further adventures in Jed York being unsuited for his position
|1 day 20 min ago||I don't see it in any of||
I don't see it in any of those links, so I'll ask the question. Why did you think that guy was from Princeton to begin with?
|6 days 5 hours ago||So Indiana is showing that||
So Indiana is showing that it's possible to reject horrible Adidas ideas that interfere with classic looks. Hopefully the AD is paying attention when it comes to the next horrible football proposal.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||I didn't say it wasn't due to||
I didn't say it wasn't due to availability. But there is a reason that class size factors into these evaluations at all, the more bullets in the chamber, the more likely you'll have productive seniors four and five years from now. But, even considering the small class, our star rating isn't at Michigan standards. If it were a top 5 or 10 class by average star rating, nobody would be calling us "signing day losers."
Again, that's not to say that extenuating circumstances don't make it silly to call the day a loss in the big picture. But when writing articles about the small picture, i.e., what do respective classes look like today, it's not unreasonably to say we were a "loser" on the day.
|3 weeks 6 days ago||Don't take this too||
Don't take this too seriously. From a small picture standpoint we were one of the "losers" yesterday. We had a small class and even our average star rating was below what we normally see at Michigan. We only have one consensus top 100 recruit. And we landed none of the biggest recruits we were competing for, including a guy who most thought we would get. The guys premise is completely reasonable viewing signing day from this point of view.
From a big picture standpoint it's hard to see it as a lost day considering all the factors working against us. We did flip guys that other schools wanted. We did fill our limited numbers with guys that weren't complete flyers. And we knowingly were sacrificing part of this class to land Harbaugh, a sacrafice every single person in college football would have made. Obviously we hope that the talent we did bring in plays above their recruiting rankings and are solid contributors over the next five years.
|4 weeks 22 hours ago||Gambler's fallacy has nothing||
Gambler's fallacy has nothing to do with it. Under his logic, Michigan had to "win" 3 straight 50/50 propositions, the odds of which were 12.5%. There's nothing wrong about that math. Gambler's fallacy says because some event happened at rates greater than would be expected by strict odds, the opposite event is going to happen more often for a while "to even things out." Gambler's fallacy would say that because Michigan "won" the first two 50/50 chances they were less likely than 50/50 to win the third. Which isn't true.
|4 weeks 22 hours ago||The point wasn't that the||
The point wasn't that the guy's assumptions were correct (they weren't, and I don't think he would really contend they were), just that under his assumptions, the 12.5% chance at a victory was the right math.
|4 weeks 23 hours ago||If you have 50% chance to||
If you have 50% chance to make the two and force overtime, under his math you have a 50% chance at losing if you miss (obviously not true, but work with it). If you make it, your opponent has a 50% chance of hitting the winning bucket at the buzzer, knocking your winning percentage down 25% and your opponents up to 75% (the missed two point shot plus hitting the game winner in regulation). Now, if you have survived your 25% chance to get into overtime, you now have a 50/50 chance again to win. Your chances of winning overall are 12.5%, your opponents are 87.5%.
The guy's assumptions are way off base, but I think his math reasonably makes sense.
|4 weeks 1 day ago||The big factor missing from||
The big factor missing from all of this analysis is just how small the class was expected to be from the beginning. 12-15 guys has been the prediction all along. Thus, when Hoke's class filled up quickly with studs there wasn't a lot of strong interest on the part of Michigan to other recruits that Harbaugh could then run with when he got going. Also, when the few commits started leaving, it left an even tinier class to come back from.
If we get Clark, Wheatley, and someone that appears to be a longshot right now, that would be a great class considering the circumstances.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||That's always been the case||
That's always been the case though. Now they're just announced as these 5th year transfers whereas before, guys who would be expected to make little or no contribution in their 5th year were given a slap on the back, thanked for their contributions, and pushed out the door, hopefully with their degree in hand.
If a freshman isn't going to make a contribution his first year on campus it is still in everyone's best interest to see him redshirt.
|4 weeks 5 days ago||I don't think it's more of a||
I don't think it's more of a thing than it has been in the past. You used to just see these guys show up for a year at FCS or DII to complete their eligibility. There was proablably a little seen press release from the school announcing their departure.
The Russell Wilson type transfer obviously is more common now, but that comes from the rule change, as others have noted.
|5 weeks 6 days ago||I think it depends on how||
I think it depends on how they cheated. If they had a ball boy deflate the balls after inspection then that's clearly "cheating" even if it's a stupid rule and should draw a real punishment (not keep them out of the super bowl, but fine/draft picks). Whatever one thinks of a rule, sportsmanship says you should play within it. On the other hand, if they did something along the lines of what was discussed on this board yesterday where they pumped up the balls in a much warmer room right before inspection, and after a couple hours in the cold they were no longer kosher, that's probably violating the spirit of the rules but shouldn't draw a huge punishment as its the type of advantage football teams take all the time.
|5 weeks 6 days ago||Exactly. The balls are all||
Exactly. The balls are all manufactured the same, there's really a limit of what you can do to the ball. It's not like someone is going to gain a huge technological advantage. Since they let them do basically anything they want to the ball to make it to the QBs liking, I don't understand what's so sacrosanct about the pressure reading.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||That's the frustrating part.||
That's the frustrating part. The on the field punishment really had little to do with the problems Penn State was being punished for, whereas the Paterno related punishments were directly connected. As it stands, only the on-field punishment will have actually taken affect.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Since they'll probably put||
Since they'll probably put Paterno's statue back up next, I'd imagine it will go on for a while, and deservedly so.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||Trey wasn't going to get||
Trey wasn't going to get taller or quicker had he stayed. GR3's progression had stalled, same with Hardaway. McGary probably would have been wise to leave after freshman year, but would have benefited from a year of healthy play if he had the opportunity to stay. I don't think Nik was going to get a second leap in the college game, to improve he had to compete every day against better players.
Unless there's a correctable flaw that can be improved by sticking around (Darius Morris' shooting, for example) or there's a legitimate chance of the player blowing up into a star (Trey after freshman year), a player should go Pro when he reaches his approximate peak of nba draft value. Our recent departures have mostly done that with the exception of Morris and McGary who erred by staying an extra year.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||And there's no chance that||
And there's no chance that none of those guys are as productive as Miller or Barrett? Especially with two guys being true freshman?
You have to be a real homer to not see that it's much more preferable for others that Ohio State's backup is someone who hasn't played a down rather than someone who has spent at least one season as the Big Ten's most productive QB.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Once we get to talk about||
Once we get to talk about actual on the field stuff, the khaki stuff will take care of itself. Bready Hoke never wearing red was once a thing too...
|8 weeks 1 day ago||They were starting Tony||
They were starting Tony Lippett at the end of the season...
While saying thay have no talent in the secondary may be a bit of hyperbole, I don't think it's a stretch at all to say that they have serious questions in the back four, a back four, which to my eyes, was fairly mediocre this season. I think it's fair to say that when you turn to a true freshman and a WR (or two if what you say about Shelton is correct) late in the season, your coaching staff isn't all that thrilled with the state of the rest of the position group.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Even if he is forced to||
Even if he is forced to transfer and sit out he's basically just committing himself to a RS year, something he was likely to take anyway as a freshman QB.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Would guess that's as of||
Would guess that's as of whatever date that was published. Just eyeballing it, he has our offensive numbers correct with Funchess going pro, but is off by one on MSU's defense with Trae Waynes' recent declaration reducing their starting numbers down to 7.
|8 weeks 1 day ago||Would guess that's as of||
Would guess that's as of whatever date that was published. Just eyeballing it, he has our offensive numbers correct with Funchess going pro, but is off by one on MSU's defense with Trae Waynes' recent declaration reducing their starting numbers down to 7.
|10 weeks 1 day ago||Lets hope he really was what||
Lets hope he really was what made MSU's D go and that he takes a defensive assistant or two with him...
|10 weeks 1 day ago||I think the school decides.||
I think the school decides. Nike/Adidas/Under Armour all have schools that do it, some schools reject or minimize it, most prominently Alabama, Texas and USC. There's no reason why we can't be a school that rejects or minimizes it, no matter which apparel company we sign with.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||You want to be a truly||
You want to be a truly competent reporter to get to the NFL where you can receive tips from your sources to report what the league wants you to report, and in exchange, you get fame, relative fortune and job security. Seems like a good gig.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||I guess my proplem with the||
I guess my proplem with the "someone's kid" theory and I guess his stated connection of being close to a family friend of the agent (which, I guess makes him a son of the family friend of the agent?), is that he seems to be a Michigan person and not just a kid who knows he has a source of info on news that lots and lots of reporters are chasing. Now is it possible that the agent has a very close family friend who is presumably a huge Michigan fan? Sure, even though I think the agent is a west coast guy. But, if you were going with the fact that he's the son of someone important, I'd be more agreeable to the theory if he seemed to be reporting information coming from a Michigan source.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Maybe he's saying that none||
Maybe he's saying that none of those jobs are all that promising. And there might be something to that...
Bears/Jets/Raiders/Redskins are all organizational messes. Falcons and Panthers are playing for a playoff game, that might save a coach's job. Jags are going to be perpetually young and underfunded, probably not paying top dollar for a coach.
I think Giants and Falcons are the only two jobs there that a coach can look at and reasonably think, yeah, I can go win there quickly. And I'm not sure either job will be open.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||I wouldn't be surprised if||
I wouldn't be surprised if the last time he ever had to report on something Michigan related was when he was actually at Michigan. He's an NFL guy, he has NFL connections. I'm not shocked that he hasn't cultivated any connections at Michigan. For what purpose would he need those?
|10 weeks 2 days ago||And to be fair, isn't every||
And to be fair, isn't every fan base going to act that way?
If they drop off next year it will because they may lose three or so guys with eligibility remaining to the NFL. I don't buy that MSU is a program that can just plug the next guy in for early departures. Also, finally losing Rush is going to be a blow.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||Those people would be stupid.||
Those people would be stupid. Even Alabama lost to Louisiana-Monroe in Saban's first or second season. Worked out pretty well for them.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||I think the more likely||
I think the more likely scenario is that Brandon contacted Harbaugh late in the season and maybe basically said the job was his if he wanted it, with Harbaugh saying something like "I'm interested, but don't put me in a position to decide whether to finish the season with Stanford or take the Michigan job, you won't like the answer." Brandon holds off firing Rodriguez and by the time he officially does so, Harbaugh has become a hot name in NFL coaching searches with specific interest from the one franchise that keeps his family in place. Thus, he no longer wants the Michigan job once an official search begins.
