While I agree thatcher athletic department is flailing, I don't know that harbaugh is " the best thing for the program". He's mercenary and divisive.
He's like a shot of nitrous to an engine. Yes, for a short time we'd win. A lot. But I think that it's likely that he'd leave a lot of wrecked relationships and angry people in his wake that would end up hurting the program in the long run. It's very tempting. But I think it would help us in 3 years and hurt is more in 5 after he left.
One more thing: I wonder how the TV environment might affect some future fans.
I live up north and get to few games. Now, I listen to the games on the radio because I can't afford to go, especially with the family. I can't watch the games on TV because I don't have the B1G network. I was going to use ESPNgo for one game, but Charter was going to hit me with a $30 charge to watch the game.
Because of this I think that my 5 year old and 8 year old have maybe seen 8 or 9 Michigan games over the years on TV.
When I was a kid, Saturday had the B1G games on all over. I loved sitting down in college and watching all sorts of good football. Now more and more of it is relegated to exclusive networks. I'm not going to budget for the B1G Network because my budget is tight. So my kids are going to get exposed to alot less B1G football than I did. It might have an effect.
I remember attending a Lions game in '91 with my Dad. They had the security there, and TV's scrolling a long list of $hit that would get you thrown out of the game. This usher, about my Dad's age, comes up and said something to my dad (I think he had his cigs out). My dad looked at the usher, looked at the TV, and said 'Wow! You have alot of rules for a team that hasn't won since '57!'
I think there is some of that here.
When I was there we had marshamallows (who can forget trying to pelt the camera guy), some great tailgates, and very easy access. I remember free water at most games in the early fall, to ease the hangovers. I remember concessions that weren't great, but weren't ridiculously over priced either.
But what I really remember is a hell of an off season most times. Oklahoma, IIRC one year. Houston when they were hot with the Run & Shoot. Florida State (Ow). Colorado. Yes, we had Rice and EMU, but not for the whole non conference gig.
Nowadays the team would likely lose a tough non conference schedule, but I don't think that would hurt so much. It would at least send a message 'We are going to keep trying to play with the big boys. We are prepping our young talent." And even if a team isn't good you can still build a fanbase. IIRC when Canham was building things UM wasn't always perfect on the field. Similarly some bad teams have very loyal fans. I was stunned at how crazy KC Chief fans were when I went there, no matter that the team wasn't all that good at the time.
Relax the rules. Plant a Hot Dog Guy if you have to to act as a spark. It wouldn't cost the U much. Bring Wifi to the stadium, or a cell repeater. Have students tweet pics for display on the jumbotron. Let a student group pick the bumper music each game, and have them compete for the right. Maybe set up some grills inside the fence for a student tailgate area if they can get there soon enough.
Basically, make enough room in the rules that the students can make it a fun event. For the rest of the fans make it like football Disney. Make them the focus and make them feel welcome.
Both with Hoke and RR there seemed to be gaps in the roster, that it was assumed would be filled by astute recruiting.
While I think Hoke has done a nice job recruiting, the jury is still out on development. And there are roster gaps. Why doesn't UM get JUCO. Kids to try to fill those gaps?
Hope you're kidding and totally disagree. I was a Lions season ticket holder when he played. (I was in college at the time too, so it made for fantastic football weekends. Wheatley on Saturday, Barry and Spielman on Sunday).
Spielman is one of my favorite football players ever. He's an example of how I think all football players should be. I love UM and hope they kick OSU in the teeth any time, but that doesn't extend to hoping their players get hurt.
Spielman is a class guy. He was a great player with the Lions. He was always polite and kind to the fans when I went to the fall camps. And the way he treated his wife when she was sick was, IMHO, a great example. He's a great player and an honorable man. He isn't a Michigan fan. I can get over that.
MSU is killing people with a a simpler "old fashioned" offense and a murderous defense. I don't see them going away any time soon. Nor would I be shocked to see them wreck Oregon next year. And they seem to be the banner boys for offensive modernity.
