thing that school wanted was to lose him. There's no lack of H.C. experience with Hoke. In fact, at every prior stop, he was, in fact, successful (of course, one would expect that of someone at Michigan, right).
I guess if you meant that he was once a position coach, fine. So were most or, actaully all, successful head coaches. Marinelli was a glorified position coach, having no head coaching experience before being hired by the Lions, which was his downfall.
We need to raid and hijack Bama's assistant coaches like a bunch of starved Somalis in a pack of Zodiacs loaded with AKs.
I'd take IU's OC right now....
As I sit here quietly contemplating yesterday's game (which was my son's first game at U-M), I can't help but wonder what our offense would look like under Seth Littrell (currently OC at Indiana). His starting starting offensive line has not one senior and his backups are mainly freshman. Tell me that Indiana's roster doesn't look younger than ours....
|78 Jason Spriggs | 6-7, 297, SO|
|57 Pete Bachman | 6-5, 298, RS JR|
|62 Ralston Evans | 6-4, 285, RS SO|
|77 Dimitric Camiel | 6-7, 304, RS FR|
|73 Bernard Taylor | 6-2, 295, JR|
|65 Wes Rogers | 6-4, 293, RS FR|
|50 Jake Reed | 6-4, 291, RS SO|
|70 Jacob Bailey | 6-5, 301, RS FR|
|64 Collin Rahrig | 6-2, 285, RS JR|
|50 Jake Reed | 6-4, 291, RS SO|
Yet his offense is rushing the ball for 5.4 YPC (U-M 3.2 YPC) and passing the ball for 14.1 YPC (U-M 15.6). For the entire season the IU offense has given up 14 sacks. We have 14 in the last two games. IU is averaging over 527 yards per game of offense while Michigan is averaging 385. I could go on but I will stop. Mostly because my Oskar Blues Ten Fidy needs replaced.
And this is exactly the point. IU is getting better production with lesser talent as a result of scheme. I'd say that sacks are a very relevant stat in this case.
Has David Brandon become Joe Dumars and Bill Davidson?
I will preface my theories with the concession that I have no inside sources in order to substantiate my suspicions. But a couple of things are surfacing which makes trained analysts note the parrallels.
1. This outfit has the symptoms of a demoralized organization. If you have ever been in an organization that was humming along on all cylinders until the leadership changed, either by retirement or other circumstance..and the new leadership came in with bright ideas that missed; New ideas without consulting the veterans and an inability to read situations clearly, combined with the inability to recognize talent versus the professional ass-kissers..
Then you have seen this before. The situation reaches critical mass at the point where everyone basically quits inside their own mind as a psyche- preservation exercise. The futility erupts into a realization that the situation is hopeless.
2. Bill Davidson, and by default Joe Dumars, became inflated to the point that they believed their organizational structure was responsible for the successes. So rather than accept that Larry Brown's eccentricity was the necessary evil accompanying his genius, they thought that with their superior organization, that just about any coach could plug in and continue the success. Their arrogance destroyed the fiber of the winning chemistry. But, at least the Larry Brown ego was no longer a nuisance.
Is it possible that meddling by the chief is undermining the cohesiveness of this organization? Is it possible that true feelings cannot be expressed or that the veteran's ideas are being overruled? To the point of giving up inside but putting on the face in order to keep the paycheck coming until the ship inevitably runs aground?
Is it possible that a Jim Harbaugh or a Nick Saban or an Urban Meyer have no real chance to be hired here? Was Jim Harbaugh our Larry Brown? His eccentricity overruling his ability to stick regardless of brilliance?
And finally, in closing, I want to answer those who have asked if not Hoke, then who? What 'Michigan Man' is out there or who would want come here?
I will answer that with a question. What Marine, what Seaman, what Airman and what Soldier is just that before basic training?
Close to none of them. That is why they go through basic training. To restructure them into the epitome of the organization.
So along those same precepts, any coach with supreme ability can be molded into a Michigan Man. There would just need to be a 'basic training' program to indoctrinate them as to the do's and don'ts at Michigan.
Michigan deserves to be the best football program in the land. There are coaches out there with the resume accomplished to the point that their thoughts have turned to their legacy.
What greater legacy for a coach would there be than to take the winningest team in history to it's greatest heights ever?
That would equal immortality if you pull it off. There are a few coaches that would bite at a chance for immortality and who 'know' they can do it here.
