Maybe this has been said, but I didn't have the patience to search through 300 comments. I largely agree with Brian's predictions about how our offensive numbers will change next year. That's assuming Denard is the starting quarterback and admittedly, it's hard to envision that not being the case. However, from my own observations, I think Devin is a more natural thrower; he throws a gorgeous deep ball. IMO he is probably the better pro-style quarterback too. I think the coaching staff will be in a tough position because they will see Devin fit the future of what they are trying to do more so than Denard, but how do you demote a player who averaged the second most all purpose yards per game in the FBS? Denard is "special" and we can be successful with either, it's a good problem to have.
I also see it as a unique opportunity. Are there offensive schemes that we could draw up that incorporate both of their throwing and running capabilities on the field at the same time? Plays that would involve backward throws down the line and then another throw vertical? If we learned to execute something like that, it would be something nobody has ever seen... I'm just dreaming and it's not something I would realistically expect this staff to try but it's a nice thought in the offseason.
I think one positive that could have been emphasized more is the talent we have at tight end in Moore and especially Koger. I think Koger is NFL talent. Would be nice to have Webb's for another year, but I think it would be good if we got the tight ends more involved in the passing game.
I could be overstating the pessimism, didn't mean to, but that's the vibe I get. Maybe it's more what he hasn't said? And I could have missed this, but is there no excitement about rivalry games, especially tosu, being an emphasis? Missed what I thought was a dig at tosu when Hoke talked about the rings and how he understands their importance and he knows they are important to the guys in the back of the room. I don't know, yeah I probably overstated the pessimism but certainly not actively looking for it. I think it is telling what he doesn't mention, but it's a blog and I don't have to read here and he has every right to post what he wants. I see a different standard but I understand that and I also could be wrong, just my opinion.
Highlighting the age and race of our coaching staff...I feel there are so many other more important and interesting things that he could have put in its place. Saying that it "is bad and looks bad" because of our staff's age and race is what made me feel the pessimism. And it's childish reasoning with no facts to back it up, not very cook-like. Don't want to get back into that though.
Done posting on this one, seeya in a different thread or something.
I have no problem with raising occasional concerns, hell I don't care if you raise a ton of concerns as long as they are legitimate... you are twisting my words or maybe completely misinterpreting them. Make legit criticisms, not oh they all look the same and are white: this is bad, this is really bad. Don't walk back the reasonable criticisms, but keep the grade school ones to yourself. Don't grumble that elitist Michigan factions never gave poor old bumpkin Rich Rod a chance because of how he talked and then turn around and make the same sort of baseless criticisms of our now current staff. It's stooping to the same level of the people who pissed us all off while Rich Rod was coach...he is better than that and that's all I'm saying.
What I notice is that he felt it was more important to talk about the physical appearance, race and age of our coaching staff in a negative light than to point out some positives like Kellen Jones as someone mentioned, or that the hire has brought about strong support from past players where it was previously lacking (he only points out support in a mocking way or with a little jab...Mike Hart for instance). Did he express the same concern about Magee because he couldn't incorporate Mallet's strengths?
As I've said, I've read for years and from what I can see, there is a double standard. What were his reasonable expectations for Rich in year one, two, three? and what will they be for Hoke? I share many of the same concerns that Brian does, not a big fan of Llllllloyd and that's putting it nicely. His lack of support for Rich was disgusting. And I know it is still fresh and will have the patience to wait for him to cool off, but like I said in my first post, I hope the pessimism wears off some.
I re-read the post on Mattison, as you pointed out, I was wrong about that. Can I retract that statement? I wish to.
There is no evidence that our coaches can't relate to poor black kids from anywhere including pahokee...unless you are stereotyping and making assumptions. I am also unaware of this inability to relate bc we aren't from the same cloth issue actually being an issue other than because Brian says so. There is lots of evidence to suggest that they can relate...look at who they have coached, the length of time they have coached, and the people who have said positive things about them...including former players, who, at one time, likely were the same sort of kids Brian is concerned about. Making an issue out of nothing in my opinion.
I agree that it is reasonable to be skeptical about the Hoke hire, I don't think it is reasonable to let that disspointment or skepticism carry over to the coverage of our TEAM. That's all, I love this blog and appreciate the obviously hard work that Brian puts into it. I just don't think there has to be such a pessimistic attitude about our team because he didn't like "the process". Am I afraid that we are headed back to Lloyd 2.0? Hell yes, but I am taking more of a wait and see approach. Attacking how our coaches look and hating on some of the things that make up Michigan's identity is not why I come to this blog and read...that's all I'm saying.