What I like about Nuss is that he will work with what he has. If Mattison can realize the promise of guys coming back and Nuss can get "normal" performance out of the O, whatever it runs, the future looks bright. IMHO.
I really, desperately want a D the caliber of what MSU has now. I don't know if its in the cards, or if Mattison is more of a finesse guy. But building a quality D system has MSU where they are now. Which ticks me off and makes me jealous.
I am very torn on this. I can totally understand saying bag it and restart the next year even if next year's offense isn't good.
But it seems like Hoke has been trying to rebuild the O line from nearly scratch. And I'd like to see him get another two years if only because one more year is likely to be shaky due to inexperience and the following year should have everyone in place.
Throwing the coaching staff over at the end of next year risks having a bunch of guys leave or bringing in a coach who can't use the guys Brady has recruited.
So I guess my default position would be: Next year we better see solid improvement. Fewer mistakes. Less getting run over. The interior line should be substantially improved. The tackles should be the new week points. If we don't see this, if we see the same mess, then Funk goes.
If we see the same mess and Borgess is still all over the place, then he and Funk go. Let Brady have that final year. If that final year isn't working, try to find a guy who is at least schematically similar to Brady to reduce the loss of recruits/bleeding of current players.
"Maybe the reason I hold onto Denard so hard is because he's about 90% of the fun that Michigan football has provided since Bo died."
When I was there ('91-'96) I don't know.
Beating OSU was kind of fun. B1G titles were mildly entertaining.
1997 was livable I suppose. It didn't suck at least.
Carr beating MSU like a drum was 'do-able'. I didn't choke into my beer.
I hate this. Hate hate hate hate hate this reasoning. Its indicative of a 'Can't be satisfied fan base' attitude that drives me crazy.
I had a family member who would just rail on Carr as being 'not up to Michigan standards' and not making use of his talent. He wanted a 'modern' coach. I remember warning him that coaching changes, especially with scheme changes, are *really* hard, and that UM wasn't one game from the MNT. Ooops.
Its fine to be disappointed with this team right now. Its correct to be very concerned about our future.
But to say that the era from Bo's retirement to now wasn't 'fun' is ludicrous to me. I realize its subjective, but its like a friend of mine complaining that San Francisco was getting ruined by all the new money in the .com era. 'Yup. Those of us in Detroit feel for you. I'm sorry you aren't happy'.
And why? Because we weren't running the 'right' offense? Because you didn't agree with the calls? Seriously? Really?
Would you not be happy with a night in Vegas with a huge bankroll because you weren't in Monaco?
If the standard of success here is not just winning, but competing for the MNT all the time, and doing it with the 'correct' scheme and calls, then almost no coach could win here. Ever.
And then Hoke would shoot Borgess! And kick the dead body to pulp! And jump on it after setting it on fire and killing himself in a glorious display of self immolation!!!!!! Then we'd know that Hoke cared!!!!!
NOW I AM GOING TO TYPE IN ALL CAPS!!!
ARGH!!!!!!!
FAT BALD PEOPLE CAN'T BE COACHES!!!!
I hope State wins, but I doubt I will watch the game. And I'm not going to be all in for them.
State fans (other than my buddies) have been dicks to me all season. Arrogant and loudmouthed, even when I've been positive for their team. Ironic when you consider the root of the word laconic.
I want goodness for the B1G and my Spartan buddies but I'm not going to send any emotional involvement that way.
I just have a hard time with, say, Bellichick saying "well son, we really need you and you have all the skills, but Kirk Ferentz suggested I not hire you so sorry.
The maddening thing about MSU to me is that they've done this so well. Kudos to them. But what I'm afraid of, way more than playcalling or scheme, is that this is a skillset our staff hasn't demonstrated yet
the amount of attention, pressure, and cajoling that these kids get. I got a ton being just a college student. 'You should think about going to X if you want to pursue Y....'
Nowadays, with all the social media, it has to be nuts.
I really hope that he recommits. I really hope Brady and company can convince him to come back.