The only caveat is that the AD would have to give up sitting in on team affairs.
Dave Brandon is Jerry Jones and Michigan athletics is his Jerry World/Cowboys.
I was saying this last week.
I agree with this sentiment. Jerry Jones has been a crutch to all the Cowboys' head coaches. I 'm concerned no head coach will have good working conditions in the DB era.
Holy cow, that is insightful....and scary.
wasn't a problem until his health deteriorated and Dumars was either exposed or handcuffed by lack of support.
'Point was that Davidson grew tired of Larry Brown and his ego and interferred and made him go away, thus ending what could have been an extended championship run.
I agree however, that comparing Brandon to Davidson is generous. Davidson brought championships prior to the Larry Brown firing.
I've been pretty vocal in my support in Borges, or at that it's not all on him. That said, I thought he called a horrible game. For the most part, after the first quarter, our OL was able to pick up blitzes momentarily and he never found a way to punish Nebraska for the aggressiveness except that one screen and maybe a play here or there (which amazingly, he got away from). Never did he force them to back off. State is one thing, they were just overwhelming our OL, but to have the same exact problem a week later against a much worse defense and not have an answer is extremely frustrating. Execution is a really problem (as much as people think that's a cop out), but the plays had absolutely no coherence what so ever. It was one play at a time and see what can pick up a few yards here and there.
IU ran for 92 yards on MSU and their line is younger than ours. We ran for -48 with older and better talent. Let that soak in for a minute...
Iirc, most of that was on one play at the beginning
If it makes you feel any better Sten Carlson also said basically the same thing too.
And hey - I once posted an open letter to Brandon begging him to give RR a three year extension prior to the Wisconsin game in 2010.
I still think we'd be best served letting the current staff (funk being maybe the exception) work things out for one more year. At some point perception becomes reality though. At this point I, Borges can do no right in the eyes of most of the fan base no matter what happens, and that's not healthy for a program either. Either way, I think the folks who want him gone mid-season are delusional and only setting themselves up for frustration and disappointment.
(okay, few) is calling for Hoke to be fired mid-season--at least no reasonable ones. And canning Borges now is simply impractical as we don't have an internal option (or even a QB coach), and Hoke "don't do offense" as he has made abundantly clear. But if there was an internal option, there should be coaching changes.
I also believe that Hoke should get at least 1 more year to implement his program--as RichRod should have been given. But Borges and Funk just work for Hoke and they must go after the season. Hoke needs to sit down and have a face-to-face with Beilein--who did what he needed to do.
Make richrod an offer to be the highest paid ever OC /s
What I think is you guys who keep bringing up execution have no idea what a coaches roles is...developing the players so they can execute. Execution AND play calling are both on the coaches... That's what most people's problem was with people who tried to use that as a reason to absolve the coaches of the responsibility for what's going on.
Exactly! A coaches role is to teach fundamentals and put players in the best position to succeed according to their skillset and the teams/coaches philosophy.
Poor execution in a game happens, and I can live with that because they are young kids, but when it becomes an overwhelming trend over multiple games and multiple position groups its on the coaches. The kids aren't blameless, but the coaches deserve all of the criticism that is coming their way.
It took you until now to start questioning Borges?!?! I want the kool aid you are drinking. Why don't you go back and watch the last 2 years now that you know what people are upset about and see if you change your tune?
What could you possible use in support of Borges? Every team we play we become an statistical outlier in the wrong direction on offense.
Totally immune to anything that happens the next 1+ years. Wake me up when we have a new, competent coaching staff.
if they'd just get better at coaching.
Lost to OSU 1 vs 2 . Got worked in the Bowl game, lost the Horror on and on. This program needs a leader in the worst way plain and simple folks.
The thing that would hurt me most is having ohio fans take over our stadium again. We can be mad but we still need to go to the games and give our team the support they need
what has been the typical turnover for Michigan's coaching staff?
I know that the HC turnover has been infrequent. However, can someone provide an overview of the frequency and reasons for typical turnover going back to Bo?
I know that Hoke was hired by Moeller, and basically coached under Carr, but I'm trying to understand whether it was common at any of his coaching stops for there to be turnover. If there was turnover, it was probably due to coaches ascending the ranks. Much different from the current situation.
