So you're saying that Brady, Henne, Leach, et al. DIDN'T pad their stats against weak defenses? Somehow, Bo and Carr backed off on weaker defenses, but RR didn't so Denard's stats are over-inflated? That's absurd.
Our problem hasn't been so much lack-of-talent, as lack of fight, discipline, and focus -- the intangibles. If it was just about talent, we wouldn't have lost to the Akrons and Toledos or even MSU. If nothing else, Harbaugh will change the team's attitude right away, which should make a huge difference. I agree that we have enough talent to win now. Talent with the right attitude will get us far -- especially from where we were at the end of last season -- but it'll take a bit of time to get the "player development" part dialed in and added to the mix to where we can compete at the very highest level. In Harbaugh I trust.
OSU and MSU are our arch-rivals, but if anybody's going to hate 'em -- or beat 'em -- it's going to be us. Against other conferences -- outside the B1G family -- I want 'em to win. It makes us look so much better, and its so much more satisfying, when we beat 'em -- and we will.
Yeah, I'm not so sure Alabama's on the decline as much as OSU just showed the country that the emperor has no clothes on. Alabama's still good, but OSU -- and other Big Ten teams -- showed that they're good too. To paraphrase Mark Twain: reports of the Big Ten's death have been greatly exaggerated.
It's all a matter of attitude: if you believe you're inferior, then you are. If you don't, then you can prove it. I think that's why Harbaugh said at the press conference that he never saw Michigan struggling these past years. He's not accepting that Michigan is deficient in anyway. It might not be realistic, but it's an attitude that winners have: no, we (Michigan, the Big Ten) are NOT inferior to anybody.
I'm not sure this is a case of cycles: I think the SEC has been so very good at promoting itself this last decade or so that everybody was drinking the kool-aid. The aftertaste of the kool-aid, was that the Big Ten was inferior and had slower, less talented players.
This year the playoffs enabled the head-to-head match ups that pitted the best of both conferences and shattered all the misconceptions propogated by the self-serving SEC propaganda.
The only caveat from the playoffs today is that both the winning teams are more spread oriented and OSU creamed the supposedly "manball" Alabama team. However, I'm pretty sure Harbaugh will be less dogmatic in his approach than Hoke and incorporate anything that works in his teams. In defense of OSU and Oregon, they might be spread oriented but they are tough and physical at the same time. They ain't playing basketball on grass (or whatever Hoke's stupid saying was.)
It'd be great to see Miles v. Harbaugh play for the championship someday -- might even rehabilitate and reintroduce the now dreaded phrase "Michigan Man."
Who cares what his salary is as long as he's happy being here. Pay the man what he wants and get out of his way and let him do his thang, work his mojo.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure in due time he'll be getting raises and contract extensions like other top coaches do.
I'm not worried about recruiting...the recruits will flock to Harbaugh at Michigan.
I'm excited about what Harbaugh is going to do with the talent already here that's been wasting away all this time, once they're coached up and instilled with fight.
Harbaugh is the perfect coach to unite the Michigan fanbase: ties to Bo and the traditions yet a strong enough personality not to be restrained by any existing dysfunctions -- either in process or personnnel -- that lurk the hallowed hallways. He's young, proven, and a force to be reconned with. His ceiling is much higher than Bo's or Carr's because he has an open-mind and seems to prefer winning to football dogma. And he's got the fire in his belly for winning and the ability to light it in his players. We might lose some at first, by I'm positive that it won't be because of lackluster performance or players not playing up to their potential. We won't be losing to teams like Akron or Toledo and we will be upsetting some big fish.
We've finally landed an elite, top-tier coach. I'm pinching myself, I can hardly believe it.
Maybe Jim wants to be truly elite -- and best his brother John -- by trying to join the exclusive fraternity of Jimmy Johnson, Barry Switzer, and Pete Carroll as being the only coaches to win an NC and Superbowl. Starting with an NC at Michigan would get him half way there.
I saw that too: First he said, when RR took over the "cupboard was bare" and that was one of the reason for all the losses. But later, he said that Hoke's first season was due to Carr's players not RR's. Don't know how he imagines that Hoke won with players from the bare cupboard, unless he's implying RR coached them up to be stars for Hoke -- which I doubt he was.