That said, I wish him well wherever he goes, and hope he has some peace in the process. While I love following recruiting, so I guess I'm part of the problem, I wish more of this could take place behind the scenes.
Can play. I'd rather see him out there than Shane. I like Shane, I think he can do well. But I think it's too early. I wish they hadn't burned his redshirt because if he develops it would be great to have him a fifth year.
The only way I don't want to see DG play is if docs or trainors determine it would be a threat to his career.
"The commits for Michigan are notorious for being close before they even arrive on campus. Has that started for you yet?"
I realize that this was from the interviewer, but it reminds me of the things that I really really like about him. Despite the issues with development, and the tough tough year, his teams always seem extremely cohesive, even prior to showing up on campus. And they, to my eyes, never seem to collapse.
I'm really hoping he can fix the other issues, because team unity like that could really act like a force multiplier.
The "hamstrung by history" meme. Yes, they do want to run the ball, but many other successful teams do too. I have no problem with that. It's worked well for Wisconsin for years without as big of a recruiting stretch.
Have I been frustrated by Borges? Yup. But I don't see anyone out there capable of making the Offense perfect this year. I think firing him would be a mistake unless we have a clear improvement.
I think Borgess tried too much to enforce his methods on kids not ready for it, but I also take that, and the idea that the scheme would fix things with a grain of salt.
The plain simple truth is that this year we could t block. Put Chip Kelly in that situation and I think while he does better, he still has major issues in the games that the O line fails.
The difference between This game and others was improved O line play, coupled with a different scheme. But the O line play was crucial. If the O line doesn't look better in that OSU game Borgess' game plan fails.
They played a team that should have destroyed them, and for one day, warts and all, out it all out there and played to the best of their ability. The
Coaches and players can be proud of this effort whatever else. They played with all the heart I expect of a Michigan team against massive odds and against a season of disappointment.
Hopefully they have proven something to themselves and it gives them fire for the bowl game and for next year.
Win or lose you can always be proud of a hard fought classic when you are a massive underdog. I feel better about this team, for today, than I have in months.
I don't think Borgess is saying we have to run first. I think that's been Hokes desire from year one. Now, to give him (and Borgess) credit, for the first couple of years they didn't do that with Denard. They tried it, it didn't work, then they went back to a more hybrid offense.
This is the first year that they've tried to go more pro-set, as far as I can tell.
Will Hoke change? I don't know. I think it depends on whether his kids start to execute well, if he can develop them, and how they develop. If they end up being a team that can pass the ball like hell under Morris, I think he'll do that and let the run worry about itself. If I remember correctly thats what he did at SDSU.
I think that the development part is key. The Hoke story began with a good year, and some great recruiting. It will end if he and his staff can't develop them. That's my biggest worry.
about those players. I guess I was expecting more (alot more) on the O line, RB's, and to a lesser extent QB's.
As to what coaches were available in 2010? The two biggest names mentioned were Harbaugh (no intention of coming) and Miles (no intention of coming). Neither of them was technically 'available', IIRC, both being under contract. I guess what I'm saying is that there wasn't much in the news, no sniffs, about other big name coaches, or even medium name coaches, going 'Whoa! Michigan! I'd totally bail here for there!' IIRC even Schiano at Rutgers was lukewarm.
To us the Meyer situation would have been if Harbaugh was as pro Michigan as Hoke is. But that wasn't the case.
To be clear, I don't disagree with the Hoke hire. I like alot of things about the guy. I really hope he turns it around. I'm just worried that our O line is so bad. And I'm terrified that not only is our O line bad, it seems statically bad all through the year.
C) Said better coach is willing to come to Michigan.
I guess I see this as more of a marathon than sprint. The situation that OSU found itself in (Meyer at liberty, with a huge amount of coaching talent, and the desire to work for you) is pretty rare.
I don't see Michigan pulling anyone out of a major university either (to be fair, I don't think many programs can do that. I don't see Oregon or Stanford able to suck Les Miles out of LSU, for example).
