October 26th, 2013 at 9:28 PM ^

Blowing one fluky game a year is acceptable.  That happens across all of college football.  You marry it with 1 legitimate loss and you have a lot of 11-2 seasons.  Go look back the past 20 years and tell me how many teams UM has fielded with 2 losses or less.  Answer: It's not a good answer.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:32 PM ^

People are freaking out because we lost to PSU and the OP cited Stanford as the type of team we should aspire to be, when they are essentially in the exact same boat we are in this year and were in the same boat last year until they pulled the upset against Oregon (for the first time in a few years). 

I'm right there with you when it comes to our fanbases overinflated sense of our recent (i.e. last 50+ years) history.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:40 PM ^

I think its more than PSU.  I think its playing down to Akron and UConn - two teams Central Florida destroyed by like 30 points a game.  Now some of that was on Devin alone as he had turnovers in both games that gave very short fields.  But whatever the case.  I think right now people still look at the jersey and not the players.  We lack difference makers outside of 1 WR, 1 QB, and maybe 1 corner.  JMFR is the other but hurt.  A lot of other players are nice role players or nice effective players like Desmon Morgan but we lack the talent of the older teams (who also unfortunately underachieved under Carr post 2000).   We are just not there for whatever the reason - OSU is there... people mock them for close wins but they win.  We'll see what the next 5 weeks brings... this is the type of team that can win any of those games and lose any of those games.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:57 PM ^

I think this comment touches on something a lot of us Michigan fans really want to ignore. Michigan has a grand total of 11 national championships and only one of those those was after President Truman was in office. Michigan only has 8 Rose Bowl wins. Much of the lore behind Michigan comes from a intra-regional rivalry... not national dominance. 

We let our expectations get away from us based on a miscalculation of how we preceive the Michigan brand (and not brand in the way Brandon thinks about it).

I believe this team can be great and fun to watch and deserving of our passion. We just need to check where our preception of where it should be is coming from.


October 26th, 2013 at 11:38 PM ^

9-3 would be a 75% winning percentage. No program is that good. Not even ours, the winningest in history.

But if we average something close to that, I'm sure we'll win a few national titles. Something like 11 in any given century. We'll win quite a few conference championships, too. Hell, we will probably have more than anyone else.

In short, you are wrong, but not for the reasons you might suspect. You poo-poo 9-3 like it's a bad thing. This is fucking nonsense of the highest order.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:09 PM ^

After 2011, Hoke, and for the most part his staff, could do no wrong. Given the quick turnaround after the disappointment of the RR years, the euphoria was understandable.

More disappointments last year, but Denard's injury certainly had quite a bit to do with the late season losses. Hoke didn't seem to get much direct criticism, but after the OSU game Borges got thoroughly roasted. However, Hoke's post-season recruiting success mitigated the anger to a significant extent.

A good portion of the fanbase around here was almost giddy with optimism going into this season, and predictions of double-digit wins, including victories over MSU and OSU, were very common.

Fast forward seven games and now a sizeable portion of the fanbase (at least around here) is openly calling for the heads of several assistant coaches, with more than a few having also concluded that Hoke is an inarticulate doofus who has no clue what's going on.

If we don't come away with a win a week from now, the portion of the fanbase that shares that last opinion is going to expand exponentially.


October 26th, 2013 at 10:53 PM ^

quite common, unfortunately.  I suspect we are no different from virtually every other fanbase which has had a winning tradtion at some point, but have fallen on diffiicult times.  I would also agree that our memories of past glory might be a little blurry at best.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:25 PM ^

Problem is the team has regressed. And I'm not calling for anybody's job, I'm just saying the team has regressed. Not even so much the offense because we all knew they had to adjust to Denarnd's style of play for two years. No excuses for the Defense they've been in the system for 3 years now, and clearly have regressed. That is a problem with he coach.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:35 PM ^

Defensive regression? Why because they had a bad game against Indiana? Have you watched Indiana this year? Those kids can move the ball.