Both stories are then consistent. Brandon can tell people he had an "accepted" offer from Harbaugh. Others can say it never even approached anything official. This scenario also explains the insanity of the timing of the Rodriguez firing.
|10 weeks 2 days ago||The timing didn't really work||
The timing didn't really work for Harbaugh to have "accepted" the Michigan job. If I recall correctly, he was announced as 49ers coach only a couple days after Rich Rodriguez was fired. He would have been going through that process with the 49ers probably before there was even an official opening.
My guess is that Harbaugh said through back channels that he would have been interested, but as it became apparent that he was in play for NFL jobs, specifically one that would not require him to move, he never really became involved beyond that point.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||The line about $8M/year||
The line about $8M/year sounds dumb, but I can't deny there is real logic to it. And I would think a businessman would understand the psychological value of hitting that round number rather than leaving it at $49.
|10 weeks 5 days ago||I don't think money is an||
I don't think money is an issue, even if the 8 year contract is correct. Yes, $2M a year is nothing to sneeze at, but this isn't a situation where an athlete has to maximize his contract earnings before his career ends. Harbaugh has already had a long financially fruitful career, both as a player and as a coach. He had a 15 year NFL career, with 12 years where he was likely to be paid as a top-half NFL starter. He coached for four years at Stanford where he likely made $1M a year. He has coached for four years at SF where he has made $20M. I'm assuming he is not an idiot so he is probably set for life financially. Plus, he is still young and can coach for another 15 years. The man has made and is going to make enough money that $2M a year isn't going to change his life.
The only way it comes down to money is if with his ego he thinks he is the best coach in football and should be paid that way. And if that's the case, the NFL is always going to win that battle.
Assuming the $49M/8yrs is correct, it still makes him one of the ten highest paid coaches in all of football. We're offering more than enough money.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||It's been a long time since||
It's been a long time since he's been in Ann Arbor, and I'm not sure he's ever reported on college sports. I'm not sure why it's shocking that he doesn't have real sources within Michigan.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Anybody can claim to be||
Anybody can claim to be family friend's with Harbaugh's agent. I still don't see any evidence that he's reporting information that comes from said agent. My guess is he is a high school/college kid who scours the Michigan boards and reports rumors from others as his privately sourced information.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||This. If he drags it out a||
This. If he drags it out a couple weeks into the NFL postseason I think fans have a right to be mad at him. He'll actively be hurting Michigan. If he turns down Michigan on the soonish side because he's an NFL coach now, that's fine and shouldn't change a thing.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Gotcha. I'm convinced this||
Gotcha. I'm convinced this guy is full of it, though...
|10 weeks 6 days ago||Yeah, I'm with you. I don't||
Yeah, I'm with you. I don't see anything in his timeline to make me think that he actually is credible or has sources.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||The agent is working through||
The agent is working through some rando on twitter? If the agent really wants things out there big reporters will have the story.
|10 weeks 6 days ago||His misguided point is that||
His misguided point is that Michigan is cheap so the $8M/year contract can't possibly be real. Thus, using the contract offer to argue against Schefter's points isn't really effective.
|11 weeks 57 min ago||If I'm Jim Harbaugh, I think||
If I'm Jim Harbaugh, I think that one of these owners is going to be willing to give me full control, or damn near close to full control. I don't thik he'll need to wait to hear that as an actual offer to think that something along those lines will be on the table.
Maybe it's naive, but I just don't think that Harbaugh is going to put Michigan through the ringer that would be a couple additional weeks of waiting through the entire NFL process which is complicated by being under contract with the 49ers if the decision comes down to which NFL offer to weigh against a Michigan offer.
|11 weeks 1 hour ago||I look at it like this, he||
I look at it like this, he isn't really chosing between job offers. He's choosing a lifestyle path. He can choose to either be a college coach at what has to be his dream college destination or he can choose to be an NFL coach and feel pretty comfortable that there's going to be a palatable option in the next two seasons. I think he cares enough about Michigan that he's not going to drag out the process so he can weigh individual job offers against Michigan. If there is still indecision I think it's because he doesn't know if he wants to give up the NFL, not that he doesn't know if the right NFL opportunity will be there this offseason. He has either told Michigan he is coming but he's not going to announce until this season is over or he is still making that decision.
Come the 29th, I think we'll know. He's either coming, or on that date Hackett will demand an answer. If it drags on past them I will be highly dissapointed in Jim Harbaugh.
|11 weeks 1 hour ago||One huge difference is that||
One huge difference is that the Raiders can't actually talk to Harbaugh or his camp without risking tampering charges, unless the 49ers have given permission and I think that would have been reported. Thus, there's no real information to report for NFL people with NFL contacts.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||I'm not sure your Dennis||
I'm not sure your Dennis Erickson characterization is fair, at least for his return to Oregon State.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||I'm going to guess his agent||
I'm going to guess his agent did inquire about the Pitt job. Think Pitt could be of interest to Narduzzi? Good recruiting state in an area he's familiar with, without having to directly compete on the field with the better Big Ten schools. A P5 job where coaches have shown some ability to be successful. Certainly a better option than UConn ever was.
Edit: It's almost hard to imagine that he wouldn't have at least inquired. If he is taking youngstown job out of at least partly a desire to be coaching back home, the Pitt job accomplishes almost the same thing.
|11 weeks 1 day ago||The 2007 Herbstreit thing was||
The 2007 Herbstreit thing was only a thing because of the timing with Miles. He was trying to win an SEC (?) title that night so he was forced to make a strong public statement that he intended to be the LSU coach. The LSU AD then basically used that and UM dragging its feet to force Miles to ink an extension keeping him out of the running for the UM job. There is no remotely similar scenario that can play out with Harbaugh. Rumors of him leaving have zero impact on his current team and his current management seem disinclined to keep him anyway.
|11 weeks 2 days ago||I never thought the Niners||
I never thought the Niners being eliminated from playoff competition was important in so much as he would then be able to leave his job before the end of the season to come coach Michigan. I thought it was important in that Harbaugh was obviously not going to make or at least announce a decision when it could possibly be interpreted as interfering with his team's title chances. Now that the season is effectively over, I think Harbaugh can decide and either announce his acceptance of the Michigan job starting Dec. 29, or tell Michigan that he is staying in the NFL and have his agent start the process of pursuing other jobs.
I don't think he's going to "quit" on the 49ers, but with them out of playoff contention, I don't think he has to quit in order to announce his intentions, either publicly or behind closed doors.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||That's right. It's a chicken||
That's right. It's a chicken and the egg situation. Michigan adds value by itself, but that value has been built by generations of great players.
While you can't say as many Denard jerseys would have been sold had he been playing for Eastern Michigan, you also can't say that as many Michigan jerseys would have been sold if Denard wasn't as special of an athlete as he was. Both Michigan and Players bring money into the university.
As someone above pointed out, it's the same thing with the NFL. When the USFL was "challenging" the NFL, they were stealing a lot of the best players coming up from college. The level of play was probably closer to the NFL than the NFL would have ever admitted, yet the USFL had to fold because it wasn't as popular. The NFL brands had value irrespective of the players playing. Yet, the NFL players are still highly paid because without those great players, those same NFL brands quickly lose value.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||On the other hand, if the||
On the other hand, if the quality of play/players didn't matter, how come we're talking about paying Jim Harbaugh over $5M to come coach our football team.
You're not wrong that there's a lot of value in Michigan by itself. But the players also bring value and money in. It's fair to say they aren't adequately compensated for that value. Especially the guys like Denard Robinson who undoubtedly push a lot of jerseys and Michigan gear in general.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Yeah, Miss prevents contracts||
Yeah, Miss prevents contracts of over 4 years (or 5?) so Mullen gets a one-year extension to the state limit every off season. It doesn't mean anything with respect to his willingness to take another job.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||How do we know he isn't Will||
How do we know he isn't Will Muschamp? An excellent coordinator but not a very good head coach? His Pitt tenure hasn't really answered any questions. I understand why Wisconsin will go this route, but there's a decent chance it doesn't work out.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||Just because you gave two||
Just because you gave two examples of good offenses at shit schools doesn't mean "It's Iowa State" isn't at least some form of an excuse. Bad college football programs are bad for a reason and just because it's theoretically possible to do well at such a school, it's not like the failure to do so necesserily indicates a bad coach. Maybe 1 for 5 under the circumstances of coaching Rice and Iowa State is great?
I was more looking for if there's any other information out there. For instance, in his third year, two different QBs started multiple games, with the backup starting the last 6 of the regular season and the starter coming back for the bowl game. Injuries? Just shitty QBs because you're Iowa State? I don't know. But it probably has something to do with the offense struggling. The two years before a different two guys got multiple starts at QB, and though one seemed to be largely the starter, there are enough games in there where both saw action to indicate that it was far from settled. If I had to guess, I'd say that Iowa State had very, very bad QB play. I don't know how much can be said to be Herman's fault.
I wonder if there were other issues on offense? An O-line injury collapse? A Maryland-esque WR apocalypse? I don't know. What I do know is that Urban Meyer saw enough in Herman, or someone influential to Urban Meyer saw enough in him, that Meyer plucked him out of Iowa State to run his offense. That means something.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||I would hope that a guy we||
I would hope that a guy we hire as head coach wouldn't leave his current team in the lurch right before the playoffs, even if that team is Ohio State. Coordinators regularly take head coaching jobs, begin their duties there while coordinating their current team in their bowl game.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||It took Schiano two||
It took Schiano two additional years before his breakthrough at Rutgers, and, despite that, most thought Schiano was a fine, if not spectacular, candidate in 2007. The problem is that with Schiano we saw what happened after his breakthrough. Losing reords in the Big East three of the next five years. A disasterous two years in the NFL. We have more information now than we did in 2007 or was available for Gary Andersen two years ago, and that information says he's probably not a great coach and Michigan should be able to do better.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||I'm not sure why you're so||
I'm not sure why you're so biased on this subject. The reason UF's offense didn't crater in 2009 is because it returned everyone but Percy Harvin, including NFL players at over half the positions. And the offense still took a slight step back. In 2010,the offense did crater, which you conveniently ignore.