What we are left with is a bunch of guys at lower levels who may or may not be able to coach at Div 1 levels. MSU got lucky that Dantonio could coach at that level, and move up and find 3 stars and develop them. But that path is a crap shoot, not a clear improvement.
but I do need some definition. I'm not being snarky, but can someone tell me how we are 'blindly clinging to the past'? Is it in hiring Hoke because he had a Michigan background? Trying to revert to a ground game? Being 'Physical'?
I guess I don't see any of those things as bad in and of themselves. I'll lay my cards on the table. I'm not a fan of 'system' offenses. Being 'A Spread' team, whether its Oregon or RR seems to me to be way too specialized if that's all you do, the same way that being a strictly power I team would be. You're always hoping that the coach 'fits', or waiting for 'that special talent' that fits the system. I'm not against the spread or RR's offense per-se, but to me its like the Run & Shoot. Its great to have some Run & Shoot sets. It ends up being a negative overall if you are a 'Run & Shoot' team. One of the things that killed me over the past 10 years was Mooch trying to instill 'his' WC offense on the Lions, no matter what; and RR trying to make his offense work with us, no matter what. Nice guys. Good coaches overall. Fatal flaw to me. The elite teams (to me 'Bama, LSU, USC a few years back) don't sell their soul to one thing. They have a team that can run the spread, and a team that can kick your teeth in on the ground if necessary. Alot of it is due to good players executing a sane game plan. it doesn't have to be brilliant or avant guard.
This not to say that Borges/Hoke are the guys. A big flaw I see with these guys is similar (BY GOD WE ARE GOING TO RUN IT AGAIN!!!). But the potentially fatal flaw I see is the lack of development. I see DG regressing. I don't see Magnuson, Bosch, or Kalis going from bad, to okay, to pretty decent towards the end of the year. I just see them all struggling, every game.
I guess I just hear too much 'WE ARE BEING LEFT BEHIND' from people. Its like this magical thinking that if we just get some other lightnin' boy slick offense everything will be cured. Its grasping at straws. I heard it with the Lions all through the 90's. If Hoke and Borges/Whomever can make adjustments and our highly ranked talent starts developing and acting like highly ranked players, we will be successful. Elite year after year? Maybe. That's an extremely hard bar to get above. But good enough that we have an even chance of beating anyone, and a realistic chance of playing with and pulling out an upset on a 'Bama. Honestly, I'd be fine with that.
If they can't do it, then we'll tank. No matter what offense we run. A too light playside OT out of place running the read option is likely going to f*ck up the play just as badly as a too light OT out of place running Power I, unless your QB or RB is godlike.
I guess in the end, to me its the talent, the development, and the execution. And that is a major concern for me with this coaching staff. If we transplant the O line from some of my years ('91-'96) into this year, Borgess automatically looks better. Gardner likely spends less time on his back. Fitz probably runs alot better. Green has a chance to develop. We can go on and win a bowl game. MSU doesn't savage us physically. That doesn't make Borgess a great play caller, I'll leave that to those who analyze it more. But the team automatically looks at least competent. Right now, we have young guys who aren't getting better, and more young guys stepping in next year. That's alot of development that has to take place in just a few months to get these guys from bad to just pretty decent. And that's my huge worry.
Do we change right away? No. I agree with Brian. The coaching carousel at MSU did them no good. It won't us either. Do we change in two years? If we don't see any development we do. But then what? I didn't see coaches of Urban Meyers caliber pounding down the door to get into UM last time. What's to say they will if we fire Hoke in 2016? Whatever they do, if at all possible, my first choice is for Hoke to start showing he can really develop these kids. My second is finding someone who has shown he can at a Division 1 level if Hoke doesn't work out. Way down in last place for me is finding someone running a 'modern' offense.
One final thing: I dont' honestly remember from my college days (Mo, then Lloyd) Michigan being 'Elite' other than '97. We largely owned MSU and OSU, but the elite teams in those days were teams like FSU and ND. OSU under cooper (my favorite OSU coach) was kind of a paper tiger. It was a cast iron b*tch to beat ND, and the one time we played FSU they utterly destroyed us.
