You are Brady Hoke. What is your approach towards the team this week?

You are Brady Hoke. What is your approach towards the team this week?

Submitted by MGoPAR on November 24th, 2013 at 2:44 PM

I like these "You are..." themed stories. What is Coach Hoke's approach towards the team this week? Here are some thoughts I had.

(1) You (the players) are defined at Michigan by what you do against Ohio State. BEAT OHIO.

(2) This is a chance to create a memory for yourselves (seniors) or for the seniors.

(3) This is our bowl game. (Obviously, any bowl oppoent will not be as good as Ohio State.)

(4) Light them up that they have underperformed and can salvage the season with a win here.

(5) Don't overstate the game's importance. Focus on the process of getting better each day.

(6) Other (explain)

 

 

Coach Hoke wants you to vote for Denard

Coach Hoke wants you to vote for Denard

Submitted by umhero on March 5th, 2013 at 8:49 AM

MGoBlue.com has a video with Kovacs teaching Coach Hoke how to vote for Denard for the EA Sports cover.  I don't think either of them have futures in acting.

 

http://www.mgoblue.com/allaccess/?media=376496

 

I don't know how to embed this type of video, if anyone can help.

Request: Analysis of Coach Hoke's Gameday Coaching

Request: Analysis of Coach Hoke's Gameday Coaching

Submitted by The team the t… on August 14th, 2011 at 3:21 PM

SIAP....While it has been well established that Hoke poops gold, I was wondering if anyone has done an analysis of Hoke's gameday coaching?  I'd love to see a story on his strengths and weaknesses from his time as HC at Ball State and SDSU.   Maybe someone with more time on their hands could do a diary on issues such as:

  • clock management
  • half time adjustments
  • 4th down tendencies
  • how does he feel about punting from, say, the opponent's 35 yard line?
  • Game planning (predictable?)

I recall stories about schemes he has run, but that is not what I'm interested in.  I want to know what to expect from him on gameday.  

Mathlete!? 

Go Blue

Roster Balance and the 2012 Class

Roster Balance and the 2012 Class

Submitted by umhero on February 12th, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Frequently posters lament the position breakdown of our team.  We hear we have too many slots, or not enough O-linemen; we hear that the defense is under-recruited or that we should have signed a particular player last year since we’re recruiting that position this year (Devin Lucien).

Inspired by the various posts debating the makeup of this team, I decided to analyze what a balanced roster would look like, how our current roster is allocated, and what the future may hold.

As we all know, the NCAA allows division I football teams to provide scholarships to a total of 85 players each year (while most players keep their scholarships for at least 4 years they are technically all one year scholarships).  Despite what the SEC may do with their scholarships, Michigan plays by the rules so 85 scholarships works out to 5 classes of 17 players in each class (5 classes assumes everyone takes a redshirt year).  A perfectly balanced roster would have no attrition; all players would stay five years; and 17 RS seniors would be replaced by 17 recruits each season.  Here’s what a roster like that would look like:

    SR JR SO FR RS Recruit
TOTAL 85 (17) 17 17 17 17 17 17
OFFENSE
QB 4 (1) x   x x x x
RB 6 (2) x x x x x x
    x         x
FB 1     x        
WR 10 (2) x x x x x x
    x x x x x x
TE 5 (1) x x x x x x
OL 15 (3) x x x x x x
    x x x x x x
    x x x x x x
DEFENSE
DT 8 (2) x x x x x x
    x   x   x x
DE 8 (2) x x x x x x
      x   x x  
LB 8 (1) x x x x x x
      x   x x  
S 8 (1) x x x x x x
      x x x    
CB 9 (2) x x x x x x
    x x x   x x
SPECIAL TEAMS
K 1     x      
P 1         x    
LS 1 x          
TOTAL 85 17 17 17 17 17 17
    SR JR SO FR RS Recruit