Nobody is arguing that Meyer isn't hugely important to his offenses, but he IS more reliant on his OC than most "offensive genius" head coaches.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||Correction: Schiano's Agent||
Correction: Schiano's Agent targeting Wisconsin.
|11 weeks 6 days ago||Other than the explanation||
Other than the explanation simply being "it's Iowa State," any explanation for the struggles there?
|12 weeks 2 days ago||I sort of think the opposite.||
I sort of think the opposite. Albama isn't as dominant as they have been. Meanwhile, Baylor makes life difficult on safeties, the one glaring weakness of the Dantonio/Narduzzi scheme.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||If the guy they got to||
If the guy they got to pretend to be Kevin Hogan against UCLA is available, then yes. If not, then no.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||I don't think it's so much as||
I don't think it's so much as a contractual out as that Harbaugh can simply chose to resign and become a college coach without causing any financial damage to the 49ers. Harbaugh is prevented from coaching a different NFL team while he's under contract with the 49ers by NFL rules. It isn't written into his contract. That's different than the college game where there is no overarching league to enforce contracts. Thus, you need buyouts (Liquidated Damages clauses in contractual legal terms) in college to keep a coach from fleeing at the drop of a hat. You won't have a buyout in the NFL because there's no fear of your coach resigning to coach your competitor.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||I agree with your assessment.||
I agree with your assessment. The Niners do seem like huge long shots at this point, but nothing is impossible when it comes to December football in the NFL. That being said, I like the chances of the Niners being eliminated from the playoffs next weekend.
Seattle at home vs. a reeling Niners team, Lions at home vs. the Vikings, Green Bay beating either Atlanta at home or Buffalo on the road? All seem like they should go the way we want.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||I agree that it's nice to be||
I agree that it's nice to be able to sprinkle in under-center. At the very least it changes the looks for the defense. I also think it can be successful as a base offense (Wisconsin, for instance). My point is more that if your offense doesn't have a QB capable of being a running threat, you have to be really good at something else to keep up offensively in today's college football. Points per game are up to about 29 per team from about 23 in the 90's. Offense is just better now and I think it's largely on the running QB. If you're going to be an alternate model, you better be damn good at it.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||The big difference is that in||
The big difference is that in play-action from under center, the QB generally isn't a running threat. So to get the numeric advantage required to open the passing game your running game has to be so proficient that it is capable of being succesful against a numeric disadvantage (generally 7 defenders against 6 blockers) which causes defenses to add an extra defender to up the numerical disadvantage.
With read-option and what have you, the QB as a running threat negates the defensive numerical advantage. 7 in the box (or 6 without a TE), end up going against 5 linemen, a TE/FB, a RB and a QB. The RB or QB who doesn't have the ball ends up taking away one defender, meaning a defender has to make a play while being blocked to stop the run. Hard to do. Defenses end up having to bring an extra guy into the box just to get a defender free. Thus, play-action tends to be more effective from the spread-option (see Denard's insane passing numbers as a sophomore).
That's not to say that the read-option is always better. But I do think, in today's college football, if your QB isn't a running threat you bettter be damn good at something else. A run of the mill college QB who can't run puts your team at a huge disadvantage unless you're absolutely great at running the football from the classic under center look.
|12 weeks 3 days ago||Don't do anything. Watering||
Don't do anything. Watering down the conference to get a championship game won't help. They already play 9 conference games (the same number as a Big Ten champion). Get their conference members to play better competiition in the non-conference and have their conference declare a "true" champion for playoff consideration purposes. If Baylor beats a Nebraska this year, which they would have, they're in. If the Big 12 declared Baylor the champion this year, which they were, they're in. It's stupid to make the conference weaker, make conference mates less money, just to solve a one-year problem that they could address through other means.
|12 weeks 4 days ago||I, for one, hope and think||
I, for one, hope and think that if Harbaugh turns this down he never gets another chance. And that's said with no ill will towards Harbaugh. Even if we are searching again in 4 or 5 years because this candidate doesn't work out, which I don't expect to be the case, we won't be waiting around on the end of Harbaugh's season to make a decision. This is his last shot.
I did, however, find the same amusement in the "once in a lifetime" description.
|12 weeks 4 days ago||Even accepting that version||
Even accepting that version of events as true, what does that necesserily have to do with Mullen? Nebraska hired Mike Riley of all people after four days without a coach. They explicitly said they didn't use a search firm. It's more than reasonable to suggest that they missed opportunities on plenty of worthy coaching candidates to settle on Riley. I don't see how that suggests anything about Mullen.
I think you're letting your bias against Mullen get the better of you. Your argument, especially now that you've transitioned from that wacky "no-upsets" argument to his failure to have a QB for five seasons, has merit. I think most would recognize that. Don't go looking for additional BS reasons to say he's not a good coaching candidate just because many on this board still think he is one despite his QB problem at Miss. St.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||You also have the||
You also have the Cowboys/Eagles loser.
Niners have three games left vs. teams fighting for their playoff lives (Seattle, San Diego, Arizona). Even if they manage to go 2-1 against those three, they need at least two of Seattle to lose two, Arizona to lose 3, Dallas to lose 2 (of 3 games), Philly to lose 3 and Detroit to lose 2 to even bring tiebreakers into play. No idea how those tiebreakers play out.
Detroit should take care of business the next three weeks. Philly finishes with Washington and NYG, so even if they lose to Seattle and Dallas, they should be 11-5. Seattle and Arizona have tough schedules, but one will get a win against the other and each get a shot at the Niners. If the Niners loses to either of them, I'm hard pressed to see them getting the wild card. I don't think they'll be eliminated in two weeks with a loss to Seattle, but I think they'll be damn close.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||We should just stop until||
We should just stop until there's official word either one way or the other from Harbaugh or the school. If Harbaugh wants to be in the NFL, he'll have the opportunity with someone. If he wants to coach Michigan, he'll have that opportunity. Hackett shouldn't, and probably won't, wait around for Harbaugh to weigh each individual option before he makes a decision. Harbaugh will make his decision, college vs. pro, and then we'll know. Until then all leaks/opinions/analysis are worthless. Possible exceptions being "Harbaugh has told Michigan no," or "Harbaugh has told Michigan yes but doesn't want word to leak until the 49ers are eliminated from the playoffs." Even then I'd have my doubts until someone is hired.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||At least you're now using a||
At least you're now using a reasonable criticism. I agree not having a QB to fit his system until year 5 is a big concern. Whether that was from inability to recruit a QB or inability to utilize what was there. I also agree the QB situation probably explains the lack of getting over the hump in some of their upset attempts from those first few years (they did almost derail both of Auburn's undefeated seasons before they got started).
I don't know enough to know why Mullen had that stretch at MSU without a viable option at QB. Even good qb coaches with a history of developing qbs will have blips where they can't seem to find the right guy. Was that all this was? Who knows. However, I'm not going to dismiss his success just because Todd Graham's guy turned out ok, or because Manziel was a 3-star because too many scouts couldn't see his QB potential. Also, I think crediting Harbaugh with Andrew Luck's natural ability is a bit much.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||I think you're putting||
I think you're putting waaaaay too much into this "pulled off an upset thing." Sure Harbaugh pulled off some upsets in 2009. He also had the best pro-prospect QB at the helm since Peyton Manning. Bielema is leading a program that finished the year ranked #5 three years ago. It's not shocking that these results happened. Doesn't mean Mullen can't coach.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Les Miles made it to a BCS||
Les Miles made it to a BCS championship game long after Saban's influence on the program was gone. I don't think you can even remotely compare the accomplishments of Sumlin to Miles.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||The 1990's were a weird time||
The 1990's were a weird time in the SEC. The SEC West was absolute garbage some of those years. That 1999 team that managed to go 10-2 didn't play a ranked team all year long. So, yes, it shows that it's not entirely impossible to win at Mississippi St., but Jackie Sherrill (who was cheating like a mofo at the time) wasn't exactly competing in the SEC West of the last 6 years.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||Here's what you're missing.||
Here's what you're missing. Those numbers are pretty decent nationally. Yet, the only time he had better than the 11th best class (according to 247 composite rankings) in the SEC was in 2009 when he was all the way up at 8th in the SEC. So, he's pulling in the Purdue and Indiana type classes for the SEC. He's working with a significant talent disparity within his own conference.
I feel you're a bit biased in this post. For instance, this quote: "Did UF's offense go thru the crapper when Mullen left? No." would be laughed at by Florida people. They dropped to 8 in oFEI and 9 in oS&P in Tebow's senior year with everybody but Percy Harvin back (the pouncy twins, Aaron Hernandez, Riley Cooper, the other running backs, the offense was absolutely loaded). Then in 2010, they dropped to 68 and 50, respectively. I'd say they went through the crapper when Mullen left.
I'm not sure Mullen's a home run candidate. But I think there's evidence there that he can coach. He's coached in the SEC when it's been at its absolute beatliest. Playing in the division that has produced 80% of the SEC's good teams in that time frame. He's managed not to absolutely shit himself faced with these odds. And when the division finally came back down toward the rest of college football, his team had a breakthrough. You dismiss beating the teams "he should beat" as if that's some guarantee in football. Look at who Sylvester Croom lost to. Or even cheatin' ass Jackie Sherrill during his last few seasons. Beating "who you're supposed to" is no guarantee at Miss. St. So he didn't manage to pull the upsets until this year? Doesn't mean he can't coach. Even being in some of those games, which they tended to be, was impressive.
I think the evidence points to a guy that can clearly coach who, given at least resource parity with his competition, is going to be pretty good.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||I'd be a little concerned||
I'd be a little concerned that it took him 6 years to find an experienced QB to really run his offense. I will grant that Mississippi St. didn't give him many natural advantages to find his guy, and hopefully one of our guys could step right in like an Alex Smith, but it's still concerning.
|12 weeks 5 days ago||I'm interested to hear you||
I'm interested to hear you make that case. I would argue that Sumlin rode Art Briles' coattails to success at Houston and the arm of a 6th year QB to his one special year there, followed by two years with Johnny F'n Football, and a team loaded with talent. Yet he still hasn't won a conference championship game.
He's a good recruiter and probably a good coach. However he still hasn't really accomplished anything.
And, yes, he's not leaving A&M.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||When he's talking about a||
When he's talking about a name being "out there," I'm sure he isn't trolling the depths of Michigan message boards to come to that conclussion. He's probably read a few news articles, maybe a couple blogs, and gone from there. His name, whatever voracity may be behind it, is probably not one of the big names that has been floated. He's making it more entertaining by saying it's not even on the message boards (!!!!!!), but I doubt he would have any way to back the statement up.
However, Stoops does seem to have been floated by at least one or two legitimate college news reporters, so I would be sort of suprised if that's his super-duper secret name.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||His pre-HC resume is far more||
His pre-HC resume is far more impressive than Hoke's. He then showed that he could handle head coaching duties. It may not be a resume that generally would get you in at one of the top 10 jobs in the country. But it certainly would have earned him a shot at upper tier P5 jobs even in a deeper coaching search pool.
He's obviously no gurantee to be good, but nobody is. And programs as good as Florida have certainly taken guys with less impressive resumes.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||I'm not sure. Aside from||
I'm not sure. Aside from Mullen apparently never being in the picture, and unless they never even kicked the tires on guys thought to be unattainable, this seems like a process resulting in a fine hiring. You can't tell me he's any worse a bet to succeed than any other guy they could have gone after.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||They're going to do that||
They're going to do that anyway. What would the assistant coaches be able to say in retort to any recruiting pitches that say "you don't know who your coach is going to be"?