Oh, and all that being said, I'm all for Corwin Brown, I think that would be a great hire.
Took the post to be more emphatic than a simple note of deficiency. And it is only a deficiency if we assume that older, white men cannot relate to the kind of kids we expect to recruit. There is no evidence beyond blanket stereotypes to say this is absolutely and always true. Not mentioning that they have been coaching kids from these type of backgrounds for decades is akin to ignoring it. His point is well taken and I don't neccessarily disagree but I do disagree that this should be our criteria for determining who the remaining coaches are...a factor maybe, IMO not top priority.
My larger point is that I don't like the tone with which Brian has covered OUR TEAM's coaching staff. I'm not saying to ignore negatives, but it's a night and day difference from how Rich Rod and his staff were covered. He made the Mattison hire seem like a mediocre hire at best. You think the kids are going to overlook the fact that Mattison worked with Ray Ray, Ed Reed, Suggs, Ngata...etc...(who are from what type of background?) because of his hair, skin color and age?!
I agree that it is important for the kid to feel comfortable with his coach, but is that the priority? Brain completely ignores the years...errr...decades of experience that our coaches have working with kids in this context. Basing our new staff's ability to establish a bond with players off of age, race, and how they look is childish and in poor taste. Brian is smarter than that. I can't help but feel like he is looking for anything possible that highlights the negative, while I felt he did not take this same approach with the former staff. I didn't like "the process" and would have gladly accepted another year with Rich Rod, but I'm going to give the new staff the same benefit of the doubt that I gave to Rich and his staff.
I hope the pessimism about this coaching staff wears off soon because I have loved checking this site for years - recently some of the stuff is hard to swallow. Not sure how it matters what race our staff is. Race should play no part in determining who we hire as coaches and that goes both ways. As to the Vincent Smith comment, are we hiring football coaches or guidance counselors here? I'm an alum and lord knows there are plenty of organizations, groups, and support systems for minorities at U of M. If our players are having troubles unique to poor black kids, there are plenty of places to turn to at U of M.
I'm "all in" no matter who the coach is, hope you can get on board too. Go Blue
Recent Comments
Maybe this has been said, but I didn't have the patience to search through 300 comments. I largely agree with Brian's predictions about how our offensive numbers will change next year. That's assuming Denard is the starting quarterback and admittedly, it's hard to envision that not being the case. However, from my own observations, I think Devin is a more natural thrower; he throws a gorgeous deep ball. IMO he is probably the better pro-style quarterback too. I think the coaching staff will be in a tough position because they will see Devin fit the future of what they are trying to do more so than Denard, but how do you demote a player who averaged the second most all purpose yards per game in the FBS? Denard is "special" and we can be successful with either, it's a good problem to have.
I also see it as a unique opportunity. Are there offensive schemes that we could draw up that incorporate both of their throwing and running capabilities on the field at the same time? Plays that would involve backward throws down the line and then another throw vertical? If we learned to execute something like that, it would be something nobody has ever seen... I'm just dreaming and it's not something I would realistically expect this staff to try but it's a nice thought in the offseason.
I think one positive that could have been emphasized more is the talent we have at tight end in Moore and especially Koger. I think Koger is NFL talent. Would be nice to have Webb's for another year, but I think it would be good if we got the tight ends more involved in the passing game.
I could be overstating the pessimism, didn't mean to, but that's the vibe I get. Maybe it's more what he hasn't said? And I could have missed this, but is there no excitement about rivalry games, especially tosu, being an emphasis? Missed what I thought was a dig at tosu when Hoke talked about the rings and how he understands their importance and he knows they are important to the guys in the back of the room. I don't know, yeah I probably overstated the pessimism but certainly not actively looking for it. I think it is telling what he doesn't mention, but it's a blog and I don't have to read here and he has every right to post what he wants. I see a different standard but I understand that and I also could be wrong, just my opinion.
Highlighting the age and race of our coaching staff...I feel there are so many other more important and interesting things that he could have put in its place. Saying that it "is bad and looks bad" because of our staff's age and race is what made me feel the pessimism. And it's childish reasoning with no facts to back it up, not very cook-like. Don't want to get back into that though.
Done posting on this one, seeya in a different thread or something.
I personally like "The Hoke'ster" but I'm a sucker for late 80's-early 90's pay per view Big Time Wrestling.