We were pretty stable under Bo and Mo, mostly only losing guys to become head coaches, but under Carr we had some straight-up staff changes. He had these coordinators:
OC - Fred Jackson (1995-96), Mike DeBord (1997-99), Stan Parrish (2000-01), Terry Malone (2002-05), Mike DeBord (06-07). DeBord left the first time to become CMU's head coach. The rest were relieved of their duties (Jackson was "kicked upstairs" as assistant HC).
DC - Greg Mattison (1995-96), Jim Herrmann (1997-2005), Ron English (06-07). Mattison left for ND, while Herrmann was nudged into taking an NFL position-coach job.
Also, on special teams, the coordinator (name escapes me) who supervised the Oregon and Iowa meltdowns in 2003 was booted midseason.
Unfortunately, the only change we'll see next year is the blitz packages we cannot handle will come off the edge versus up the middle. We have a coach who was hired with a sub .500 record and while he has recruited well, he's stuck in mediocrity. 4 million a year should get better outcomes!
Does anyone think Dave Brandon watching film with coaches is insane? Christ...we've got our Jerry Jones folks. This shit show is only getting started.
I guess it depends on what he's doing. If he's just observing, I don't really care. But if he's trying to analyze and critique, then it's a problem
Jones never played a lick. Brandon played for Bo. Its not like he's Dan Snyder pretending to be a football guru.
He was an offensive lineman for Arkansas. Not a scrub either. He was a co-captain for their 1964 national championship season. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Jones
A practice player? I don't recall seeing that he was much more than that.
I thought it was pretty common knowledge that Jerry Jones played for Frank Broyles at Arkansas in the powerful Southwest Conference. I'll admit I did not know he was an All-Conference player but regardless he played college football at a school that was a national power.
Jones was a starter for Arkansas and Brandon was a blowout scrub.
Doesn't change the fact that both are egomaniacs.
He is concerned about PR that I can see him having a conversation with Brady that will go like this "either Al and funk go or you are all going...we will wait until after the Ohio game so Al can hang himself with his game plan that won't be executed"
In light of the fact that I received my 'Preferred Seat Donation' form in the mail when I returned from the shit show yesterday...I had to chuckle at your post
"Defending Borges' play-calling might be his public stance, but it can't be his private stance"
I hope so
I agree with your sentiments completely, but is there any evidence that he has done anything to address the play calling? I don't see any
Calm down everyone. Jason Whitlock said Hoke would fix things.
You heard it here first: if Borges is let go after this season, Hoke will hire (drum roll)...
Parrish was Hoke's OC during his best three seasons at Ball State (2006-08). Parrish is now the interim HC at EMU, but is virtually certain to be let go at the end of the season.
It all fits together very easily. Parrish was a UM assistant from '96 through 2001, so it will be the return of another "Michigan Man."
Bring him back from VaTech.
It seems to me Parrish was actually a pretty decent QB coach. He's getting up there in age though.
which is pretty long in the tooth.
The only thing I don't like about your prediction, Don, is the word "if" instead of "when" in the sentence, " if Borges is let go after this season, Hoke will hire (drum roll)..."
But it makes sense.
So much so that I now feel compelled to read up on Mr. Parrish...
Then he might as well promote Coach Heck to OC (I think he was an OC) and try and poach back Soup Campbell and hire a good QB coach. I personally don't like this keeping it in the family business but if that is the direction then this probably makes the most sense.
I think this is a pretty good suggestion, since it appears as though Campbell actually might have been good at coaching. This is from his wiki profile:
"At Michigan, Campbell coached wide receivers and punt returners. He was also the team's assistant head coach from 2003 to 2007. He set an NCAA record by coaching a 1,000-yard receiver for eight consecutive years from 1998 to 2005. During his tenure at Michigan, he coached receivers Braylon Edwards, David Terrell, Marquise Walker, Amani Toomer, Mercury Hayes, Tai Streets, Marcus Knight, Jason Avant, Mario Manningham, Adrian Arrington, Steve Breaston, and Ronald Bellamy. He also coached Charles Woodson as a punt returner, and Steve Breaston set a Big Ten record with 1,599 career punt return yards (12.6 yards per return) with Campbell as his position coach."
Unless he just loves Montreal and is getting paid big $$, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd be interested in coming back to Michigan.
Campbell was an excellent coach and recruiter. I was surprised he was not retained by RR. Ferentz quickly snapped him up and he did good work there as well.
Most of Carr's position coaches were pretty good. The main coaching issues in his tenure were more about game strategy than player development.