There's nothing the assistant coaches could add at this point. They've already sold Michigan. Hopefully it's enough for the guys that committed to the school, not particular coaches.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||I don't think it's that big||
I don't think it's that big of a deal. The recruits/commits all know the story. And as these guys are going to be actively looking for other jobs it protects the coaches from the appearance of improprieties if, say, a recruit ended up signing with a school that ultimately hires said assistant.
I imagine these guys all did the right thing over the last day or so, saying that they should go to Michigan, regardless of the coaching staff. I also imagine that Mike DeBord can and will keep in touch with committs, or at least offer an open line of communication for any of the committs.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||What's striking about that||
What's striking about that chart is that 2008 saw the single unit (offense) with the least returning experience since 1997 followed by, just eyeballing it, the third or fourth least experienced unit in 2009 (defense). Puts it into perspective what Rodriguez was working with his first couple years. While Hoke's teams were getting less and less experienced as the 2010/2011 classes worked there way through, it's nothing like the first couple years for Rodriguez.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||On that note, you can't wait||
On that note, you can't wait forever for a Harbaugh answer in any event, right? Maybe give him a couple weeks, see how the season progresses, but I don't think we can wait out him entertaining every NFL option he may have before we move on to other candidates.
|12 weeks 6 days ago||Rode Al Golden's coat tails||
Rode Al Golden's coat tails to one good year at Temple. BC bounced back in his first year but have been far from being good. Was OC for Urban Meyer's lone legitimately bad season as a head coach.
In sum, what everybody else said... no.
|13 weeks 3 hours ago||I don't really think the Big||
I don't really think the Big Ten's coaching hires have been atypical for power 5 conferences. Slam dunks are rare. Urban Meyer has to have take a sabbatical for Ohio State to have landed him. Alabama needed Nick Saban to not want to be in the NFL any longer. Otherwise, you look at the SEC coaching hires and they're not all that different, with the possible exception of Bielema. Malzahn was an OC of a great team and had one year of HC experience, a resume not all that different from Gary Andersen. Hugh Freeze coached for five years at FBS level (only one as HC) before landing the Ole Miss job. Butch Jones had so-so success following Brian Kelly everywhere. Florida, Mississippi St., Kentucky, Vanderbilt all hired guys with no HC experience. You can't tell me that these hires had better resumes than what the Big Ten had been getting.
Maybe the only real difference between the Big Ten and SEC is that the SEC has more schools willing to take the chance on pursuing reach candidates and have gotten fairly lucky with it (Petrino, Spurrier, Beilema).
|13 weeks 5 hours ago||Yeah, I was giving my||
Yeah, I was giving my interpretation of what he initially said. I completely agree with that interpretation of his clarification to Drew Sharp.
|13 weeks 5 hours ago||Think of it this way, it's||
Think of it this way, it's not as simple as just posting a job opening, scanning the resumes that come in, and calling some people in for an interview. Someone has to be calling agents for the various coaches and initating discussions regarding interest, timing, potential contract terms, etc. An AD doesn't have time to do that by himself, so he is either designating someone on his staff to do this who has very little experience with the task, or he could hire a search firm who does this constantly for coaches, ADs, school presidents, etc. Who would you be more comfortable with making those calls?
|13 weeks 5 hours ago||I was sort of in between the||
I was sort of in between the two interpretations. I thought Hackett was saying he wanted the search firm to bring coaches up to speed on what would be expected of a Michigan coach. Not that the coach had to be a guy with connections to Michigan, but he had to understand that Michigan has a history of success, winning with integrity, etc.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||Listen people, unless the||
Listen people, unless the prime target just falls in your lap because he's out of a job (like Urban Meyer), or is in an obvious situation where he would be looking to move up in the coaching world (like Charlie Strong) a coaching search isn't as simple as just pointing at a guy and saying "I'll take him."
At the end of the day, we're going to be in a better position after hiring a new coach than we are today, assuming we hire someone with a proven track record and give him the unconditional support of the administration. Basically if we combine what we did in the last two coaching searches.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||He would need to make a VERY||
He would need to make a VERY convincing case to the next HC that the offense put on the field was not really of his choosing. Even then, it's not common for the incoming coach to retain someone to be one of his top two assistants.
|13 weeks 1 day ago||I think you can "ignore" head||
I think you can "ignore" head to head if it's a really tight game, especially when the winner was playing on its home field. Did Baylor's win really show that they would win more than half their games against TCU?
If you say that TCU's and Baylor's resume are nearly identical, then sure, use the head to head result. If you think TCU's season has been better as a whole, then I don't have a problem not using the head to head result to give the advantage to TCU.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Fear of messing up the||
Fear of messing up the coaching search is reason to keep a coach that is proven to be bad? That's absurd. I agree the next guy needs to succeed, but here's the rub, there's absolutely no guarantee of that. On the other hand, the information we have on Hoke is that he can't get the job done. That his guys don't get better. That we're falling behind in one of the worst big tens in history. How anyone can see continuing with the coach that has made that happen would ever be the better option blows my mind.
If the Michigan administration, in other words Hackett, won't fire Hoke until they feel good about who the next guy will be, then the administration has failed already.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||I think the problem was that||
I think the problem was that Rich Rodriguez was forced to make that choice. In 2007 Michigan was in desperate need of modernization on the S&C front. Rodriguez needed Barwis or a Barwis type along with a new weight room. The weight room was where the money had to be spent, not Barwis himself. The problem is that Michigan, with all the money coming in, should have also been willing to spend the money on any assistant coach of Rodriguez's choosing.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||Coaching isn't the business||
Coaching isn't the business world. You coach until you're relieved of your duties. These guys understand that the staff is about to be fired, but they also know that their duty is to recruit players to Michigan until that is the case. And even after that is the case, they understand the nature of the business and will not be unproffesional on recruiting trips. It is nothing like sending business short-timers on the road.
|13 weeks 2 days ago||I think Green is probably||
I think Green is probably better than Johnson. Johnson got some benefit from playing at the end of the season with a more mature offensive line. And until the Ohio State game, I think there were real questions as to whether Johnson truly was any better than Smith has a main option.
I would guess Isaac and Green will get the lions share of the carries next year with Johnson as a third option.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||Nobody plays anyone these||
Nobody plays anyone these days. But because the SEC West has two pretty good non conference wins doesn't necessarily make the whole division great. The division is so highly thought of because the SEC had highly ranked teams in the preseason. That's it.
When you try to argue how deep the division is based on two games, all you are really doing is buying a narrative. Instead you should recognize that we have very little information for which to compare conferences. If someone says one division or conference is the best, its an opinion based on assumptions.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||Aside from KSU, those teams||
Aside from KSU, those teams haven't beaten anyone in conference either. In fact, La. Tech. lost to an FCS team.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||That's a nice little factoid,||
That's a nice little factoid, but at the end of the day, four of those possible champions have beaten exactly nobody. SEC west basically has two wins to its credit, Wisconsin (without their QB and with only a half of Gordon) and KSU. If you're comfortable calling a division great based on that resume, good for you. I'm not.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||A lot of the SEC West||
A lot of the SEC West national superiority is built on beating those SEC East teams. A&M was only highly thought of because they smacked USCe. Wins over Florida were credited as well. Turns out the SEC West didn't have a win worth mentioning over their Easterly brethren.
SEC west backers are hanging a lot on some ok non-conference wins. Hopefully the committee sees through it if the best the conference can do is a two-loss Bama.
|13 weeks 5 days ago||Much too early for||
Much too early for pronouncements, both in the game and for the season. Even with a loss, they're just one game behind the other three others competing for the wild card.
|13 weeks 5 days ago||Much too early for||
Much too early for pronouncements, both in the game and for the season. Even with a loss, they're just one game behind the other three others competing for the wild card.
|14 weeks 47 min ago||You know why people have come||
You know why people have come back around on Rich Rod? Because he has a not so talented team with youth at most key positions in the top 15 four years later. What are the chances that Hoke is even a head coach in four years?
|14 weeks 5 hours ago||I think you're right. The||
I think you're right. The potential problem with Hackett is that he may not be able to or know how to undo Brandon's mess. As bad as Brandon was, he was only one guy, there had to be others under him doing most of the work to execute and probably come up with all the bad decisions. Hackett, as a businessman first, may not be able to recognize the structural and staffing problems within the department.
Now, that's not to say that Hackett, being a smart guy, can't reach out to someone more knowledgable in the field to help him make some of the decisions that need to be made.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||He actually sits on the UA||
He actually sits on the UA Board which oversees UAB and UAT. The Board also recently killed an on-campus stadium proposal which would have gotten UAB out of the decrepit and monstorously sized Legion Field and into a staidum that better fit UAB's needs.
It is a really strange situation that the Bama folks view UAB as a threat. It's not like UAB has ever been good.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||Rich Rodriguez also had him||
Rich Rodriguez also had him for all of 2 seasons, only 1 as the starter. Who is to say Denard wouldn't have gotten there with the zone read in year 3 under the master?
But even accepting one limitation in his game, doesn't that make everything else he did all the more impressive? This is a guy who ran for 100 yards against a very stout South Carolina Defense in his first game ever at Running Back. You're really questioning how good he was?
You seem like you're one of those sad, sad people that were always against the spread because it wasn't "Michigan Football" so much so that your hatred for Rich Rod runs so deep that you can't accept anything good coming out of him or his teams.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||Considering how often the||
Considering how often the offense devolved into "Denard do something" from 2010-12, I think it's pretty clear, even objectively, that Denard was the best player on that team. And that's not to take anything away from Mike Martin. But Denard was 2010 Big Ten offensive MVP, two time first-team all Big Ten, 2010 all-american. He's making it as a professional at a position where he would have been less valuable as a college player.
Mike Martin was a very good defensive lineman. He was the best player on the defense. But he was no Denard Robinson.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||I think pointing out the||
I think pointing out the Fickell to Meyer transition doesn't mean people expect a national championship next year. Just that it's reasonable to think a team returning a huge proportion of its talent could be 10-2ish next year and competitive in every game.
You look back at who we played this year and it's semi-incomprehensible that we aren't at least 7-5 and competitive in our loses. If you take that as what should have been for a team returning that much experience (albeit one with a big question at QB), making the jump to conference contender shouldn't be seen as shocking.