Hackett won't fire Hoke: he knows he's not qualified to pick an AD, let alone a good coach. So typical to corporate dynamics, it's easier for him to retain Hoke and spew nonsense about the tradition of Michigan and how Hoke upholds the values of Michigan....ad nauseum.
You're right. That's the problem. Our Bo probably would've been fired at Alabama, or USC, or Nebraska because he didn't win national championships. We need to stop drinking the koolade that espouses the notion that winning the Big Ten is sufficient. It isn't. It wasn't. It never was.
To me, the whole "Bo good ol' boy" network is fraught with the fact that not winning a national championship is okay. Michigan needs to clean house in the athletic program and drag itself into relevancy -- even if its kicking and screaming. That means hiring a real AD and letting him bring in his own people.
If Hacket is staying, I bet Hoke stays another year.
Yes, but no national championships. Osborn won two. That's how they measure success in Nebraska and the truly elite schools. Not so much here at Michigan -- that's our problem. We spout history and tradition because we don't really measure up in the modern era -- and we don't accept that. Acceptance is the first step towards change.
Don't agree that we'll win in a coaching hire with other Big Ten schools. Look at us: the way we treated RR. The way we have an interim AD with no experience who's now looking to be a more long term AD. The president's seemingly indifference to athletics. Michigan has a deserved image problem that makes other schools much more attractive. What coach wants the additional headaches of the problems he'd face here?
I predict Gardner get drafted higher than expected. He's got the physical attributes which the pros place high value on and he's impressed people at the Manning camps. The fact that he hasn't played well is easily written off to coaching instability and incompetence. If nothing else, he has showed a tremendous amount of grit, perserverence, and loyalty. He'll get his shot at the pros.
Yeah, so please let's not accept any "we're a young team" excuses from any of our coaches anymore. Everybody else seems able to win with freshman in key positions.
I'm not so sure RR would've done quite as well, with Brandon and the other program dysfunctions still swirling around him. Change, even from talented coach to new untalented, or at least as-yet-untested coach, often brings with it a revitalizing boost of morale to the team -- and fan base -- which no doubt played a significant role in the team's performance.
So even though the basketball team has had such success the last few years and even reaching the finals last year, our new interim AD has JUST gone to his first basketball game? That's not a promising sign.
But only a clueless CEO-type would think that hiring a coach before hiring an AD is a good idea. AD's usually want their own people installed. Why would you want to automatically create tension by hiring a coach first? Unless, you're clueless to the social and political currents of a robust athletic department.
And if his main objective is to find a good AD and he can't get it done in a couple of months and says he needs two years, then he's incompetent in his role. Other schools seem to be able to do it pretty quickly. Again, why is it that these things seem to be so much harder for Michigan?
Win or lose, his offenses rack up impressive numbers on everyone. One miracle win with a 36 pt. fourth quarter -- must be magic -- and you forgot to mention the narrow LOSSES which if they had gone the other way might have made his record even more impressive.
"On October 19, 2013, Gardner broke John Navarre's Michigan single-game record with 503 passing yards. He also broke Denard Robinson's Michigan single-game record with 584 yards of total offense.
As a high school senior, Gardner was rated as the No. 1 dual-threat quarterback in the United States byRivals.com and the No. 5 quarterback by ESPNU."
But it's important to recognize the hyperbole that goes with this "affinity for Bo." It's the knee-jerk reaction that Bo was great and all our coaches should be llike Bo that's caused our decline. RR wasn't Bo and had a different philosophy than Bo, so he was basically run out of town even though before and after his stint here he was, and is, considered an excellent coach.
We need to accept that Bo was good, not great, even in his heyday, and though he kept Michigan relevent, he never made Michigan elite (using the NC metric) mainly because he failed to keep up with the new trends -- like the forward pass -- and was extremely conservative and predictable. He couldn't win it all then, and he certainly couldn't now.
For the next coach, we need to start thinking outside the Bo Box, outside the Michigan Man Box, outside the Manball Box, and any other self-limiting parameters of Tradition we put on ourselves. We need to look forward, not back. What matters is seeing excellence on the field. Seeing improvement on the field. Getting wins. And last but not least, winning National Championships.
