things go poorly
- Member for
- 3 years 42 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Brady Hoke with Ball State historical context||
Didn't take the time to go through the entire history of Ball State football, but since 1971:
19 seasons in which Ball State was outscored by its opponents:
10 point losses:
Seasons with four or more 10 point losses:
|3 years 34 weeks ago||Brady Hoke with San Diego State context||
Didn't take the time to go through the entire history of San Diego State football, but since 1973:
20 seasons in which San Diego State was outscored by its opponents:
1978, 1980 (Gilbert)
10 point losses:
Seasons with four or more 10 point losses:
|3 years 34 weeks ago||San Diego State chart by year||
San Diego State chart by year through 2010 (Brady Hoke started in 2009)
San Diego State chart by coach
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Stanford chart by year||
Stanford chart by year (Jim Harbaugh started in 2007)
Stanford chart by coach (includes 2 stints by Bill Walsh 77-78, 92-94)
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Ball State chart by year||
Ball State chart by year through 2008 (Brady Hoke started in 2003)
Ball State chart by coach
|3 years 35 weeks ago||Fair criticism, human nature||
That's a fair criticism, particularly with respect to anyone who was actively trying to undermine RR. On the flip side, I do believe it's human nature to actively support people that you have a personal connection with, especially in light of the apparent need to show support and solidarity given the fractures in the fan base and the loss of the "Great Unifying Coaching Candidate" (hereinafter referred to as GUCC) to the 49ers.
Not everyone showing active support for BH now was previously actively undermining RR. And it is human nature for some people to be silent and sit on the sidelines for someone they don't really know personally.
There are some who may be guilty of doing bad things to get what they want in terms of this coaching change. But there are also some who are genuinely happy, with "good" motivations and "right" reasons, that BH is the coach at Michigan.
|3 years 35 weeks ago||PR for Rodriguez v. Hoke||
I've seen several posts now pointing to the different treatment of Rodriguez v. Hoke by the press and also in terms of the PR effort put forth by the Michigan athletic department. I also saw earlier the article that Section 1 cites now.
I understand that there's an element of "not one of us" v. "one of us" going on here in terms of the different treatment. But I also wonder if part of the difference, particularly in terms of the PR effort by the Michigan athletic department, is precisely due to what happened to Rodriguez.
Even DB has stated the need for unity this time in contrast with what has happened in the past, so it makes sense to me that the athletic department would be putting significantly more effort into shaping media and fan perceptions this time around. If anything, that's an indictment of BM and his failure to recognize the need for an aggressive PR campaign on behalf of Rodriguez, given his lack of historical, institutional ties.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||December survey is different||
Just wanted to say - be careful comparing these results to the December survey. It's two different populations (December survey was randomly-selected voters, self-identified Michigan fans v. self-selected MGoBlog users now). You may not be seeing shifts in opinion as much as you are differences in populations.
Edit: And not to be negative, great post! Thanks for doing this.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||private or public sector?||
@OP: Do you work in the private or the public sector? We shouldn't underestimate the political influences at play in the public sector (which is essentially every D-1 athletic dept with alums, boosters, presidents, etc., even if the college itself is private).
It's entirely possible that there were political forces in play that required RR's termination even without a replacement on board.
I would also point to other football coaching changes, and suggest that your principle is the exception rather than the rule.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Sounds like Miami, Oakland,||
Sounds like Miami, Oakland, and Denver provided all the leverage needed. Schefter suggested Harbaugh turned down Miami's offer because it wasn't all about the money.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Impressive to Stanford...||
Impressive to Stanford...
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Interesting contrast between||
Interesting contrast between Singletary and Harbaugh by Mike Lombardi, former candidate for 49ers GM position: nfl.com
|3 years 36 weeks ago||I think there's some truth to||
I think there's some truth to both perspectives. Yes, donations have continued to increase. But yes, it's possible that major donors were threatening to withhold future donations.
At the same time, yes, just having lots of money doesn't make you a better person. But yes, making a lot of money suggests an ability to be successful in some sense. How do we feel about Stephen Ross going after JH for the Miami Dolphins?
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Nah, pretty sure dirt was||
Nah, pretty sure dirt was around before 1964.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||I know the feelings about the||
I know the feelings about the media (ESPECIALLY after that Tuesday debacle!), but I honestly don't think DB was afraid of offending the media in deciding to fire RR. I'm not even sure the input of influential alumni was decisive. I do think he made an evaluation and didn't like what he saw. People can disagree with his evaluation, but I don't think it was a lack of courage that led to this decision.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Oh that game John||
And Stanford was apparently playing a redshirt sophomore backup quarterback who had only 3 passes in his career. And USC surrendered 4 sacks, more than they had all season, and only had 95 yards rushing. (source)
Please - stop trying to compare Michigan and Stanford - you are only making it worse for RR. As I mentioned above, is it really fair or reasonable to expect that Michigan would go 12-1 next year with a blowout BCS bowl win? That's the bar you're setting by continuing to make this comparison.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Similar, but not the same||
I think it's reasonable to draw some similarities between the first 3 years of JH's tenure at Stanford, and the first 3 years of RR's tenure at Michigan. However, I think it's also important to recognize the differences, especially in the 3rd year and especially considering the context of both programs.
Certainly, the general atmosphere and fan expectations are very different at Stanford than at Michigan, and that made it easier for Stanford's AD to keep JH around. And 8-5 was the best record Stanford had since 2001.