Now, I don't know this is going to make anyone feel better, but in some ways it's a lot like Hoke's first year. Going into that season, no matter the head coach, most would have said with returning talent you're looking at 9-3, get some real improvement from coaching on the defensive side it could be a special year. We got probably more defensive improvement than expected but combined it with a step back from what would have been expected on offense and had a pretty great year. That transition should be easily replicated.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||It's not that surprising. He||
It's not that surprising. He has said that Mike Martin was the best player on that team. Now, don't get me wrong, I loved Mike Martin, but if you think he was a better college player than Denard Robinson, you're insane.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||Mattison: "All I know is||
Mattison: "All I know is Brady and our staff go in every day and say, ‘I’m going to make you a better player. I’m going to do everything I can to make you a better football player today’ and we do that."
Respectfully disagree, good sir.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||If chasing down a would-be TD||
If chasing down a would-be TD is the basis for not being disinterested, how do you factor that in with Funchess. Didn't he chase down a long INT return against northwestern?
|14 weeks 2 days ago||This is why I thought there||
This is why I thought there may be something positive to giving Hoke the Earle Bruce treatment. It's a distraction at this point. Most know that Hoke is gone, but some won't admit it, don't realize it, etc. If we had just ended it, they could all have gone on, prepared this week and played The Game.
|14 weeks 2 days ago||If we had Julius Peppers, I||
If we had Julius Peppers, I feel confident that he would start at WDE. Even in his old age, I think he could tear some poor college o-linemen up.
|14 weeks 2 days ago||I can't say I've paid||
I can't say I've paid attention to many AD hirings, so I don't know if there's an obvious answer to this, but could we be hearing that a lot of our targets would prefer to make the move in between school years? If so, it makes absolute sense to have an interim for a few months.
|14 weeks 2 days ago||Nope, no flag. Once the clock||
Nope, no flag. Once the clock is at a point where the game is effectively over, those types of penalties aren't called. For instance, ever see a penalty for the entire team running out on the field before the clock strikes zero? Didn't think so.
I think some only think that it may have been a penalty because it looked at first that he wasn't getting the answer he wanted from the official and through his headset up in disgust. That would have been a penalty.
|14 weeks 3 days ago||Couldn't you say that the||
Couldn't you say that the certainty is something positive about announcing the decision this week. I know it's not much, but it's not nothing either.
I bet most players know the score, but ending all doubt might be a small positive going into The Game.
|15 weeks 39 min ago||What if the guy tossing the||
What if the guy tossing the beer had simply missed? Pretty lucky shot to hit Artest. I imagine if the beer had fallen harmlessly behind the scorer's table, nothing happens and it is forgotten as just one of those minny dustups that happen in professional sports.
|15 weeks 48 min ago||If you click through to USA||
If you click through to USA Today, you'll see that Dantonio got a $2M bonus for remaining the head coach through Jan. 1, 2014. And I agree he probably got about his max bonus for winning the Big Ten and Rose Bowl. He was probably around $3M on a normal year.
|15 weeks 22 hours ago||NFL contracts are different||
NFL contracts are different than college contracts. Teams don't have to protect themselves from players/coaches leaving for other NFL jobs because league rules prohibit teams from contacting players/coaches under contract without permission. Teams don't need a buyout in the contract because another team would have to trade assets to acquire a coach under contract.
I don't think NFL teams worry too much about the possibility of a coach leaving for a college job. Most think it's unlikely that a successful NFL coach would want to leave for a college job, and that if a coach doesn't want to be there anymore, it's better to move on anyway. Much like Bobby Petrino was able to up and leave the Falcons for Arkansas, I think it's a safe assumption that if Harbaugh wanted to take the Michigan job, there would be nothing holding him back.
|15 weeks 23 hours ago||I agree. The only time it||
I agree. The only time it really matters that an AD wasn't the one who hired the coach is when it goes badly. There's slightly less loyalty to the coach if the AD didn't hire him. But that being said, I doubt there's an AD out there that would prefer to fire a coach. It's not like a new GM coming in and preferring to have "his guy" as coach.
A new coach is going to come in and know he has 3-4 years to have things working. That would be the case even if we had the permanent AD on board.
|15 weeks 23 hours ago||Those three wins are better||
Those three wins are better than Oregon over MSU? Or Virginia Tech. over Ohio State? I doubt it. Or how about anyone over Notre Dame or BC over USC? Or Nebraska over Miami? I don't think anyone claims that the Big Ten has done anything this season, but c'mon, that doesn't mean the SEC West's OOC wins are amazing.
The SEC West's three wins are decent, but that you would argue that they're "the most impressive non-conference wins of the year," says more about the fact that nobody plays anyone than about the strength of the SEC West. Kansas State was a legitimately good win, even if they are only the third best team in the Big 12. West Virginia is the fifth best team in the Big 12 and Wisconsin is the third best team in the very bad Big 10 (and that game was without a functioning QB and half without Melvin Gordon). What's comical is that anyone would hang their hat on those three wins as the basis of superiority.
|15 weeks 23 hours ago||At the same time, how many of||
At the same time, how many of those wives hold that position when their husban is a professional at sports? It's not like he can just pick up and start over at one of hundreds of other companies in the Bay Area like he would be able to do if he was in almost any other profession.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||If the Raiders leave Oakland,||
If the Raiders leave Oakland, a very real possibility, Harbaugh's wife's purported position would leave Harbaugh without a reasonable coaching alternative in the near future if he falls out of favor in SF. Something tells me that is not a likely scenario...
|15 weeks 1 day ago||All that says is that there||
All that says is that there isn't a garbage team in that division. What wins of note does the division have? LSU over Wisconsin, Alabama over West Virginia, Auburn over Kansas State, Ole Miss over an ok Boise State team (three of those four on "neutral fields" in SEC territory). That's really it. After that you're into garbage with the best wins being over Florida, South Carolina or Tennessee.
The SEC West has barely played anyone. Their greatness is based almost entirely on circular logic. I think it's a good division, probably best in football right now, but I don't think any particular team is all that great. Those teams would lose games no matter what conference they played in, even the Big Ten. Maybe subtract a loss for each team, but anything beyond that is probably giving the division more then it is due.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Yet Auburn just got crushed||
Yet Auburn just got crushed by Georgia,Texas A&M lost at home to Missouri, and LSU got shut out by Arkansas. I think it's the best division in football, but a lot of the basis for them being head and shoulders above the rest of football lived on teams like A&M and LSU being massively overrated.
The other basis are some non-conference wins that do, on the surface, look fairly good. Auburn and LSU both managed to pull out wins that they had no right winning. I'm also not sure LSU beats Wisconsin today with a slightly more competent QB and a healthy Gordon. Alabama got by an ok West Virginia team. But that's really it. Ole Miss beat a not so great Boise State team deep in SEC territory. Arkansas beat an awful Big 12 team. I'm hard pressed to say that those games make the SEC west "head and shoulders" better than everyone else. I'll grant that it's the best division in college football, I'm just not sure it's that much better.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||It just seems like you're||
It just seems like you're over-relying on Sagarin top 30. As I said, it's silly to use one system as the sole basis of quality wins. I also find it a little silly to draw an arbitrary point in the rankings as being a quality win. And, no, there aren't a bunch of super-powers in Sagarin #30-40, but can you tell me that wins over Stanford, Arizona and Texas are really that much worse than wins over Missouri, Tennessee, Clemson, and Georgia Tech from your hypothetical 2-loss Georgia team? The former are all between 30 and 40 and the latter are all between 20 and 30. Maybe in a sport like basketball where teams play upwards of 40 games, it's ok to be a bit arbitrary, but with so few games in football it just removes necessary data points.
The more logical way to measure quality wins is to rank the wins for each team as you see them, and then compare the lists. If you want to bring in a few different rankings systems at that point to help you judge who has higher quality, that's reasonable if not necessary.
For my take, I'd line up hypothetical UCLA's wins over Oregon, Arizona State, Arizona, and USC against any one-loss team out there aside from Alabama. Can we honestly say that Ohio State's is better with Michigan State, Wisconsin, Minnesota (?) and Maryland(??). Or that TCU's is better with Kansas State, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Minnesota? Maybe Baylor's is better with TCU, Kansas State, and Oklahoma.
The way things are lining up, I think the playoffs are likely to be Alabama, Florida State, one Big 12 team (likely Baylor), and a Pac 12 team (likely Oregon). Obviously this can all change.
For the record, I like talking about this a lot more than those other stuff you mentioned. Not angry or agitated at all. Just like a good debate.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Why are you throwing around||
Why are you throwing around W-L v. Sagarin top 30 as some important metric? Is there any indication from the committee that they are using that as a basis at all? One computer ranking in a vacuum is practically worthless. I mean, they have a Georgia team that got destroyed by a very bad Florida team as #3. How in the world does that make sense? Obviously one weird ranking doesn't negate a whole system, but it does show why you shouldn't only consider one computer ranking system when you're working with so few points of comparison between conferences. To my eye, Sagarin is clearly over valuing the SEC (A&M at 17, Florida, Missouri, Arkansas and Tennessee all in the top 30???? This is the ranking system you're using?) while undervaluing the Pac 12. So of course, if you are simply using that as your basis, you're not going to see a two loss Pac 12 team getting in.
I think a two loss Georgia team would make it for the same reason that I think a two loss UCLA team would have a shot. The committee says they are going to value conference championships, and being the champion of one of the two best conferences is going to carry extra weight. If UCLA wins out, they will have played 12 P5 teams, with the 13th game coming against current AAC leader Memphis. That is going to play well no matter what computer poll is used.
I think an 11-2 UCLA has a shot over Ohio State, and I think they have a pretty good shot over a second Big 12 or SEC team. This process is going to be political and the most defensible move is to give four conference champions their shot. Throwing a second team from a conference in only really "works" for the committee if that second team wins the whole thing. If the champion from the conference with two in wins, people can say, yeah, well, what if conference X was better and their champion didn't get a shot. If neither conference team wins it looks really bad for the committee. I think the committee is going to look to avoid that until the selection committee has built up the reputation of the playoffs as crowning a true champion.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Your post is why it's stupid||
Your post is why it's stupid for the committee to have weekly rankings. Nothing should constrain the committee at the end of the season from determining who they think deserves a shot in the playoffs. If the committee wanted to have those initial rankings at week 9 or so, just to show what they were currently feeling, fine, but the weekly rankings have the potential to carry over the worst part of the poll-based championship system into the playoff selection committee.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||If UCLA wins out, I think||
If UCLA wins out, I think they have a pretty strong resume. I think they would have a shot at keeping OSU and other one-loss teams out. They would have a drubbing of ASU, wins over Texas, Arizona, USC, Stanford and Oregon with their only losses in competitive games vs. Utah and Oregon.