Recent Comments
Spielman was a mean player. He was not a dick.
If hutch was mean but helped his other linemen develop and he had their backs, he wasn't a Dick.
(Not saying Lewan was. I don't know)
He's like a shot of nitrous to an engine. Yes, for a short time we'd win. A lot. But I think that it's likely that he'd leave a lot of wrecked relationships and angry people in his wake that would end up hurting the program in the long run. It's very tempting. But I think it would help us in 3 years and hurt is more in 5 after he left.
One more thing: I wonder how the TV environment might affect some future fans.
I live up north and get to few games. Now, I listen to the games on the radio because I can't afford to go, especially with the family. I can't watch the games on TV because I don't have the B1G network. I was going to use ESPNgo for one game, but Charter was going to hit me with a $30 charge to watch the game.
Because of this I think that my 5 year old and 8 year old have maybe seen 8 or 9 Michigan games over the years on TV.
When I was a kid, Saturday had the B1G games on all over. I loved sitting down in college and watching all sorts of good football. Now more and more of it is relegated to exclusive networks. I'm not going to budget for the B1G Network because my budget is tight. So my kids are going to get exposed to alot less B1G football than I did. It might have an effect.
I remember attending a Lions game in '91 with my Dad. They had the security there, and TV's scrolling a long list of $hit that would get you thrown out of the game. This usher, about my Dad's age, comes up and said something to my dad (I think he had his cigs out). My dad looked at the usher, looked at the TV, and said 'Wow! You have alot of rules for a team that hasn't won since '57!'
I think there is some of that here.
When I was there we had marshamallows (who can forget trying to pelt the camera guy), some great tailgates, and very easy access. I remember free water at most games in the early fall, to ease the hangovers. I remember concessions that weren't great, but weren't ridiculously over priced either.
But what I really remember is a hell of an off season most times. Oklahoma, IIRC one year. Houston when they were hot with the Run & Shoot. Florida State (Ow). Colorado. Yes, we had Rice and EMU, but not for the whole non conference gig.
Nowadays the team would likely lose a tough non conference schedule, but I don't think that would hurt so much. It would at least send a message 'We are going to keep trying to play with the big boys. We are prepping our young talent." And even if a team isn't good you can still build a fanbase. IIRC when Canham was building things UM wasn't always perfect on the field. Similarly some bad teams have very loyal fans. I was stunned at how crazy KC Chief fans were when I went there, no matter that the team wasn't all that good at the time.
Relax the rules. Plant a Hot Dog Guy if you have to to act as a spark. It wouldn't cost the U much. Bring Wifi to the stadium, or a cell repeater. Have students tweet pics for display on the jumbotron. Let a student group pick the bumper music each game, and have them compete for the right. Maybe set up some grills inside the fence for a student tailgate area if they can get there soon enough.
Basically, make enough room in the rules that the students can make it a fun event. For the rest of the fans make it like football Disney. Make them the focus and make them feel welcome.
Oh. And MORE NIGHT GAMES. This isn't 1955!!
While I think Hoke has done a nice job recruiting, the jury is still out on development. And there are roster gaps. Why doesn't UM get JUCO. Kids to try to fill those gaps?
Hope you're kidding and totally disagree. I was a Lions season ticket holder when he played. (I was in college at the time too, so it made for fantastic football weekends. Wheatley on Saturday, Barry and Spielman on Sunday).
Spielman is one of my favorite football players ever. He's an example of how I think all football players should be. I love UM and hope they kick OSU in the teeth any time, but that doesn't extend to hoping their players get hurt.
Spielman is a class guy. He was a great player with the Lions. He was always polite and kind to the fans when I went to the fall camps. And the way he treated his wife when she was sick was, IMHO, a great example. He's a great player and an honorable man. He isn't a Michigan fan. I can get over that.
What I like about Nuss is that he will work with what he has. If Mattison can realize the promise of guys coming back and Nuss can get "normal" performance out of the O, whatever it runs, the future looks bright. IMHO.