If you honestly think this team has regressed I urge you to go back and watch other games over the past couple years. Perhaps the improvement is not as drastic as we would all like, but overall this team is improving game to game year to year.


October 26th, 2013 at 10:12 PM ^

Rather than repeating your claim that the team has regressed, it might be helpful to explain what the hell you're talking about. When exactly was which unit better, and how exactly is it due to coaching? I'm denying anything, but it's odd to see a claim just repeated over and over without any support.


October 26th, 2013 at 10:37 PM ^

It should be explanatory but if you really need me to explain what it means for a team to regress, particularly this team I will. Let me make it simple for you, there are many aspects of this team that look worse in year 3 then they did in year one. Last year at least the O-line made an attempt to block some one, this year they are blocking no one. Last year the Defense did a good job getting off the field on 3rd down, this year they are not. I could go on and on, but do you really want to? are you really pretending that you haven't noticed regression in this team, Coaching has regress, special teams have regress, Fitz looks slower, linebackers aren't as good as they have been. C'mon man are you really doing this. I'm a Michigan fan just like you but be honest with yourself.



October 27th, 2013 at 12:29 AM ^

I can't stand the g-d negativity around here sometimes.

They went 11-2 the first year, with a BCS win. Mattison as coach improved the defense by about ONE HUNDRED spots in ranking. They overperformed even the optimistic predictions some would have that year. OF FUCKING COURSE they were going to regress to some extent. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. The coaches are good, but they're not magicians. 

NOt to mention that the "regression" from last year included 3 losses to 3 teams that lost a grand total of TWO games among them all year (and one of those losses was the fricking national championship game).

This year they're 6-1 and were one field goal or interception away from 7-0.

But yeah. Totally regression, you guys.



October 27th, 2013 at 7:54 AM ^

Sooooooo you make my point by saying this team has regressed, then you act as if its all fine and dandy, as if its OK because every team in America will get worse over time. Yeah unfortunate that doesn't fly its not OK.  I'm sure Hoke would agree with me and say the same thing. So ask yourself, whose expectations lines up more with this coaching staff, mines or yours? you believing that regression is OK, and I believing that it is not. We've seen 5 different left guards, 2 centers, and 4 left tackles. All I've said was that this concerns me, and some how that makes me a bad fan? you tell me to go root for someone else, and that I'm to negative because I'm concerned that a staff could go through a full off season (spring and summer practices) and not know their team couldn't block power?  Maybe you should go root for another team, find one of those little kids soft ball teams where they don't keep score.


October 27th, 2013 at 3:15 PM ^

Completely missed my point. Yes, the regression is expected. And it's silly to think that regression always and forever means that the coaches are bad. And you also miss the point that Hoke was a guy who got us to 11 wins, but you're kind of using that to ding the guy because next year he wasn't as good, even though with the tougher schedule anyone with a brain could have seen it coming.

And, by the way, it's not right to say that Michigan has regressed this year again, because the simple fact is we don't know yet. They're 6-1 yet, and there is a chance they win out. Shoot, there's enough data to show that they've progressed in some areas. Maybe not on Oline, but again, no coach would be able to stem the tide of regression on OL due to turnover and youth being forced to start.

You bring up Akron and Uconn like they're relevent, but they're not. Because you are essentially arguing that RR at least progressed each year, when there is data to prove that he didn't. My point was if you're going to hold Akron and Uconn against Hoke as some sort of proof that Michigan is regressing, in contrast to how you think RR progressed each year...look at 2010 and see how many of M's wins were a lot like Akron and Uconn this year.


October 27th, 2013 at 11:14 AM ^

These are all just angsty ranting points that are not necessarily due to coaching. Generally, regression would make more sense if players were getting worse. New players coming in and not playing as well as past players is hard to pin on coaching since it happens to every team.

This isn't about being honest with yourself. This is about suppressing your extreme emotions and thinking about things rationally. I've gotten fired up at times this season as well, but when it comes to evaluating things a week after the last game, it's really better to slow down and try to be objective. It's not clear you're capable of doing that.