I also think at the end of the day a conference championship is going to carry weight. Everything the committee has said indicates this to be true. I think the committee is going to know that the gathered information only means so much when there are so few data points between conferences. Unfortunately for the Big Ten, all the data points that do exist are negative, so a Big Ten championship probably carries the least weight. OSU isn't going to climb over a one-loss conference champion and would need the committee to put a lot of weight behind the conference championship to overcome a one-loss Mississippi State.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||Does it really matter who is||
Does it really matter who is the 4th team right now? I think at the end of the day, with no further upsets, Mississippi State gets left out for Baylor. I also think that Mississippi State's resume isn't going to be so noticeably stronger than a one-loss TCU or even a one-loss Ohio State that the committee would leave out a conference champion in favor of a second SEC team. Politically, the far easier move is to give another conference champion a shot.
Mississippi State is honestly the SEC's worst shot at a second team. They played nobody in the non-conference schedule and drew the two worst SEC-East teams. The only thing propping them up is the idea that the SEC West is so great. However, A&M just lost at home to Missouri. LSU lost to Arkansas. And Auburn got crushed by a so-so Georgia team. Those are Mississipp State's "big wins." If the committee does their job, they'll ignore the fact that the pollsters rushed to judgment and declared all three to be top-5 teams at some point this season.
|15 weeks 1 day ago||I will laugh if they hire Mke||
I will laugh if they hire Mke Shanahan.
|15 weeks 6 days ago||I don't know how logical it||
I don't know how logical it is to say you won't fire your current coach until you have a replacement lined up. The coaching world is a fraternity and most won't go the Bobby Petrino route of completely undermining a sitting head coach. Yes, a search committee can talk to agents for coaches and guage some interest, but nothing definitive will be done until the current coach is fired.
|15 weeks 6 days ago||They are usually published on||
They are usually published on Thursdays and Fridays during bye weeks.
|16 weeks 31 min ago||It's hard to admit you were||
It's hard to admit you were wrong. They are part of the group that was driving the train to hire Hoke. To say he should be fired is to admit being wrong. Not everyone is able to do that.
Edit: That's in addition to what people said above about liking him and all that...
|16 weeks 4 hours ago||I think it's started to||
I think it's started to happen less. Not the putting football far in front of academics, but the not getting kids to their 120 credits part. Pretty much everyone is on campus for summer class so that coaches can keep an eye on them. You almost have to try to not get 120 credits and a degree under those conditions.
These days, if you're a senior football player, you've pretty much going to graduate, with possible excepions of 4th year seniors that ditch the spring semester for combine work.
|16 weeks 1 day ago||I think schools do have some||
I think schools do have some say in primetime vs. non-primetime, but otherwise, I think you're right. I think a school has almost no control over what time an afternoon game kicks off at.
|16 weeks 1 day ago||I bet you won't find many||
I bet you won't find many traditional top-25 programs that play many games at noon.
More games used to be at noon because 3:30 was the "primetime" slot for college football, with the exception of an SEC night game on ESPN. That has changed. Now the primetime slot is 7:00 or 8:00 and is likely to see a big game on Fox, ESPN, and ABC, with possible big games on CBS or NBC. With slightly lesser games on ESPN2 and Fox Sports 1. That has bumped most of the better noon games up to 3:30 leaving primarily the dregs for the noon slot. Michigan, even when awful like this season, only seems to qualify for the dregs if we're playing an FCS or MAC-equivalent. The Ohio State game is the lone exception and that is more out of tradition than anything else.
|16 weeks 2 days ago||I think Morris at least has||
I think Morris at least has to get a possession or two in the first half of the Maryland game. And that's being said knowing full well that he hasn't shown anything to indicate he's even a viable option at QB. Morris has had to have shown something at some point to get the Minnesota start (our coaches are not so dumb as to make that change if they've only seen the bad version of Morris that we have seen in his limited playing time). It's time to see if there's anything there. After all, somebody is going to have to play QB next year...
I would start Gardner, it is senior day and the kid deserves it. Let them split reps in the first half. If they look equal maybe split reps in the second half or even go with Morris. If one looks significantly better, he's your guy the rest of the season.
|16 weeks 3 days ago||I was going to say the OP||
I was going to say the OP spent a lot of time talking about the Big 12 three way tie to not realize that KSU and Baylor still have to play each other.
|17 weeks 2 hours ago||The Sugar Bowl was a brutal||
The Sugar Bowl was a brutal struggle on offense (184 total yards) and a game we were very lucky to win. Hemmingway caught a prayer or two, the fake fg disaster that somehow worked out, etc.
Much like I sometimes wonder how perceptions would have been different had RichRod's teams gotten two or three lucky breaks in his first two seasons, I wonder how perceptions would have changed for Hoke had he not seemingly been shitting horeshoes his first season.
|17 weeks 3 hours ago||It's still good to have.||
It's still good to have. What if he has an injury plagued 4th year on campus? That 5th year gives him the flexibility to come back and improve his draft stock.
|17 weeks 3 hours ago||Actually, I don't think that||
Actually, I don't think that is correct at all. You have to apply to the NCAA for a medical redshirt, a process that can be done at anytime. Once that's done and granted, this year becomes a redshirt. If it happens before next season he will be a RS-Fr.
|17 weeks 3 hours ago||To answer your question.||
To answer your question. Generic football players' opinions should be given greater weight than the average member of the public, at least when it comes to on-field success. However, individual players' or groups of players' opinions should not be given any weight if they cannot remove their individual biases.
Ideally, your current players should never want a coach fired. It's a bad sign even if the current coach really should be fired. Current players and coaches should be on the same side moving the team forward.
I think your problem is that, in your own words, "all the other people that have played for Brady Hoke and spoken out about their love/appreciation/confidence in his abilities as a coach are just doing so because of loyalty." I don't think it's a question of whether Hoke's players/former players are doing so because of loyalty. I think it is absolutely so, it's just that some are unable to recognize that their loyalty has blinded them to reality.
|17 weeks 4 hours ago||Were we really going to be||
Were we really going to be 7-5 with the offensive talent on that team in 2008? Someone is divorced from reality and I don't think it's Brian.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||Narduzzi is in the box, no?||
Narduzzi is in the box, no? I do see your point, though, and agree it's a natural disadvantage. In all honesty, I'm probably not all that worried about actual sign stealing. I'm more frustrated when we show a blitz and the offense sees it, has a play relayed in from the sideline and we go ahead and run the blitz anyway seemingly every time. I know part of all that are simply head games, not knowing whether the offense is actually changing when the whole team looks over at the coaching staff. I guess I'd just like to see us participate rather than simply being caught with a tipped blitz.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||I'm assuming you meant||
I'm assuming you meant between Pitt and Stanford (where Walt Harris went). I'd say there probably was a disparity. I didn't raise this in my OP, but if my recollection is right, Harris wasn't popular. Wikipedia says he was pushed out at Pitt (I know, wikipedia...). I just don't think there was any sort of groundswell to keep Harris at Pitt, nor even frustration that he was gone.
To me he wasn't a "strong" hire the way you have characterized others.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||I guess I don't understand||
I guess I don't understand why multiple signalers is slower. High tempo offenses do it. If Mattison is making the call and someone is signalling in the plays, how is it slower to have one guy signalling in the play while two other guys are simultaneously faking signals? Does Mattison signal in the plays himself? I guess I could see how it would be slower to relay it to signallers. But again, other coaches who DC from the box have someone relaying their calls in, I don't see why we couldn't do the same.
And yeah, it doesn't have to be multiple signalers, but do something besides holding up some towells. I think simply throwing your hands up in the air and saying "that's life" is a deteriment to the team. I understand that he thinks the worst thing to do is not get everyone on the same page, but be a problem solver.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||There's a disconnect with the||
There's a disconnect with the coach-in-waiting hires. Hiring away James Franklin from Maryland is a Strong hire, but hiring away Will Muscham from Texas is average? I'd also argue that locking in Jimbo Fisher who was destined for a big time coaching job was a strong hire on FSU's part, especially if we're counting hiring away a coach-in-waiting.
Also not sure I'd call Walt Harris a strong hire. I know technically Pitt in 2004 was BCS, but he won his only conference championship that year and was ranked 25. That version of the Big East was a stepping stone conference. You treated Big East hires properly when you called Randy Edsall average.
|17 weeks 1 day ago||That would have to be a||
That would have to be a pretty amazing defense, no? Basically would have to win a game playing your base set all game long without blitzing. Who can do that?
I think Mattison should spend more time on making sure the offense doesn't know what's coming and then maybe the defensive players will be shown to be pretty good. Is it really that hard to do the offensive signaling route of having two or three guys signaling in the plays? Is it really that hard after you show a blitz to have the defense give one or two signals that means either revert to defensive call x or continue with the original call? Most other teams manage to do this.
The ability of offenses to get to the line and have an audible called in from the sideline based on what the defense shows is a huge advantage and a relatively modern one. That Mattison refuses to adjust beyond simply putting towels up is not a good thing.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||I disagree on the latter||
I disagree on the latter part. I think there are very, very few athletic director candidates that are going to keep a coach from coming to a particular school. An AD may be a pull, but the coach is generally taking the job because of what the job offers, not what his future boss offers. Michigan has history and resources. A coach looking to make the move to a Michigan-like program isn't going to say no because they don't know who the AD will be. It is a question mark, and maybe it pushes a guy deciding between us and Florida to Florida, but it won't keep a guy from even considering the option. Especially a guy like Harbaugh or Miles, for whom Michigan is more than just a job.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||A slam dunk hire prior to the||
A slam dunk hire prior to the new AD coming on board would be a fine scenario. Of course, that's pretty much just Harbaugh.
Could also argue that hiring the football coach before the AD would give the new AD a few year buffer before he sees any pressure. If the axiom for ADs is that they are judged by their football and MBB hires, then coming into a situation where you have a stable basketball program and a football coach that is going to, at worst, get at least three years before you get to pick your guy. I could see an AD thinking that he has 5+ years of job security under that scenario.
I know pro sports GMs like to have their guy and even college ADs seem likelier to pull the trigger on firing a guy they didn't hire, but I'm not sure an AD feels all that strongly about walking into a situation where someone else has just made the coaching decision. Seems to me that the best scenario for an AD is walking into a department where there is no need to hire a coach.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||He's carrying water for those||
He's carrying water for those that feed him his access which feeds his career. It's a quid pro quo relationship. We usually see his recruiting/injury information/depth chart/etc. ("the quid") now we're seeing him push the agenda of the current coaching staff ("the quo"). Not saying he's being told to explicitly do this, but I'm sure he feels pressure to say things that can only be interpreted as "we better keep Hoke."
|17 weeks 2 days ago||I thought your last paragraph||
I thought your last paragraph was suggesting as much. Apologies for putting words in your mouth.