I really, desperately want a D the caliber of what MSU has now. I don't know if its in the cards, or if Mattison is more of a finesse guy. But building a quality D system has MSU where they are now. Which ticks me off and makes me jealous.
I am very torn on this. I can totally understand saying bag it and restart the next year even if next year's offense isn't good.
But it seems like Hoke has been trying to rebuild the O line from nearly scratch. And I'd like to see him get another two years if only because one more year is likely to be shaky due to inexperience and the following year should have everyone in place.
Throwing the coaching staff over at the end of next year risks having a bunch of guys leave or bringing in a coach who can't use the guys Brady has recruited.
So I guess my default position would be: Next year we better see solid improvement. Fewer mistakes. Less getting run over. The interior line should be substantially improved. The tackles should be the new week points. If we don't see this, if we see the same mess, then Funk goes.
If we see the same mess and Borgess is still all over the place, then he and Funk go. Let Brady have that final year. If that final year isn't working, try to find a guy who is at least schematically similar to Brady to reduce the loss of recruits/bleeding of current players.
After re-reading my post, I realize you are correct. I was in a snit up early on a new years morning, and I didn't read it correctly.
I apologize to all I may have offended.
is the new #1 about what scares me about the future.
My #2 is player development.
I could give a damn about scheme.
But one of Hoke's biggest attributes was winning the guys over and forging a team. He was brilliant, IMHO, that first year.
But if he's losing that, if he's lost this team, its just done.
"The point was that Stanford didn't just sit there and simply out-recruit everyone else and that's the reason their offense was successful."
with some good, reasoned posts.
"Maybe the reason I hold onto Denard so hard is because he's about 90% of the fun that Michigan football has provided since Bo died."
When I was there ('91-'96) I don't know.
Beating OSU was kind of fun. B1G titles were mildly entertaining.
1997 was livable I suppose. It didn't suck at least.
Carr beating MSU like a drum was 'do-able'. I didn't choke into my beer.
I hate this. Hate hate hate hate hate this reasoning. Its indicative of a 'Can't be satisfied fan base' attitude that drives me crazy.
I had a family member who would just rail on Carr as being 'not up to Michigan standards' and not making use of his talent. He wanted a 'modern' coach. I remember warning him that coaching changes, especially with scheme changes, are *really* hard, and that UM wasn't one game from the MNT. Ooops.
Its fine to be disappointed with this team right now. Its correct to be very concerned about our future.
But to say that the era from Bo's retirement to now wasn't 'fun' is ludicrous to me. I realize its subjective, but its like a friend of mine complaining that San Francisco was getting ruined by all the new money in the .com era. 'Yup. Those of us in Detroit feel for you. I'm sorry you aren't happy'.
And why? Because we weren't running the 'right' offense? Because you didn't agree with the calls? Seriously? Really?
Would you not be happy with a night in Vegas with a huge bankroll because you weren't in Monaco?
If the standard of success here is not just winning, but competing for the MNT all the time, and doing it with the 'correct' scheme and calls, then almost no coach could win here. Ever.
I though Morris looked great? But the o and D lines and secindary were just.. Okay. Or dropped off from OSU
NOW I AM GOING TO TYPE IN ALL CAPS!!!
ARGH!!!!!!!
FAT BALD PEOPLE CAN'T BE COACHES!!!!
I hope State wins, but I doubt I will watch the game. And I'm not going to be all in for them.
State fans (other than my buddies) have been dicks to me all season. Arrogant and loudmouthed, even when I've been positive for their team. Ironic when you consider the root of the word laconic.
I want goodness for the B1G and my Spartan buddies but I'm not going to send any emotional involvement that way.
I just have a hard time with, say, Bellichick saying "well son, we really need you and you have all the skills, but Kirk Ferentz suggested I not hire you so sorry.
I hope the guy can turn it around.
the amount of attention, pressure, and cajoling that these kids get. I got a ton being just a college student. 'You should think about going to X if you want to pursue Y....'
Nowadays, with all the social media, it has to be nuts.