October 27th, 2013 at 12:14 PM ^

Dude I don't care how you word it. You can say the offensive line "players" are worse, or you could say the offensive line as a whole is getting worse. Who cares it is still regression. Now if you want to believe that that has nothing to do with coaching then go ahead, we'll just agree to disagree. Being objective has nothing to do with anything because everything I listed is fact. The O-line does look worse; rather you name them by name or a unit. The D-Line looks worse rather by name or unit, as does defensive tackling. I'm not calling for coach Hokes job, or writing  the  book on this regime that would be ridiculous. This team still has a chance to have a great season. All I am saying is that they have not look up to par as whole team so far. They have issues, and if they don't correct them soon it maybe to late.


October 27th, 2013 at 12:32 PM ^

Guys please stop with the formalities PLEASE! your killing me. I am not being coy with anything I am saying. forget the numbers, forget who they've played and who they haven't played I don't care. By saying this teams has not looked up to "par" I am merely saying that as a team they have not past the eye test, nor the sniff test. They're offense defense and special teams have not came out and looked good at the same time. In certain games the defense looks good, but the Offense stinks. There are other games where the offense looks great, but then the Defense is bad. 


October 27th, 2013 at 4:16 PM ^

The OL is currently getting worse? By what metric? What is your frame of reference? Were they worse vs. IU than against PSU, or are you just talking about relative to last year, in which case one could point to having lost half of it to graduation?

The DL is worse? By what metric? They are statistically far improved over last year, for example.

I think the reason you come across so poorly is because your posts do nothing but repeat your dubious premises. We're asking for reasons to believe your premises before we bother with any of your arguments based on them.

Even if you don't think these are worthwhile exercises, I hope you'll see that those who don't immediately agree with you have reasons beyond not being honest with ourselves. As it turns out, your personal emotions toward a topic play no role in how someone else might evaluate the same topic.


October 26th, 2013 at 10:11 PM ^

If we don't come away with a win a week from now, the portion of the fanbase that shares that last opinion is going to expand exponentially.

Probably. It's irrational, though - playing a 7-1 team on the road is not easy, especially when that team has the top-ranked defense in the country. The fact that this opponent is MSU, of course, makes it hard to remember those things.

Ty Butterfield

October 26th, 2013 at 11:41 PM ^

Next week is the biggest game of Hoke's tenure at Michigan. I know playing on the road is tough. No excuses. This is a game Michigan needs to win. Part of the problem is that Hoke does not have one quality road win. To this point he is not capable of getting this team to perform well on the road. Hoke won't be fired after this season but the fact that he does not have one single quality road win is a major concern.


October 27th, 2013 at 12:08 AM ^

But really how many opportunities have they had in 2 and a half years for a quality road win? In 2011 it was beat a really good MSU team or...nothing. Last year it was two undefeated teams and a team we lost our starting QB in. If we had beat Penn State would anyone be calling it a great road win? There haven't been a lot of opportunities to break that streak.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:08 PM ^

What is with all the negativity?

Pretty standard coach speak if you ask me. We are the only fan base that can cry doom while sitting at 6-1.

Cheer up people.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:10 PM ^

The pass rush is way, way better this year than it was last year. This is not a subjective issue. Hoke is right about this, and if you disagree with him, you're wrong.

Is it surprising that Hoke isn't as suicidal as most of the fanbase? Do we really want an angsty teen coaching the team?

There are certainly many other areas that continue to be concerning, but given that it helps the team not one bit to discuss those issues in public, why would Hoke be forthcoming about everything? Just stop reading Hoke interviews if you're sick of his lack of candor. It's not going to change.


October 26th, 2013 at 9:11 PM ^

Is Ron Zook reincarnated! Hell of an recruiter, but can't put it all together! I predict many 8-4 seasons in or future. Mediocre coach. Mediocre results.