I do think the players mentioned in Brian's post are largely taking the attitude that the athletes are the only ones capable of knowing what makes a good AD. And to be fair, how the AD treats athletes is a part of his gig, and it seems Brandon was excellent at that. However, it's only a part of the gig and that's what the athletes are losing sight of.
Throwing this in here, I too would like to know what Dileo thinks the problem is if it's not Hoke/Brandon. Other coaches? Players? Is there no problem? I'm genuinely intrigued by what he thinks the problem is, assuming it's more than simply not wanting a coach he liked to be fired.
|17 weeks 2 days ago||Being a better ballplayer||
Being a better ballplayer does not equal knowing whats best for an athletic department.
I would be able to accept that being a better ballplayer equals being better able to judge a coach, but only if personal biases are removed.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||It's a bad idea. Can't have||
It's a bad idea. Can't have the old coach on staff. Completely undercuts the new guy.
|17 weeks 5 days ago||We can only hope...||
We can only hope...
|18 weeks 4 hours ago||Nobody thought RichRod was a||
Nobody thought RichRod was a possibility since he had just turned down Alabama.
|18 weeks 4 hours ago||I'm less worried about||
I'm less worried about Herman. I think Meyer relies on his OC a lot more than your typical guru head coach. His offense had a noticeable decline at Florida after Mullen left. I think Urban Meyer is definitely a thinker on offense and has an idea of what he wants his offense to look like in a given year, but his OC is largely responsible for making it work.
|18 weeks 1 day ago||On the second one it looked||
On the second one it looked like the lineman blocked justice hayes from getting to his spot on the screen. Sure, the lineman didn't "cause" Gardner to flip the ball foward instead of firing it into the ground, but they at least were part of the problem.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||It would have to be a pretty||
It would have to be a pretty big coincidence to not be the end, right?
If the conversation was entirely about Brandon that means either Schlissel phone him up, which he wouldn't do if he hadn't made the decision to fire Brandon, or Ross called Schlissel to tell him that he wouldn't interfere with firing Brandon, which would be the biggest "take a hint" message that any booster could give.
The only way it isn't the end is if they happened to be speaking about something else and it came around to the question of Brandon. But then, I highly doubt that he relays the conversation to the WSJ.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||That was exactly my thought.||
That was exactly my thought. People have sort of taken it for granted that Hoke wouldn't "lose" the team, but I'm not sure that's true, and this B.S. can't help matters.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||We still get to play in the||
We still get to play in the Big Ten, right? This team is atrocious and 4-4 in conference is still a legitimate possibility.
|18 weeks 3 days ago||Who says? I've never heard||
Who says? I've never heard that before.
Presumably they both love Michigan and would prefer a coach not embarrass the school.
|18 weeks 3 days ago||At the time, I didn't think||
At the time, I didn't think that was a called run. Not sure we called one all game.
|18 weeks 3 days ago||Maybe it's a family thing...||
Maybe it's a family thing... Tommy Bowden resigned mid-season at Clemson.
|18 weeks 5 days ago||I think I agree, but for no||
I think I agree, but for no one thinking it's going to be close being a good thing. I would greatly prefer that people thought Michigan visiting the #8 team in the country was going to be a close game.
|18 weeks 6 days ago||B.S. Only watching a dozen||
B.S. Only watching a dozen movies a year may not allow you to vote on the Academy Award for cinematography or film editing, but you damn well can voice a reasonable opinion on best picture. You don't have to know every in and out to see the end result. Just like you don't have to be able to break down every single play of the game to be able to tell if a team is a good or bad team. Your entire post proves my point.
|18 weeks 6 days ago||So your problem is really||
So your problem is really that people are over the top in their criticism? But here's my question. What has this coaching staff done to prove its competence at Michigan? Sure, Mattison co-coordinated a national championship team and Nussmeier didn't crater a national championship offense, but what have they, the assistants, and Hoke done that shows competence for this program with the current players? All we've seen is play getting worse and worse when talent is supposed to be getting better and better with more players that fit the desired system.
I get why you're frustrated about people that have no real understanding of what coaches do giving specific criticisms abou coaching. But, shit, man, you've spent two-three years telling us how this coaching staff obviously knows what it's doing but there just isn't execution, when our eyes have consistently told us that this team isn't good. Give people a little leeway. They may be unable to tell you exactly why the coaching has sucked, but at least they're the ones in the conversation recognizing shitty coaching.
|18 weeks 6 days ago||Most coach types are loathe||
Most coach types are loathe to criticize the coaching of other coaches. Just the way they are. Many live in this theoretical world where the plays/scheme works just given the right preparation/execution. It often times takes non-coaches to see the disconnect between the coaches' theoretical worlds and reality where preparation/execution is also part of the coaches' jobs.
Competent but ineffective is meaningless. Effectiveness is the entire name of the game. If you aren't effective, you're not competent at your job. That simple.
|19 weeks 56 min ago||It really depends on your||
It really depends on your approach to wanting a good TOP. If it's a substitute for winning third downs, not turning the ball over and staying ahead of the chains, then, yes, it's a reasonable strategy to want to do well with it. If winning TOP is the goal in and of itself, then that is dinosaur 1990s ball, especially if it means a slow manner in which play calls are made and relayed to the field.
|19 weeks 3 hours ago||But he wasn't in a "that guy||
But he wasn't in a "that guy is so fired state." He was in a "next year better be good or we're moving on state." I'm sure there are plenty of coaches that have made that leap to something good to great when it was time to put up or shut up. I'm talking about a guy that needed a miracle to save his job (like Hoke this year), gets it and goes on to some success at the school.
|19 weeks 4 hours ago||He's a possibility. I don't||
He's a possibility. I don't really recall how hot his hot seat was at that point. But even a luke warm hot seat to that run is impressive.
|19 weeks 5 hours ago||Considering the hypothetical||
Considering the hypothetical of us winning 4 of 5 or 5 of 5 and giving Hoke another year has me wondering: has any college coach ever been this close to being fired and gone on to have a successful career at his school? I know of guys that have hung on, but never really had great success before ultimately being canned (Tommy Bowden, Mack Brown, etc.) and guys who have hung on only to completely crater soon thereafter (Will Muschamp). However, I'm not sure any of those guy were ever as close to getting fired as Hoke is. And I can't think of one college football coach whose hot seat was this hot who survived and then went on to continued success.
I guess what I'm saying is that I'm siding with Brian. Giving Hoke the chance to save his job is only going to maintain mediocrity or worse. He should be gone no matter what, though I realize that is unlikely if we manage tow in out. And for the record, I will be rooting for the latter because I can't root for a loss, even if in the end more losses are the only real way forward.
|19 weeks 6 hours ago||Not necessarily been||
Not necessarily been "threatened" per se, but it's reasonable to think he's parroting the information that the current regime (whether it's the coaching staff or AD) want put out there. Webb has extrordinary access. He's benefited greatly from that access. It's reasonable to conclude that he's afforded that access with the understanding that when the current regime wants a certain angle pushed, he'll push it. It's how the world generally works when there is a symbiotic relationship between a reporter and his subject. See the NFL insiders reporting on the Ray Rice incident as a recent great example of how this relationship plays out.
|19 weeks 6 hours ago||I was going to make the same||
I was going to make the same point. We take his "gut feelings" on recruits as gospel because coaches feed him information. But he's out of his depth here.
|19 weeks 23 hours ago||It's "apolitical" in the||
It's "apolitical" in the common left-right/democrat-republican usage. Sure, it's a political position. By definition, damn near everything is when so much of our society is controlled by others making decisions for the community. Water boards, library boards, university boards, village boards, community boards, etc. Anyone sitting on any of these boards are technically politicians. But, the vast majority of the positions have, or at lease should have, almost nothing to do with partisan politics. That's why so many of those positions are maintained through non-partisan elections. It's ridiculous that U.M. Regents aren't similarly maintained. If there was no party affiliation allowed (and thus, ultimately required), there would be zero controversy as to the "politics" of this post.
Brian made clear that he doesn't consider any of his stances that matter to him to be partisan. If a couple other posters on this board could resist seeing everything through a partisan lens, this post would have gone fine.
|20 weeks 47 min ago||The regents can't fire him,||
The regents can't fire him, so it wouldn't make sense that there would be a "decision." Brandon is not going to be fired at a public meeting. Just not the way the world works. But, if the regents voice displeasure about Brandon during the public portion of the meeting, it's probably an implicit endorsement of ending his tenure with explicity endorsements taking place in private conversations.
I don't think this means anything and is either Bacon acting a little perturbed that other outlets are breaking the news, or his source is purposefully being cryptic about what's going to happen.
I still think signs are good that Brandon gets the axe very shortly. Too much smoke for there not to be fire.
|20 weeks 1 hour ago||I'd go a little further and||
I'd go a little further and say that Ilitch wouldn't have participated discussion of the topic on the news show if the matter wasn't settled.
|20 weeks 4 hours ago||He also fired Petrino when it||
He also fired Petrino when it would have been easier from a public support standpoint not to have done so (they were coming off a top-5 finish) and hired the coach of the three-time defending Big Ten champs to replace him. I think the positives outweigh the negatives.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||And he was a college||
And he was a college assistant for 15 years before his stint in Houston and a head college coach for 1 year before his stint in Cleveland. Saban is a college coach who has dabbled in the NFL.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||But drops happen, even for||
But drops happen, even for the best players. Even if you assume he'd catch 999 out of 1000, why risk that 1000th event? Of course, you only see Norfleet signalling that he's supposed to fair catch... maybe coaches were signalling back that he wasn't even supposed to catch it and he was just back there to make sure everybody got away.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||I'm not saying it's not true,||
I'm not saying it's not true, but do mlive reporters have a history of breaking these stories in the comment sections of their articles? Isn't the normal route twitter then article?
|20 weeks 1 day ago||That's the obvious play, no?||
That's the obvious play, no? The only thing that gives PSU a chance in that situation is a roughing the punter penalty or a muffed kick. It makes sense to tell your punt returner to call the fair catch so that the only thing he concentrates on his fielding the punt. Of course, the better thing may have been to just leave the defense on the field, go safe and make sure nobody touches the ball at all.
|20 weeks 2 days ago||I agree, that was a||
I agree, that was a mind-munbingly stupid timeout. Some PSU people were saying he needed the timeout to confirm you could onside a kick after a safety, but that doesn't make any sense. If they had had their punt team ready to go or had just taken the penalty, they wouldn't have needed the onside kick because they would have had two timeouts. If they're on top of things, they should have punted with 2:00 on the clock. With two timeouts, we would have been looking at kicking with 1:00 to go. Now, what were better odds? Stopping a Michigan offense that couldn't move the ball, probably getting a touchback, and going 50 yards in 50 seconds for a game-tying FG or recovering an onside kick, going 70 yards for a TD with 90 seconds left and one timeout? I think that the former was the more likely scenario to give PSU a chance (and that doesn't include stuff that could happen like a muffed punt, a fumble, a blocked punt, a punt return for a TD).