I really hope that he recommits. I really hope Brady and company can convince him to come back.
That said, I wish him well wherever he goes, and hope he has some peace in the process. While I love following recruiting, so I guess I'm part of the problem, I wish more of this could take place behind the scenes.
Something like this:
"The commits for Michigan are notorious for being close before they even arrive on campus. Has that started for you yet?"
I realize that this was from the interviewer, but it reminds me of the things that I really really like about him. Despite the issues with development, and the tough tough year, his teams always seem extremely cohesive, even prior to showing up on campus. And they, to my eyes, never seem to collapse.
I'm really hoping he can fix the other issues, because team unity like that could really act like a force multiplier.
Don't hate the way the other team beat you. Overcome it. In the meantime show sone honor.
In the meantime, while I hope we clean their clock next year. Congrats to MSU and good luck in Pasedena.
Have I been frustrated by Borges? Yup. But I don't see anyone out there capable of making the Offense perfect this year. I think firing him would be a mistake unless we have a clear improvement.
I think Borgess tried too much to enforce his methods on kids not ready for it, but I also take that, and the idea that the scheme would fix things with a grain of salt.
The plain simple truth is that this year we could t block. Put Chip Kelly in that situation and I think while he does better, he still has major issues in the games that the O line fails.
The difference between This game and others was improved O line play, coupled with a different scheme. But the O line play was crucial. If the O line doesn't look better in that OSU game Borgess' game plan fails.
Now, of course that leaves Funk...
Coaches and players can be proud of this effort whatever else. They played with all the heart I expect of a Michigan team against massive odds and against a season of disappointment.
Hopefully they have proven something to themselves and it gives them fire for the bowl game and for next year.
Win or lose you can always be proud of a hard fought classic when you are a massive underdog. I feel better about this team, for today, than I have in months.
I don't think Borgess is saying we have to run first. I think that's been Hokes desire from year one. Now, to give him (and Borgess) credit, for the first couple of years they didn't do that with Denard. They tried it, it didn't work, then they went back to a more hybrid offense.
This is the first year that they've tried to go more pro-set, as far as I can tell.
Will Hoke change? I don't know. I think it depends on whether his kids start to execute well, if he can develop them, and how they develop. If they end up being a team that can pass the ball like hell under Morris, I think he'll do that and let the run worry about itself. If I remember correctly thats what he did at SDSU.
I think that the development part is key. The Hoke story began with a good year, and some great recruiting. It will end if he and his staff can't develop them. That's my biggest worry.
about those players. I guess I was expecting more (alot more) on the O line, RB's, and to a lesser extent QB's.
As to what coaches were available in 2010? The two biggest names mentioned were Harbaugh (no intention of coming) and Miles (no intention of coming). Neither of them was technically 'available', IIRC, both being under contract. I guess what I'm saying is that there wasn't much in the news, no sniffs, about other big name coaches, or even medium name coaches, going 'Whoa! Michigan! I'd totally bail here for there!' IIRC even Schiano at Rutgers was lukewarm.
To us the Meyer situation would have been if Harbaugh was as pro Michigan as Hoke is. But that wasn't the case.
To be clear, I don't disagree with the Hoke hire. I like alot of things about the guy. I really hope he turns it around. I'm just worried that our O line is so bad. And I'm terrified that not only is our O line bad, it seems statically bad all through the year.
That assumes that
A) There is a better coach out there
B) Said better coach is available
C) Said better coach is willing to come to Michigan.
I guess I see this as more of a marathon than sprint. The situation that OSU found itself in (Meyer at liberty, with a huge amount of coaching talent, and the desire to work for you) is pretty rare.
I don't see Michigan pulling anyone out of a major university either (to be fair, I don't think many programs can do that. I don't see Oregon or Stanford able to suck Les Miles out of LSU, for example).
What we are left with is a bunch of guys at lower levels who may or may not be able to coach at Div 1 levels. MSU got lucky that Dantonio could coach at that level, and move up and find 3 stars and develop them. But that path is a crap shoot, not a clear improvement.
