Fun with Small Sample Sizes
October 2nd, 2011 at 8:02 PM ^
The Hoke sample isn't just small; it's also biased toward lesser opponents. This would be interesting as a full diary (with charts and all) but probably not until the end of this season.
October 2nd, 2011 at 9:21 PM ^
He's also including RR and Carr's biggest wins against lesser opponents, so it's at least partially apples-to-apples. I think what he's trying to say is that when Hoke has won, the wins have been impressive - at least as, if not more, impressive than RR and Carr's (in his last years) big wins against lesser opponents.
I think the flaw in these observations is less about sample size, and more about the fact that Hoke inherited a hell of a team from the RR era. We expected to win all of these games. However, I will agree with the OP that the wins are definitely feel-good, and I would like to believe they indicate greater things to come.
October 2nd, 2011 at 10:06 PM ^
I think the lesser opponent issue makes this kind of claim problematic:
"Brady Hoke is responsible for only 6.25% of the last 80 games, yet contributed one third of the shutouts and the most lopsided win."
Also, I'm not convinced that Hoke inherited a much better team than RR. It seems like Hoke inherited considerably better offensive talent while RR inherited considerably better defensive talent. To the extent that it looks like our defensive talent is pretty good right now, I think a lot of that should be attributed to talent development (and better use of that talent) by the new staff.
October 2nd, 2011 at 10:14 PM ^
100% agreed.
Sorry, couldn't figure out how to block quote.
October 2nd, 2011 at 8:41 PM ^
With five minutes gone in the second quarter yesterday, we were on pace for 900 yards of total offense. I was a bit disappointed that we couldn't sustain that.
October 3rd, 2011 at 12:49 PM ^
Immediately following the TD at the start of the 2nd QTR we were on pace for a yardage disparity of 960 to 16... that woulda been something.
October 2nd, 2011 at 9:33 PM ^
and thought it was going to be about your sex life.
oh I KID, I KID! :)
more seriously, too premature. we're all excited, but taking a huge number of returning starters and getting to 5-0 with wins over a number of cupcakes (and one I think very good ND team) is not a good basis for extrapolation...
October 2nd, 2011 at 9:48 PM ^
While I like our chances against NW because of Persa's injury and NW isn't a particularly intimidating venue, MSU and Iowa are likely to be tough and very physical games at very hostile stadiums.
October 2nd, 2011 at 10:35 PM ^
Around for the '07 games as the OP states?
<br>
<br>Wasn't he hired in '08, coached 3 seasons and fired in 2011?
October 3rd, 2011 at 12:32 AM ^
I don't know if it's wise to advertise that on the internet...
October 3rd, 2011 at 2:17 AM ^
You have to consider the teams they inherited. Imagine if Rich Rodriguez had inherited this year's team, or if Brady Hoke had taken over in 2008.
October 3rd, 2011 at 2:58 AM ^
He'd inherit great defensive players and on offense he'd have Ryan Mallet.
October 3rd, 2011 at 7:09 PM ^
"and he'd have Ryan Mallett."
Let's beat this to death one more time: Mallett was gone the moment Mitch Mustain transferred.
Now we can certainly speculate that, had Mustain remained at Arkansas, Rodriguez's arrival would still have prompted Mallett to leave. We can also speculate that the fact that he couldn't get along with his teammates would have played a role, independent of who his coach was. But it seems a stretch to state unequivocably that, had Hoke become coach in 2008, he would have had the services of Ryan Mallett at his disposal.
Comments