Hoke's problem with the timeout was waiting too long. If he thought the chance something goes right and we get a TD off of a punt return or a blocked punt outweighed the chance something went wrong such as a muffed punt, ruffing the kicker, etc. then call it earlier. Otherwise eat the timeout and go to half.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||Muschamp at Florida. Richt||
Muschamp at Florida. Richt at Georgia. Does Jimbo Fisher count? He was brought in as OC/Coach-in-waiting. Dana Holgorsen at WVU (not top-15 historically, but recent success). Bo Pelini at Nebraska. Not a ton, but top-15 jobs don't open all that often either.
I've said this before, absent a guy that is a proven commodity at a big time school, your Urban Meyer, Steve Spurrier, Nick Saban, every hire is a risk. There's no right answer. All you can ask for is that the school hire a guy with a great resume, unlike what we did with Hoke, and give that guy full support, unlike what we did with RichRod. It's obviously no guarantee, but a place like Michigan should be able to win with the next guy if we do both of those things. Hopefully we've learned our lesson.
I do appreciate your point about the coordinator/HC responsibilities. That's why, if I'm judging a coordinator, I want to see something that shows the success is theirs. With Stoops, you have the fact that his defenses have done well in both Arizona and Florida St., the latter under an offensive head coach. With Tom Herman it's a little more of a gamble because he's under Meyer, but he had success before and was brought in without any previuos ties to Meyer. Other guys, such as Narduzzi, Kirby Smart, Mark Helfrich/Scott Frost, etc. have only seen success under a single coach focused on the same side of the ball. Those guys are big risks.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||Out of curiosity, why? I||
Out of curiosity, why? I would much prefer the opposite. At least with a college coordinator you get a guy who is used to recruiting and a guy who you know understands how to coach in college. Bill O'Brien worked out at PSU, but Charlie Weis was a disaster at ND once he was forced to actually develop underclassmen talent. I don't even think you can say that NFL coordinators are better x's and o's coaches as almost all innovation trickles up to the NFL, not down through college. At least on the offensive side, not as true on the defensive side.
That may be somewhat true on the Stoops name thing, and I thought the OP addressed that. But he has success to back it up and there is some worth in a name. He knows what is brother has done, he knows how he's done it, and being a Stoops should help in recruiting where a name does matter. And, if a guy goes 8-4 at UK in his second season with a record of great success as a coordinator, he's going to be a hot name no matter his last name.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||It is almost certain that||
It is almost certain that we're going to get a guy who is "unproven" at the Michigan level. There just isn't a proven commodity outside of Jim Harbaugh (John is a question mark for the college level, in my opinion), Miles, and maybe Mullen. I guess you could throw Todd Graham into the mix, but that's just about it, outside of an out of leftfield candidate like Gundy or Patterson. Not landing any of those guys is a reasonable possibility. In fact, it's often the norm for big coaching hires. It's rare for a proven commodity to fall into a school's lap (Urban at OSU, RichRod here (sigh)) or be ready at the right time (Strong at UT). Almost every other coaching hire is an unproven commodity (Hoke here (sigh again)) or someone there are question marks about (RichRod at Zona, Muschamp at Florida).
Aside from those few proven commodities which we may not get, everyone else we could hire is "unproven." They're either guys with some success at a non-P5 school or a coordinator. Stoops is more like a coordinator but we have a hint (if he goess 3-3 or better) that he can translate that to a head coaching job. He's probably a better option than any of the coordinators we have mentioned and probably as good of an option as Jim McElwain. If Stoops manages to go 3-3 down the stretch, with his DC coordinator success and recruiting success at UK, which by the way has reached unomfortably into Ohio, I think he'd be the guy I want.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||On the other hand, can't you||
On the other hand, can't you say Patterson handled the drug thing fairly well? The guys all got booted, he upped testing, he sent his QB to rehab (Joe Kane in The Program style) the year before. All this coincided with his two worst years when entering the Big XII. Would all coaches have sabotaged their team in the same manner? I'm not so sure.
And lets not pretend that large portions of most college teams wouldn't also fail drug tests if they weren't warned.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||I'm not sure it's fair to use||
I'm not sure it's fair to use the Indiana game as proof of anything. It was like they purposefully tried not to cover Gallon.
Successful shots down the field were basically non-existent over the last of half of last season. Most big plays were screnes that broke open, such as Gallon's long TD against OSU. I don't think the problem is offensive philosophy as much as just that we broke Gardner somewhere along the line last season. Took away his confidence to make big plays in the name of protecting the ball, and as a result we no longer take our shots.
|20 weeks 5 days ago||I think you're looking at it||
I think you're looking at it backward. Brian is saying that if an AD target is about to fire his football coach at his current employer, the timing of hiring him during football season may be a problem. He's not saying that a new AD would keep Hoke.
|20 weeks 6 days ago||Just out of curiousity, what||
Just out of curiousity, what does he have to do the rest of the way to get you on board, or is he a no-go after 2 years, no matter what?
Their schedule the rest of the way is Louisiana-Monroe, @LSU, Miss. St., @ Missouri, Georgia, @ Tennessee, @ Louisville. Going 3-3 the rest of the way would be impressive. Going 4-2 would have me willing to hire him on the spot.
|20 weeks 6 days ago||I'm with you. I haven't seen||
I'm with you. I haven't seen any evidence of Franklin actually being in a position to see the tape. And why in the hell would someone accused of rape say "oh yeah, I taped it, it was bad. Coach told me to delete it."? Wouldn't it be better for the accused rapist for that conversation to have never taken place? Doesn't it imply that a third person saw what happened and thought it was bad?
|20 weeks 6 days ago||Game theory question...||
What almost made it worse was MSU attempted a short FG before Nebraska's last drive. If they make that they're up 8 and a lot has to go right for Nebraska to even tie. If they had attempted extra points, a made FG only puts them down 6 and a TD would still win the game (assuming MSU would still have attempted the FG under the circumstances and not gone for the win on 4th and short).
On the other hand, prior to scoring that TD, it's easy to think "we're down 24... three TDs and Three 2-pt conversions are our only hope. Getting 4 scoring drives against MSU had to be seen as a real long shot.
What I took most from the game (other than MSU being vulnerable in the secondary) was how hard Nebraska fought, both players and coaching staff, despite the extremely long odds. Haven't seen that type of fight out of Michigan in a while...
|20 weeks 6 days ago||At least he learned, I don't||
At least he learned, I don't think he pulled his starters at all against A&M. And to be fair to Mullen, it took a tragically bad snap over the QBs head to turn the LSU game into a scare.
|20 weeks 6 days ago||I guess the question is does||
I guess the question is does Bacon have any real contacts in either Harbaugh camp. It's pretty clear that he knows people around the school and athletic department, so I would give some credence to Brandon being out and Bates being in, but saying one of the Harbaughs would come would require some contacts pretty close to either Harbaugh. Even people that "know" either one probably aren't getting the straight scoop from the Harbaughs.
I always doubt people that say "coach x would absolutely take job y if offerred." It's never that simple... For instance, would Les Miles have taken the job in 2007? I'll always have my doubts. I just don't think a coach who is about to play for a national championship is leaving for another college job.
|20 weeks 6 days ago||If you assume Bolden is||
If you assume Bolden is better than Ryan, then I think you have to have Morgan and Bolden as your two main inside linebackers. Maybe they can use some packages in passing downs with Ryan as the 4th lineman or run a bit of under package to get Ryan in the game, but it seems like a waste and not a good idea to keep running him out there at MLB with guys around that are seemingly better at it.
|21 weeks 33 min ago||Same goes for spots along the||
Same goes for spots along the Western New York/Ontario border.
|21 weeks 1 hour ago||I think there are some||
I think there are some reasonable options out there. Mike Gundy, if he could be pried loose from Okie St. is the only other P5 coach I'd consider, but yesterday's post had reasonable options. Jim McElwain may be a hot coaching prospect by the end of the year. Then you have several coordinators that appear ready for the top job (Morris, Herman, Narduzzi, Beck, etc.). Several big time coaches, such as Bob Stoops, Gary Patterson, Mark Richt, and Jimbo Fisher have gotten their first head jobs at their current schools.
I don't think you should set yourself up for disappointment. Miles has enough detractors that I don't think he gets through at his age. Harbaugh is seeming like more of a pipe dream every single day. Mullen is going to be Florida's top prospect, and losing out to them is a very real possibility.
Whoever we get is going to have a better resume than Hoke did and there's going to be a reasonable belief of future success.
|21 weeks 4 hours ago||If I remember correctly, it||
If I remember correctly, it was only one game vs. Purdue in 2008 where we ran the 3-3-5 to disasterous effect.
I sometimes find myself wondering what would have happened if just a couple small things were changed about that 2008 season. If we don't miss the chip shot FG against toledo and are able to win that game in overtime. If we don't switch to the 3-3-5 and beat a Purdue team we were actually able to score against. If we managed to beat Northwestern. If we're 6-6 does Rodriguez have to scapegoat Shafer? If we kept Shafer and avoided the GERG disaster, does 2009 and 2010 switch from 5-7 and 7-5 to 7-5 and 8-4? If it's those three years with an extremely young team, does Rodriguez get the 4th year that was likely to be much better and thus become the long-term guy at Mighigan? I don't know, but I do wish we had gotten to see the results of that alternate universe.
|21 weeks 22 hours ago||Nebraska did have some weird||
Nebraska did have some weird instances where the center snapped the ball when the QB wasn't looking. It's not odd to see it happen once in a while, but this was three or four times a game. I wouldn't be surprised if MSU clapping was the cause. In any event, I'm sure Urban Meyer will be all over the officials before their game to prevent the same problem.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||I was strictly talking about||
I was strictly talking about how he left as slimey. It was. No two ways about it. I don't know enough about him besides this fact to judge and I do think he is a good coach and it is worth at least giving him a look.
I only see two potential negatives. Will the fickle high school coaches in the midwest trust him enough to steer recruits our way and does he have any NFL ambitions? Not sure either is worth disqualifying him, but they are there and largely so based on negative attitudes surrounding his job hopping. Fair or not, I don't know, but I think those are concerns that would need to be looked at.
|21 weeks 1 day ago||Could he convince Warinner to||
Could he convince Warinner to come along as OC/Oline coach? Herman as head coach/qb coach?
Gives Warinner the upgrade in salary and title for future job considerations while primarily maintaining his responsibilities as the developer of the offensive line.