LOL. I just wrote a long drawn out post and I think you just clarified it perfectly. If your O line is bad, then, well, the scheme won't matter much.
but I do need some definition. I'm not being snarky, but can someone tell me how we are 'blindly clinging to the past'? Is it in hiring Hoke because he had a Michigan background? Trying to revert to a ground game? Being 'Physical'?
I guess I don't see any of those things as bad in and of themselves. I'll lay my cards on the table. I'm not a fan of 'system' offenses. Being 'A Spread' team, whether its Oregon or RR seems to me to be way too specialized if that's all you do, the same way that being a strictly power I team would be. You're always hoping that the coach 'fits', or waiting for 'that special talent' that fits the system. I'm not against the spread or RR's offense per-se, but to me its like the Run & Shoot. Its great to have some Run & Shoot sets. It ends up being a negative overall if you are a 'Run & Shoot' team. One of the things that killed me over the past 10 years was Mooch trying to instill 'his' WC offense on the Lions, no matter what; and RR trying to make his offense work with us, no matter what. Nice guys. Good coaches overall. Fatal flaw to me. The elite teams (to me 'Bama, LSU, USC a few years back) don't sell their soul to one thing. They have a team that can run the spread, and a team that can kick your teeth in on the ground if necessary. Alot of it is due to good players executing a sane game plan. it doesn't have to be brilliant or avant guard.
This not to say that Borges/Hoke are the guys. A big flaw I see with these guys is similar (BY GOD WE ARE GOING TO RUN IT AGAIN!!!). But the potentially fatal flaw I see is the lack of development. I see DG regressing. I don't see Magnuson, Bosch, or Kalis going from bad, to okay, to pretty decent towards the end of the year. I just see them all struggling, every game.
I guess I just hear too much 'WE ARE BEING LEFT BEHIND' from people. Its like this magical thinking that if we just get some other lightnin' boy slick offense everything will be cured. Its grasping at straws. I heard it with the Lions all through the 90's. If Hoke and Borges/Whomever can make adjustments and our highly ranked talent starts developing and acting like highly ranked players, we will be successful. Elite year after year? Maybe. That's an extremely hard bar to get above. But good enough that we have an even chance of beating anyone, and a realistic chance of playing with and pulling out an upset on a 'Bama. Honestly, I'd be fine with that.
If they can't do it, then we'll tank. No matter what offense we run. A too light playside OT out of place running the read option is likely going to f*ck up the play just as badly as a too light OT out of place running Power I, unless your QB or RB is godlike.
I guess in the end, to me its the talent, the development, and the execution. And that is a major concern for me with this coaching staff. If we transplant the O line from some of my years ('91-'96) into this year, Borgess automatically looks better. Gardner likely spends less time on his back. Fitz probably runs alot better. Green has a chance to develop. We can go on and win a bowl game. MSU doesn't savage us physically. That doesn't make Borgess a great play caller, I'll leave that to those who analyze it more. But the team automatically looks at least competent. Right now, we have young guys who aren't getting better, and more young guys stepping in next year. That's alot of development that has to take place in just a few months to get these guys from bad to just pretty decent. And that's my huge worry.
Do we change right away? No. I agree with Brian. The coaching carousel at MSU did them no good. It won't us either. Do we change in two years? If we don't see any development we do. But then what? I didn't see coaches of Urban Meyers caliber pounding down the door to get into UM last time. What's to say they will if we fire Hoke in 2016? Whatever they do, if at all possible, my first choice is for Hoke to start showing he can really develop these kids. My second is finding someone who has shown he can at a Division 1 level if Hoke doesn't work out. Way down in last place for me is finding someone running a 'modern' offense.
One final thing: I dont' honestly remember from my college days (Mo, then Lloyd) Michigan being 'Elite' other than '97. We largely owned MSU and OSU, but the elite teams in those days were teams like FSU and ND. OSU under cooper (my favorite OSU coach) was kind of a paper tiger. It was a cast iron b*tch to beat ND, and the one time we played FSU they utterly destroyed us.