While we could debate the numbers by position group, this gives a pretty good blueprint for an ideal roster.  A team like this would rely primarily on upper classmen.  The structure would eliminate the need for desperation recruiting where the makeup of a position group is so dire that the coaches are desperate to land freshman to fill in the two-deep.  Obviously player attrition would make managing a roster so precisely impossible, however that doesn’t mean it’s not something quality programs should strive for.  Realistically, we could probably expect to lose anywhere from three to five players each season to the draft, injury, ineligibility, or home sickness; that would mean our recruiting classes would be 20 to 22 with 17 being redshirted and the remaining recruits added to the active roster.  It is well known that Wisconsin and Iowa start a high percentage of fifth year players each season, which may account for their quality play despite lackluster recruiting.

Let’s take a look at our current roster compared to the “ideal” roster:

Ideal   Actual
    SR JR SO FR RS Recruit       '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Recruit*
TOTAL 85 (17) 17 17 17 17 17 17   TOTAL 83 15 19 20 11 19 20
OFFENSE   OFFENSE
QB 4 (1) x   x x x x   QB 3   x   x x x
RB 6 (2) x x x x x x   RB 8 x x x   x  
    x         x         x x   x  
FB 1     x                 x        
WR 10 (2) x x x x x x   FB              
    x x x x x x   WR 13 x x x x   x
TE 5 (1) x x x x x x       x x x x   x
OL 15 (3) x x x x x x       x x x x    
    x x x x x x       x          
    x x x x x x   TE 3 x x     x x
DEFENSE                 x
DT 8 (2) x x x x x x   OL 11 x x x x x x
    x   x   x x       x x x   x x
DE 8 (2) x x x x x x         x       x
      x   x x           x       x
LB 8 (1) x x x x x x                 x
      x   x x     DEFENSE
S 8 (1) x x x x x x   DT 5 x x x x   x
      x x x                 x   x
CB 9 (2) x x x x x x                 x
    x x x   x x   DE 9 x x x x x x
SPECIAL TEAMS       x     x x x
K 1     x                     x  
P 1         x       LB 11 x x x x x x
LS 1 x                 x x   x x x
TOTAL 85 17 17 17 17 17 17               x  
    SR JR SO FR RS Recruit               x  
                  S 7 x x x     x
                          x     x
                          x      
                          x      
                          x      
                  CB 10 x x x   x x
                          x   x  
                          x   x  
                              x  
                              x  
                  SPECIAL TEAMS
                  K 2     x   x  
                  P 1       x      
                  LS 1   x        
                  TOTAL 83 15 19 20 11 19 20
                      '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 Recruit*
*Recruits are projected for this class

As you can see, the team lacks consistency from season-to-season.  We have an abundance of WRs, a dearth of O-linemen and D-tackles, and a cluster of safeties all in one season.  I suspect that over the next couple of seasons Coach Hoke will try to remedy this by balancing recruiting the way I described above.  For some insight into the coach’s thinking, here’s a look at our current offers and the way I suspect the class will break down:

Targets         Offer Rivals 250
Quarterbacks
Zeke Pike 6'5" 220 4.7 Dixie Heights HS, Edgewood, Kentucky Yes Yes
Gunner Kiel 6'4" 220 N/A East HS, Columbus, Indiana Yes Yes
Bennie Coney 6'2" 205 4.8 Plant City HS, Plant City, Florida Yes Yes
Maty Mauk 6'2" 185   Kenton HS, Kenton, Ohio Yes Yes
Running Backs
Matt Jones 6'2" 200 4.53 Armwood HS, Seffner, Florida Yes Yes
Wide Receivers
Stefon Diggs 6’1″ 185 4.4 Our Lady of Good Counsel, Olney, Maryland Yes Yes
Dorial Green-Beckham 6’6″ 215 4.4 Hillcrest HS, Springfield, Missouri Yes Yes
Dwayne Stanford 6'4" 200 4.5 Taft HS, Cincinnatti, Ohio Yes Yes
Aaron Burbridge 6'0" 175 4.35 Farmington Harrison HS, Farmington Hills, Michigan Yes  
Derrick Woods 5'11" 180 4.5 Inglewood HS, Inglewood, California Yes Yes
Deontay McManus 6'0" 209 4.5 Dunbar HS, Baltimore, Maryland Yes Yes
Tight Ends
Sam Grant 6’6″ 230 4.8 St. Edward HS, Lakewood, Ohio Yes  
Sean Price 6'4" 206 4.9 North Marion HS, Citra, Florida Yes  
Devin Funchess 6'5" 205   Farmington Harrison HS, Farmington Hills, Michigan Yes  
Ron Thompson 6'4" 225   East Detroit HS, Eastpointe, Michigan Yes  
Taylor McNamara 6'5" 235   Westview HS, San Diego, California Yes Yes
Offensive Linemen
D.J. Humphries 6’5″ 265 4.9 Mallard Creek HS, Charlotte, North Carolina Yes Yes
Jordan Diamond 6’6″ 289 5.0 Simeon Vocational HS, Chicago, Illinois Yes Yes
Zach Banner 6'9 295   Lakes HS, Lakewood, Washington Yes Yes
Dan Voltz 6’5″ 289 5.3 Barrington HS, Barrington, Illinois Yes Yes
Defensive Ends
Chris Wormley 6’4″ 255   Whitmer HS, Toledo, Ohio Yes Yes
Ifeadi Odenigbo 6’4″ 210 4.44 Centerville HS, Centerville, Ohio Yes  
Pharaoh Brown 6’6″ 220 4.7 Brush HS, Lyndhurst, Ohio Yes  
Tom Strobel 6'6" 240 4.9 Mentor HS, Concord, Ohio Yes Yes
Mario Ojemudia 6'3" 215 4.65 Farmington Harrison HS, Farmington Hills, Michigan Yes  
Defensive Tackles
Tommy Schutt 6’3″ 301   Glenbard West HS, Glen Ellyn, Illinois Yes Yes
Eddie Goldman 6'4" 307   Friendship Collegiate Academy, Washington, D.C. Yes Yes
Vincent Valentine 6'3" 300   Edwardsville HS, Edwardsville, Illinois Yes Yes
Sheldon Day 6'2" 268   Warren Central HS, Indianapolis, Indiana Yes  
Danny O’Brien 6’4″ 255 5.1 Flint (MI) Powers Catholic Yes Yes
Greg Kuhar 6'3" 265   St. Edward HS, Concord Township, Ohio Yes  
Linebackers
Deaysean Rippy 6’2″ 198   Sto-Rox HS, McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania Yes Yes
James Ross 6’0″ 203   Orchard Lake St. Mary’s HS, Orchard Lake, Michigan Yes Yes
Royce Jenkins-Stone 6’2″ 215   Cass Tech HS, Detroit, Michigan Yes Yes
Vince Biegel 6'3" 210 4.53 Wisconsin Rapids Lincoln HS, Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin Yes Yes
Cornerbacks
Terry Richardson  5'9" 160 4.5 Cass Tech HS, Detroit, Michigan Yes Yes
Safeties
Elijah Shumate 6'1" 205 4.5 Don Bosco Prep, Ramsey, New Jersey Yes Yes
D.J. Singleton 6'3" 195 4.5 St. Peters Preparatory School, Jersey City, New Jersey Yes  

 

OFFENSE DEFENSE SPECIAL TEAMS
QB x DT x K  
RB     x P  
FB     x LS  
WR x DE x TOTAL 20
  x   x   Recruits
TE x LB x    
  x   x    
OL x S x    
  x   x    
  x CB x    
  x        
  x        

Currently we have made 37 offers, and we’ll probably make another 50 to 60 between now and signing day.  Based on what TomVH told us about signing percentages and our expectations for some of the players listed above, we can probably expect to sign around 12 or so of the players above and eight from future offers.  It will be interesting to see how close this projection will be.  It would be nice to return to the days when our teams didn’t rely on underclassmen too much.  Hopefully, roster management and recruiting will be some of Hoke’s strengths.