Seems like the money spent on alternate uniforms would be better spent on other things.....like maybe keeping ticket prices lower or something along those lines.
Like in the pros when they wear pink: wouldn't it better to just donate a bunch of money to breast cancer research rather than throwing it away on pink-trimmed uniforms?
Some might say that Adidas or Nike just give the alt unis for free so it's not costing the school a cent, but then why should our team, or any team, be reduced to an advertising vehicle for corporate giants? Which brand is more important? The brand of the school or the athletic wear company? Seems like the alt unis is intended to diminish the school brand.
He's probably already tried the non-public approach and it's obviously hasn't worked, so maybe now he's trying this approach. Every player responds to different methods. Maybe Golson needs some DB-ing to change.
Recent Comments
Maybe Phil Knight should spend less on uniforms for the team and more on steroids and even more expensive weight rooms.
Exactly! Competition improves the breed. A strong Big Ten is in our best interest.
So you're saying that Brady, Henne, Leach, et al. DIDN'T pad their stats against weak defenses? Somehow, Bo and Carr backed off on weaker defenses, but RR didn't so Denard's stats are over-inflated? That's absurd.
Our problem hasn't been so much lack-of-talent, as lack of fight, discipline, and focus -- the intangibles. If it was just about talent, we wouldn't have lost to the Akrons and Toledos or even MSU. If nothing else, Harbaugh will change the team's attitude right away, which should make a huge difference. I agree that we have enough talent to win now. Talent with the right attitude will get us far -- especially from where we were at the end of last season -- but it'll take a bit of time to get the "player development" part dialed in and added to the mix to where we can compete at the very highest level. In Harbaugh I trust.
OSU and MSU are our arch-rivals, but if anybody's going to hate 'em -- or beat 'em -- it's going to be us. Against other conferences -- outside the B1G family -- I want 'em to win. It makes us look so much better, and its so much more satisfying, when we beat 'em -- and we will.
Yeah, I'm not so sure Alabama's on the decline as much as OSU just showed the country that the emperor has no clothes on. Alabama's still good, but OSU -- and other Big Ten teams -- showed that they're good too. To paraphrase Mark Twain: reports of the Big Ten's death have been greatly exaggerated.
It's all a matter of attitude: if you believe you're inferior, then you are. If you don't, then you can prove it. I think that's why Harbaugh said at the press conference that he never saw Michigan struggling these past years. He's not accepting that Michigan is deficient in anyway. It might not be realistic, but it's an attitude that winners have: no, we (Michigan, the Big Ten) are NOT inferior to anybody.
I'm not sure this is a case of cycles: I think the SEC has been so very good at promoting itself this last decade or so that everybody was drinking the kool-aid. The aftertaste of the kool-aid, was that the Big Ten was inferior and had slower, less talented players.
This year the playoffs enabled the head-to-head match ups that pitted the best of both conferences and shattered all the misconceptions propogated by the self-serving SEC propaganda.
Hey, The Big Ten's not so bad after all.
Don't forget he did go undefeated his first year at OSU, so he's been having success since day one. I'm pretty sure Harbaugh can too.
The only caveat from the playoffs today is that both the winning teams are more spread oriented and OSU creamed the supposedly "manball" Alabama team. However, I'm pretty sure Harbaugh will be less dogmatic in his approach than Hoke and incorporate anything that works in his teams. In defense of OSU and Oregon, they might be spread oriented but they are tough and physical at the same time. They ain't playing basketball on grass (or whatever Hoke's stupid saying was.)
Why would he be any different than Devin Gardner? Wasn't he a grad student last year?
Bo can stop spinning over in his grave now. RIP coach, all is good.
It'd be great to see Miles v. Harbaugh play for the championship someday -- might even rehabilitate and reintroduce the now dreaded phrase "Michigan Man."
Who cares what his salary is as long as he's happy being here. Pay the man what he wants and get out of his way and let him do his thang, work his mojo.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure in due time he'll be getting raises and contract extensions like other top coaches do.
"WHO'S GOT IT BETTER THAN US?........."