First and foremost, I am not suggesting Al (or Funk at this point) should be going anywhere after this year, but back to Schembechler Hall. However, if they were, I'd suggest we take a look at Mr. Cameron at LSU. I doubt we'd get him at this point, but you never know.
other retread "michigan men" like Loeffler have not been particularly good at their other stops. Why not just give a young promising guy like Coach Heck a shot? It seems like he coaches the wideouts pretty well (at least they block well!) and he's been an OC at some of his previous stops. And he's the recruiting coordinator.
Needs to go up to Mount Pleasant where they belong and take over CMU - MAC quality at best and that is why Hoke was out at San Diego. His staff is incompetent and he hasn't corrected anything which makes him incompetent as well. This program won't return to where we were unless we go and steal a top notch staff.
Are you actually asserting that Brady Hoke was fired at San Diego State?
That is why he was out at that school and not a better program
Your premise doesn't hold up.
Hoke went from Ball State (MAC) to SDSU (Mountain West)
Urban Meyer went from Bowling Green (MAC) to Utah (Mountain West)
Is Urban Meyer a better coach than Brady Hoke? Of course, but it has nothing to do with coaching at a small school out west for a short time.
It's the thought that if was such a great coach, why wasn't he at a school "better" than SDSU?
Because for most coaches, there's a ladder you climb. You start off in a MAC level school, then advance to a mid-major, before going to the Big Boys.
Again, look at Urban Meyer. Or Brian Kelley. Or Nick Saban
Brian Kelley and Brady haven't coached long enough at their respective schools to judge their coaching acumen. That's the only thing they have in common with Meyer or Saban . . .
I wasn't comparing how good of coaches Kelly/Hoke are to Meyer/Saban, only talking about their previous job stints. And that you can't knock Hoke for being "out" at SDSU and asking why he didn't have a job
Try to keep up, or just scroll 2 comments up
If Urban Meyer was a better coach, why wasn't he at a 'better' school than Utah. Yeh, that guy sucks
Dave Brandon's judgement in firing RR was both narrow minded & short sighted.
Hoke is a glorified position coach who resembles Barney Fife.
Michigan needs to find a Sheriff.
Yeah that or was based off of having zero defense, given up 50+ in his last game to a meh Ole Miss team, having an abysmal record against rivals, barely 1 season over 500, sanctions, terrible recruiting, and bad hires ... Other than that Brandon jumped the gun, right?
Michigan would not give RR another measley 5 grand to bring his DC with him nor offer the guy an actual contrct compared to the Red Carpet treatment afforded to Hoke who had Denard's Jr & Sr season too boot. Apply the same standard ro measure the product on the field as before to realize this is not the guy you thought he was.
So do you want us to go through another coaching change, suffer more transfers and have more years of being very young again? If not, what is the point of constantly rehashing the RR stuff?
My Post is about Dave Brandon's Judgement:
A. Short Sighted;
Changing horses in midstream.
B. Narrow Minded;
Michigan DNA as the main criteria.
RR is pertinent to the 1st point.
Beyond that I will not comment,
Unless brought up in response.
This is what Dave Brandon wrought,
This is His Choice to parade up & down the sidelines sans headphones.
Let him Live with it & be Judged by it.
First off, Wojo's article is spot on.
I think everyone should wrap their head around the fact that Brady Hoke's job is NOWHERE near in jeopardy. Brandon is not going to subject the Michigan program to another, potentially damaging, coaching change this soon. Right now the program is in desperate need of stability, not change.
That being said, however, to think that Hoke is somehow satisfied with the offense -- and particularly the running game -- is asinine (despite what he says in pressers). Hoke said specifically that Michigan is going to run the ball, and right now it is doing the complete opposite of that. Whether he's a delegator type of not, it is plainly obvious to even the casual observer that something is seriously wrong with Michigan's offense, and it's OLine in particular -- let alone someone who is totally immersed in the program. Don't let Hoke's comments and his sort of bumbling nice guy personae trick you into believing for one second that he's not completely in control of the situation.
I stand by my comments about Hoke taking a dogmatic approach to development. He's going to get these kids to execute by letting them try to execute until they get it right. Further, the youth issues are a factor, and that issue will only be resolved with time. However, what we saw saw last night after the muffed punt has nothing to do with youth, nor anything to do with dogmatic development -- it was nothing but stupidity on the part of Borges. Honestly, I hate ascribing stupidity to people who have done something as long as Borges has. But, what other conclusion can one logically come to?
