OTish: Malzahn effect on winning %
November 26th, 2013 at 1:11 AM ^
If you're not a OC or DC genius, then you don't have the luxury to be loyal to 'your guys'.
November 26th, 2013 at 2:02 AM ^
is his "hot seat" year no matter what he does, fire Borges or let him stay. Now if he made a deal with the devil ( DB ) and said " I'm going to change everything and get a new OC and line coach but you're going to have to give me TWO more years " what do you think DB might say ? How much time did Belein get when he sacked his staff ?
November 26th, 2013 at 4:25 AM ^
Hoke, as FB coach, is on a much shorter leash.
November 26th, 2013 at 9:12 AM ^
November 26th, 2013 at 3:04 AM ^
Hoke deserves his five years. Brandon is the real problem with the MANBALL mandate. But Borges will be the sacrificial lamb. After all, somebody is going to have to be let go to sate the bloodlust of "Michigan fans."
Fans who want Hoke fired have no class. I am sure many of you are the same people who screamed "FIRE RICH ROD" and were excited for a return to "Michigan Football."
You got exactly what you wanted; give Brady Hoke the time he deserves.
November 26th, 2013 at 4:26 AM ^
I think those fans want to win regardless of what system we run. I think it's silly to call fans classless if they demand better from a team with so many resources, largely due to the tix fees we pay.
November 26th, 2013 at 5:44 AM ^
just idiodic and impatient to believe it takes less than 5 years to rebuild a program from the complete garbage it was in 2010.
November 26th, 2013 at 8:27 AM ^
BlueinLansing: idiotic? Really? Take a look at Univ of Louisville. Steve Kragthorpe followed Bobby Petrino and drove their program into the ground over a 3 yr period. In year 3 UL finished 4-8 in the Big East. That's like 2-10 (at best) anywhere else. AD Tom Jurich canned Kragthorpe after 3 yrs. Charlie Strong immediately turned them around and soon thereafter had a BCS Sugar Bowl win against Florida. So, if I understand you correctly, Jurich should not have fired Kragthorpe after yr 3 and it should have taken Strong much longer to turn Kragthorpe's garbage into a winning team? Sorry, no sale.
November 26th, 2013 at 8:38 AM ^
I am assuming that BlueInLansing's comments are confined to Michigan. Comparing our situation to a different program in a different, decidedly less competitive conference probably isn't the best idea. Because Charlie Strong did that at Louisville doesn't mean he could produce similar results in another conference with different talent / recruiting bases. The situations seem too dissimilar for you to make this comparison.
November 26th, 2013 at 8:43 AM ^
November 26th, 2013 at 10:18 AM ^
The garbage you speak of in 2010 is exactly where coach Hoke is after the same amount of time....Only in his case his teams have declined steadily in each year. The previous staff showed improvement each and every season and still got the axe.
Now I'm not advocating for Hoke to get the axe as I still believe 5 years is a minimum, but that's for a head coach IMHE. Get rid of the entire offensive staff is what I'd do.
November 26th, 2013 at 4:53 AM ^
November 26th, 2013 at 10:26 AM ^
Having said all that, Hoke better realize that he will take some serious heat if the offense is underwhelming again next year. If he stays with Borges, his longevity as the M head coach is going to become tied with Borges' ability to field a good offense.
I'm not find of Borges right now. But continuity might be more important for this football team than anything else. This might be growing pains or it might be that Borges is just bad. We don't know yet unfortunately.
It sickens me to see M fans like this. I know we should expect more because this is Michigan and all that, but so many here are expecting it to happen RIGHT NOW and frankly, that's not realistic. I hate to say it, but we look more and more like ND fans everyday.
November 26th, 2013 at 5:11 AM ^
November 26th, 2013 at 5:42 AM ^
he scrapped his offense 10 frickin games in to the season after trying to MANBALL Iowa.
November 26th, 2013 at 10:24 AM ^
I think some people on this site give Denard Robinson far too little credit for what this team achieved while he was here. It's my opinion that we won games in spite of AB in the first two years and not because of him. I think it was the fact that Denard was Denard that covered up for the fact that Borges has always been terrible, we just didn't realise it because Denard covered it up.
As for the end of last season, again I think it was just having Denard on the field anywhere that covered up how bad Al is. Just look at what happened in games where we stopped going to him (like second half OSU).