I'm not worried about recruiting...the recruits will flock to Harbaugh at Michigan.
I'm excited about what Harbaugh is going to do with the talent already here that's been wasting away all this time, once they're coached up and instilled with fight.
"Who's got it better than us?.....
.......NOBODY!!!!!"
Hate to keep saying it, but I can't help myself:
"Who's got it better than us? NOBODY!"
GO BLUE!
"Who's got it better than us? NOBODY!"
"Who's got it better than us? NOBODY!"
This is a marriage that's gonna work:
Something old (quarterback #4), something new (new coach), something borrowed (from the NFL), something Blue!
May this honeymoon be long and prosperous.
GO BLUE!
Harbaugh is the perfect coach to unite the Michigan fanbase: ties to Bo and the traditions yet a strong enough personality not to be restrained by any existing dysfunctions -- either in process or personnnel -- that lurk the hallowed hallways. He's young, proven, and a force to be reconned with. His ceiling is much higher than Bo's or Carr's because he has an open-mind and seems to prefer winning to football dogma. And he's got the fire in his belly for winning and the ability to light it in his players. We might lose some at first, by I'm positive that it won't be because of lackluster performance or players not playing up to their potential. We won't be losing to teams like Akron or Toledo and we will be upsetting some big fish.
We've finally landed an elite, top-tier coach. I'm pinching myself, I can hardly believe it.
Let's Go Blue!
With all due respect, what has Harbaugh won in the college ranks? Not much more than Mora. Not as much as Miles, for instance. Just sayin'.
Maybe Jim wants to be truly elite -- and best his brother John -- by trying to join the exclusive fraternity of Jimmy Johnson, Barry Switzer, and Pete Carroll as being the only coaches to win an NC and Superbowl. Starting with an NC at Michigan would get him half way there.
Hey, Tate, with all his faults and eventual failure, won us some pretty exciting games -- so let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
If the snow, cold, ice,and wind of "The North" hampers the spread, how does it not interfere with "pro-style" passing game? Makes no sense.
I saw that too: First he said, when RR took over the "cupboard was bare" and that was one of the reason for all the losses. But later, he said that Hoke's first season was due to Carr's players not RR's. Don't know how he imagines that Hoke won with players from the bare cupboard, unless he's implying RR coached them up to be stars for Hoke -- which I doubt he was.
^^^ This is a profound statement pertaining to Michigan when you think about. Carr is replaced by RR who is replace by Hoke. Oops.
RR's not going anywhere. He's one game away from being in the first playoff.
Hackett won't fire Hoke: he knows he's not qualified to pick an AD, let alone a good coach. So typical to corporate dynamics, it's easier for him to retain Hoke and spew nonsense about the tradition of Michigan and how Hoke upholds the values of Michigan....ad nauseum.
You're right. That's the problem. Our Bo probably would've been fired at Alabama, or USC, or Nebraska because he didn't win national championships. We need to stop drinking the koolade that espouses the notion that winning the Big Ten is sufficient. It isn't. It wasn't. It never was.
To me, the whole "Bo good ol' boy" network is fraught with the fact that not winning a national championship is okay. Michigan needs to clean house in the athletic program and drag itself into relevancy -- even if its kicking and screaming. That means hiring a real AD and letting him bring in his own people.
If Hacket is staying, I bet Hoke stays another year.
Yes, but no national championships. Osborn won two. That's how they measure success in Nebraska and the truly elite schools. Not so much here at Michigan -- that's our problem. We spout history and tradition because we don't really measure up in the modern era -- and we don't accept that. Acceptance is the first step towards change.
Don't agree that we'll win in a coaching hire with other Big Ten schools. Look at us: the way we treated RR. The way we have an interim AD with no experience who's now looking to be a more long term AD. The president's seemingly indifference to athletics. Michigan has a deserved image problem that makes other schools much more attractive. What coach wants the additional headaches of the problems he'd face here?
I predict Gardner get drafted higher than expected. He's got the physical attributes which the pros place high value on and he's impressed people at the Manning camps. The fact that he hasn't played well is easily written off to coaching instability and incompetence. If nothing else, he has showed a tremendous amount of grit, perserverence, and loyalty. He'll get his shot at the pros.