Back to Hoke and the overall trajectory of the program. I would be shocked if Funk, Jackson, and Borges are on the staff next season. Those three coaches oversee the running game, and it's an historic cluster fuck. Hoke knows what Michigan expects of him and the team he leads, he knows that something needs to change, and that time will fix some issues, but not all the issues that plague this offense.
First of all - welcome to the "WTF is Borges thinking team". You'll find our club growing in members every day and it's a lot easier to attribute his weekly WTF play calling to being just a bad play caller than some master plan he is about to unleash on everyone.
Second of all I respectfully disagree with your assessment that Hoke is unhappy with his coaching staff and will make changes. He is most certainly unhappy with the results but I firmly believe - from both his words and his actions - that he believes the failings are that of youth, not his coaches, and time will make things right.
I dont think anybody is going anywhere for a year at least.
After the muffed punt, It was deja vu all over again with the PSU OT game. In hindsight, it's like they were playing for the FG. They didn't want to throw the ball to risk an INT or sack.
For anyone who missed it, YouTube the Saban 60 minutes piece. Certainly plenty of fluff, but one thing that stands out - the guy knows how to coach. Jimbo Fisher can talk football circles around the best of them. Meyer may be hated in Florida but the guy wins wherever he goes. Hoke talks about "hearing football" and tries to stuff the term "physicality" into every sentence. I'm sorry but the guy seems to be in a bit beyond his pay grade. Who is the answer if he's not? Go to the pro's?
GTFO! Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.
"So this is on the coaching staff and offensive coordinator Al Borges, who has failed to make consistent adjustments."
Not sure what team he's been watching if he doesn't think adjustments are being made - they were made during the Nebraska game. Hard to take him seriously after that comment.
Just lazy, bandwagon, blame the coaches journalsim. No insight or analysis to back his talking points whatsoever.
making adjustments. And calling the same shit plays that have yet to work this season is so far from "making adjustments" it's not even funny anymore.
First half game plan was garbage, first drive second half with quick passes was outstanding and then what did we do after we scored? Go Right back to the first half game plan...what FN adjustments?
Not sure if serious Clark
Hoke had no choice in these matters
I see we've entered "scorned ex-girlfriend" territory, where anything that can possibly annoy you about a coach does.
After PSU, I decided I'd DVR the games, enjoy my Saturday afternoon, and check the score to see if I wanted to watch. Both games since have been deleted without a look.
Yes, the 2008 team was clearly worse, but not by much. We could easily be 5-4 and headed for 5-7. The thing that's very scary is that the failure is systemic. Hoke wants Michigan to be a run-first team, and we seemingly don't have the RBs or OL in the pipeline to do it. I don't mean this year -- what in our underclass RBs or OL gives us much hope? I guess Drake Johnson was #2 until the injury, but Green and Smith look clueless. It just doesn't seem like anyone on the offense is being coached up and improving.
As far as scheme and play-calling, the things we can do aren't apparently called enough. Someone talked about the first drive after the half and how we moved the ball. After that, those plays weren't seen again. That's ludicrous. Hoke made mention that before the Indiana game, he had to tell Al to go for the end zone. Why would an OC need to be told that? Either Borges or Hoke puts trying to control clock ABOVE scoring points? Maybe in the last half of the fourth quarter with the lead, but not as a game strategy.
I've been a fan since before I can remember, but this team is unwatchable, and looks to be so for the foreseeable future. Sad.
That doesn't make any sense - the most important thing is the score so by checking it first you're defeating the purpose of watching the game at all. Now don't get me wrong, I DVR pretty much every single game but I still watch them in their entirety. It's a lot easier to deal with a loss when you've only lost an hour of your Saturday than 3+...
He doesnt watch games we've already loss only the victories. I do the same thing when i have to DVR football and basketball games.
Could be 5-4? We could just as easily be 8-1 right now with PSU and Neb
Hit the nail right on the head. I had been holding back judgment on Borges (last year Ohio game). But he needs to go!
maybe, just maybe, Hoke is actually not a "good" football coach, and maybe he knows nothing about offensive playcalling... so he washes his hands of it every week. he was a defensive lineman in college and that's been his calling ever since. motivation and keeping The Team The Team The Team together is one thing, but knowing how to win games by scoring points is quite another.
i'm not saying, i'm just saying.