November 26th, 2013 at 8:52 AM ^
So, who's the new Malzahn? Rather than around the standard names (flightracker says GRUDENCOWHERPARCELLS) who is the cool new OC that Michigan can hire in order to experience a Malzahn-like effect?
November 26th, 2013 at 9:01 AM ^
November 26th, 2013 at 9:26 AM ^
Thanks - that's the sort of name I was looking for.
In my mind the Borges offense is the football equivalent of hero ball in basketball - desperately hope that your playmakers are better than their playmakers. Brian and Ace and Seth have noted it all year - where are the very obvious counters that the offense can run to take advantage of what the defense is doing? Mattison talks about being unable to take away everything, and yet defenses look like that's exactly what they're doing against the Michigan offense.
I also get frustrated with the 'execution' meme. The former coach at the place I teach was big on that - it's a 70's/80's mentality in my mind, and resulted in the other defense often calling the play based on formation. I had players in my class (we're a very small school), and they talked about how frustrating it was to hear that (and with no audible options, but that's another conversation).
I heard Dana Holgorsen talk about this at halftime of the WVU- Texas game. The announcer asked what they had to do in the second half - he said "they have an extra man in the box. We have to get him out of there. That's on the coaches." Notice no mention of execution...and no hero ball, assuming your player can somehow by sheer triumph of will (or something) run through three defenders.
November 26th, 2013 at 9:47 AM ^
Both guys were offensive geniuses and has an answer for every one of my schematic questions. They find weakness in alignment and formation so their concepts can be used effectively even at younger levels.
You really do not need any super heroes, although it obviously helps to have two solid receivers and a malleable H/Y.
I consider many of their ideas to be cutting edge but it would be a huge contrast to what we are currently running at Michigan.
November 26th, 2013 at 9:26 AM ^
I'm really not sure you want to go here. Borges was with Bob Toledo basically from the beginning of his head coaching career, so not a good place to start. Then Borges had a cup of coffee with a disasterous Cal team and Indiana before heading into big-boy land. At that point, his effect looks Malzahn-esque. Take a look....
Tommy Tuberville
Before Borges -- 59%
During Borges -- 82%
After Borges -- 57%
Brady Hoke
Before Borges -- 47%
During Borges -- 62%
After Borges -- ??
November 26th, 2013 at 12:25 PM ^
Ultimately the key to Michigan's offensive woes the last two seasons have centered almost exclusively around the offensive line. In 2011 we had the good fortune of our center being a Rimmington award worthy guy who was also a real leader and disciplinarian to the rest of the OL. This opened up holes for two 1000+ yard rushers and established the run game to allow for play-action passing and held up the pocket for enough time for deep routes to develop.
While I wouldn't come close to claiming that I approve of how the offense is running, there've been plenty of times that "execution" has been the problem. Gallon and Funchess had some drops on reasonably thrown balls that would've been conversions... And that's about the only thing our porous OL allows for. Which leaves us without a run game or the option to let deeper passing plays develop. The only thing we can really try to do is take the short routes, which teams are starting to tee-off on looking for a pick-six.
The only way an offense could be successful with Michigan's current level of execution would require a whole-sale dedication to a system that negates those weaknesses - which would be a whole different offense. Our problem is that we keeping trying to go wholesale MANBAWL, finding it doesn't work, and half-heartedly installing other elements. I also hate our emotional resistance to using tempo to our advantage. I understand huddling and burning clock some of the time, but I think we'd have a lot more success running the ball on 1st down if (following a conversion) we rushed to the line and pounded Green right up the middle. Do that a few times and you'd even be able to pull out the dreaded waggle for a shot at the enzone when you're around mid-field (again, no huddle, after a 1st down conversion. Don't give the defense time to think). Given our snail-like pace the rest of the time, just going no-huddle for a down here and there would be incredibly effective.
I'm not sure exactly where the blame lies for any of this. I still think Hoke is our guy and I'm a huge supporter of our defensive staff. Though I have a few reservations about their subsitution policies I think they're doing an excellent job developing young players into stars, and it will start paying big as soon/long as the offense is functional. Hopefully you'll see something new on Saturday... I'm not sure that I can even bring myself to watch.
November 26th, 2013 at 12:31 PM ^
Gene Chizik must be the worst head coach to ever win a national title. My god, his record without Malzahn!