I have no problem with raising occasional concerns, hell I don't care if you raise a ton of concerns as long as they are legitimate... you are twisting my words or maybe completely misinterpreting them. Make legit criticisms, not oh they all look the same and are white: this is bad, this is really bad. Don't walk back the reasonable criticisms, but keep the grade school ones to yourself. Don't grumble that elitist Michigan factions never gave poor old bumpkin Rich Rod a chance because of how he talked and then turn around and make the same sort of baseless criticisms of our now current staff. It's stooping to the same level of the people who pissed us all off while Rich Rod was coach...he is better than that and that's all I'm saying.
What I notice is that he felt it was more important to talk about the physical appearance, race and age of our coaching staff in a negative light than to point out some positives like Kellen Jones as someone mentioned, or that the hire has brought about strong support from past players where it was previously lacking (he only points out support in a mocking way or with a little jab...Mike Hart for instance). Did he express the same concern about Magee because he couldn't incorporate Mallet's strengths?
As I've said, I've read for years and from what I can see, there is a double standard. What were his reasonable expectations for Rich in year one, two, three? and what will they be for Hoke? I share many of the same concerns that Brian does, not a big fan of Llllllloyd and that's putting it nicely. His lack of support for Rich was disgusting. And I know it is still fresh and will have the patience to wait for him to cool off, but like I said in my first post, I hope the pessimism wears off some.
I re-read the post on Mattison, as you pointed out, I was wrong about that. Can I retract that statement? I wish to.
There is no evidence that our coaches can't relate to poor black kids from anywhere including pahokee...unless you are stereotyping and making assumptions. I am also unaware of this inability to relate bc we aren't from the same cloth issue actually being an issue other than because Brian says so. There is lots of evidence to suggest that they can relate...look at who they have coached, the length of time they have coached, and the people who have said positive things about them...including former players, who, at one time, likely were the same sort of kids Brian is concerned about. Making an issue out of nothing in my opinion.
I agree that it is reasonable to be skeptical about the Hoke hire, I don't think it is reasonable to let that disspointment or skepticism carry over to the coverage of our TEAM. That's all, I love this blog and appreciate the obviously hard work that Brian puts into it. I just don't think there has to be such a pessimistic attitude about our team because he didn't like "the process". Am I afraid that we are headed back to Lloyd 2.0? Hell yes, but I am taking more of a wait and see approach. Attacking how our coaches look and hating on some of the things that make up Michigan's identity is not why I come to this blog and read...that's all I'm saying.
Oh, and all that being said, I'm all for Corwin Brown, I think that would be a great hire.
Took the post to be more emphatic than a simple note of deficiency. And it is only a deficiency if we assume that older, white men cannot relate to the kind of kids we expect to recruit. There is no evidence beyond blanket stereotypes to say this is absolutely and always true. Not mentioning that they have been coaching kids from these type of backgrounds for decades is akin to ignoring it. His point is well taken and I don't neccessarily disagree but I do disagree that this should be our criteria for determining who the remaining coaches are...a factor maybe, IMO not top priority.
My larger point is that I don't like the tone with which Brian has covered OUR TEAM's coaching staff. I'm not saying to ignore negatives, but it's a night and day difference from how Rich Rod and his staff were covered. He made the Mattison hire seem like a mediocre hire at best. You think the kids are going to overlook the fact that Mattison worked with Ray Ray, Ed Reed, Suggs, Ngata...etc...(who are from what type of background?) because of his hair, skin color and age?!
I agree that it is important for the kid to feel comfortable with his coach, but is that the priority? Brain completely ignores the years...errr...decades of experience that our coaches have working with kids in this context. Basing our new staff's ability to establish a bond with players off of age, race, and how they look is childish and in poor taste. Brian is smarter than that. I can't help but feel like he is looking for anything possible that highlights the negative, while I felt he did not take this same approach with the former staff. I didn't like "the process" and would have gladly accepted another year with Rich Rod, but I'm going to give the new staff the same benefit of the doubt that I gave to Rich and his staff.
I hope the pessimism about this coaching staff wears off soon because I have loved checking this site for years - recently some of the stuff is hard to swallow. Not sure how it matters what race our staff is. Race should play no part in determining who we hire as coaches and that goes both ways. As to the Vincent Smith comment, are we hiring football coaches or guidance counselors here? I'm an alum and lord knows there are plenty of organizations, groups, and support systems for minorities at U of M. If our players are having troubles unique to poor black kids, there are plenty of places to turn to at U of M.
I'm "all in" no matter who the coach is, hope you can get on board too. Go Blue