Let's not ignore the importance of their AD in bringing RR to Arizona. We need a real AD here. NOW!
He won GAMES. He never won a championship of any kind.
Yeah, so please let's not accept any "we're a young team" excuses from any of our coaches anymore. Everybody else seems able to win with freshman in key positions.
I'm not so sure RR would've done quite as well, with Brandon and the other program dysfunctions still swirling around him. Change, even from talented coach to new untalented, or at least as-yet-untested coach, often brings with it a revitalizing boost of morale to the team -- and fan base -- which no doubt played a significant role in the team's performance.
So even though the basketball team has had such success the last few years and even reaching the finals last year, our new interim AD has JUST gone to his first basketball game? That's not a promising sign.
But only a clueless CEO-type would think that hiring a coach before hiring an AD is a good idea. AD's usually want their own people installed. Why would you want to automatically create tension by hiring a coach first? Unless, you're clueless to the social and political currents of a robust athletic department.
And if his main objective is to find a good AD and he can't get it done in a couple of months and says he needs two years, then he's incompetent in his role. Other schools seem to be able to do it pretty quickly. Again, why is it that these things seem to be so much harder for Michigan?
Yeah, but two years is way too long.
Win or lose, his offenses rack up impressive numbers on everyone. One miracle win with a 36 pt. fourth quarter -- must be magic -- and you forgot to mention the narrow LOSSES which if they had gone the other way might have made his record even more impressive.
If only Lloyd HAD turned his back instead of actively working against the team he was supposed to be loyal to.
It's sad how history seems to be repeating itself. That's the problem with too much emphasis on Tradition: nothing really changes.
Don't blame the players. But the coaches and administration, yeah, get rid of the bums.
If scoring 36 points in the fourth quarter is luck, we could use some of that. And don't forget the USC game which they LOST by pure luck.
"On
You seem to forget:
"On October 19, 2013, Gardner broke John Navarre's Michigan single-game record with 503 passing yards. He also broke Denard Robinson's Michigan single-game record with 584 yards of total offense.
As a high school senior, Gardner was rated as the No. 1 dual-threat quarterback in the United States byRivals.com and the No. 5 quarterback by ESPNU."
Also:
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2013/07/michigan_qb_devin_gardner_earn.html
The guy's got loads of talent and potential that's unfortunately been wasted and undeveloped.
But it's important to recognize the hyperbole that goes with this "affinity for Bo." It's the knee-jerk reaction that Bo was great and all our coaches should be llike Bo that's caused our decline. RR wasn't Bo and had a different philosophy than Bo, so he was basically run out of town even though before and after his stint here he was, and is, considered an excellent coach.
We need to accept that Bo was good, not great, even in his heyday, and though he kept Michigan relevent, he never made Michigan elite (using the NC metric) mainly because he failed to keep up with the new trends -- like the forward pass -- and was extremely conservative and predictable. He couldn't win it all then, and he certainly couldn't now.
For the next coach, we need to start thinking outside the Bo Box, outside the Michigan Man Box, outside the Manball Box, and any other self-limiting parameters of Tradition we put on ourselves. We need to look forward, not back. What matters is seeing excellence on the field. Seeing improvement on the field. Getting wins. And last but not least, winning National Championships.
Anyway you look at it, hiring a coach who's never won anything significant and has less than a .500 overall record is a bad hire.
Seems like the money spent on alternate uniforms would be better spent on other things.....like maybe keeping ticket prices lower or something along those lines.
Like in the pros when they wear pink: wouldn't it better to just donate a bunch of money to breast cancer research rather than throwing it away on pink-trimmed uniforms?
Some might say that Adidas or Nike just give the alt unis for free so it's not costing the school a cent, but then why should our team, or any team, be reduced to an advertising vehicle for corporate giants? Which brand is more important? The brand of the school or the athletic wear company? Seems like the alt unis is intended to diminish the school brand.
He's probably already tried the non-public approach and it's obviously hasn't worked, so maybe now he's trying this approach. Every player responds to different methods. Maybe Golson needs some DB-ing to change.