Nevertheless, it's hard to say that Michigan in 2010 is the same as Stanford in 2009, and I believe it's even harder to argue that Michigan under RR in 2011 will be like Stanford in 2010. Do you honestly expect 12-1 and a blowout win in a BCS bowl next year, with your only loss coming to a non-rival team playing for the national championship?
The more people compare JH to RR, the more you cement this year's Stanford team as the benchmark for RR next year. I don't believe that's fair or realistic to RR, so my suggestion is that we stop trying to suggest that Michigan under RR is just like Stanford under JH, "except for a 4th year."
|3 years 36 weeks ago||While I disagree with broad||
While I disagree with broad generalizations and stereotypes, there is some evidence (polling data) that there was a significant shift in support away from RR among Michigan fans 65+ this season (from 65% wanting him to continue in May, to only 18% in December). Interestingly, however, there was also a significant shift in support away from RR among African-American fans over that same time period (from 75% wanting him to continue in May, to only 40% in December).
|3 years 36 weeks ago||The 3rd year was key||
Stanford defense 2007-2009 under JH:
Points / game: 28.3, 27.4, 26.5
Michigan defense 2008-2010 under RR:
Points / game: 28.9, 27.5, 35.2
The trends in the first two years are similar, but that third year really bottomed out for Michigan's defense, especially in scoring and point differential.
Also, it's hard for Stanford fans to complain about 4-8, 5-7, 8-5 when their previous 5 years were 2-9, 4-7, 4-7, 5-6, 1-11.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||4. Competitive context||
MSU and OSU (and Wisconsin!) had 11-1 seasons, while the Big 10 went 2-5 (at the time) in bowl games.
Iowa tanked to 8-5, MSU gets blown out in a bowl (neither team was really THAT strong)
Notre Dame, under a first year coach, showed improvement over the course of the season and won their bowl game.
NTMSU beat Michigan handily in the 2nd year of their coach's tenure.
Stanford went 12-1 this year and won handily in their bowl game.
Nebraska (member of Big 10 next year, and considered to be one of the stronger teams in the conference) loses to a mid-level Pac 10 Washington team (that got blown out by Stanford, btw).
Even Stanford's bowl loss last year, in JH's 3rd year, was much more competitive (against Oklahoma) without Andrew Luck (didn't play due to injury). Heck, even Northwestern's bowl loss this year was more competitive without Dan Persa. What would the Gator Bowl have looked like without Denard?
It's hard not to compare Michigan's situation under RR unfavorably to those competitive benchmarks. For a business mind like DB's, I have to think the competitive context played a significant role as well.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Agreed - it was hard, if not||
Agreed - it was hard, if not impossible, for the team to recover the momentum after that 2nd quarter. But it still wasn't over at the half - they came out on D and made a big 3-and-out stop, but then the offense got bogged down, and the failed FG (!!!)...
After so many 2nd half comebacks this year, even those that came up short, I thought this team would keep fighting to the final possession like they had most of the year. That didn't happen, and I believe that was the end of RR's opportunity to continue here.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Not sure I agree that JH is||
Not sure I agree that JH is actively using Michigan as leverage. He could use the Raiders, the Panthers, and the Dolphins for that. Hot coaches have a high market value by definition.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||The troubling detail about||
The troubling detail about that report is that the supposed source of what JH wants was the Michigan athletic department? It makes more sense if it was the athletic department saying what it wants (ie, deciding not to pursue JH because of price, other concerns, whatever).
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Well, he at least proved he||
Well, he at least proved he could recruit a stud quarterback to a 1-11 team.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||I realize there's a lot of||
I realize there's a lot of emotional investment in JH right now, but think of him as an athlete who could choose to declare early for the draft. If he's projected to be a top pick and make a lot of money, are you going to begrudge him his decision to go pro?
Football is too unpredictable. If he has this kind of opportunity, I say let him go and wish him well.
If he were just another alum and not a candidate for a coaching gig here, I think most of us would be rooting for him to be successful.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||It's possible the 49er job||
It's possible the 49er job opens up now precisely because of the opportunity to grab JH, and the concern that he would go to Michigan. Not good to be competing with NFL owners for a head coach.
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Not sure I agree. JH's market||
Not sure I agree. JH's market value may have changed (possibly because of Michigan alum Stephen Ross) between the verbal and now. What if a junior player states his intention to finish his degree, but then over the course of the season becomes projected as a top 5 pick in the draft? Can you really blame him for going pro?
|3 years 36 weeks ago||If JH had led DB to believe||
If JH had led DB to believe he would come, then some of the fault would have to lay on him. On the other hand, when billionaires are throwing money at you to come coach their NFL franchises, it's hard to complain about his decision-making. Sort of like Stanford fans complaining if/when Andrew Luck decides to declare for the NFL draft. Can you really blame him?
|3 years 36 weeks ago||If that were the real reason||
If that were the real reason for the delay, don't you think DB would have mentioned it (wink, wink)? Why take all the criticism and pressure if the delay is just a formality?
|3 years 36 weeks ago||Yeah, I wondered about that||
Yeah, I wondered about that too. I guess we'll find out 7 days from now. But if that were really the case, I think DB would have cited it as a reason for the delay (wink, wink) - why endure all this pressure if he's got the guy in hand and just has to wait on the formality?