Farnn

February 7th, 2014 at 2:33 PM ^

Really? So someone who doesn't know much about being an OC should be more involved with the offense because your idea of a head coach is involved in the offense?

Joined: 07/07/2008

MGoPoints: 12788

Mr. Yost

February 7th, 2014 at 5:02 PM ^

It doesn't mean I want him calling plays or teaching or any of that.

But he, as head coach, has input on the offense. He is also the only person that can tell the OC what to do when it comes to play calling.

I think if Hoke had a better idea of what to do on offense he would've been able to say "Hey Al...we're out of sync, maybe we should try no huddle." Or "Hey Al, that zone stretch isn't working...let's run something else." Or "Al, we've been killing them all day with the misdirection...don't stop until they make you stop."

As it was last year, he usually just waited until the defense was on the field again.

I don't expect him to have ANY kind of expertise. But you're still responsible for it.

Someone gave the analogy of a company (below).

I'd respond with no...the CEO shouldn't mess with those other departments...but he/she should at least know the basics. 

As a supervisor, I never allow any of my guys to be indispensible. I may not be able to do what they can do as good as they can. They may be experts at it. But if shit breaks...I can at least come up with an idea or two to fix it. I can at least locate the problem even if I can't fix it.

So if we can't run, I'm not expect Hoke to draw up plays to make the run game work. But I do expect him to say "Hey Al, we can't run...let's try some short passes so we can keep the ball." Hoke may not know what short passes to call, but that's not the point. The point is Borges isn't up there with no one to answer to (you know what I mean).

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

Mr. Yost

February 7th, 2014 at 4:54 PM ^

No. Ass.

What I said was more involved.

All I meant was know when to go no huddle when not to...when not allow the OC to call the some off tackle/zone stretch play over and over that loses the game.

Simple things that are the head coaches responsibility.

Don't put words in my mouth.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

Magnus

February 7th, 2014 at 7:20 PM ^

Name calling is always fun, isn't it?

Do you really think Brady Hoke is so involved with coaching the defensive tackles that he's incapable of telling the offensive coordinator whether to run more power, run less power, throw the ball more, throw a screen, etc.? Really? You must really think Brady Hoke is an imbecile.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 165909

Mr. Yost

February 8th, 2014 at 1:08 AM ^

It was a dick comment and I called you out for it. So what.

And no, many times Hoke just stood on the sidelines with his arms folded and a look of disgust. Then the defense took the field and he'd clap over and over to give encouragement and then go to working with Mattison on the defense.

Regardless, what you said is not what I said nor what I meant.

I think it would be good for Hoke to be involved in a limited capacity. He doesn't need to be an expert or call plays or any of that. He doesn't even need to wear a headset (for all those that insist he must).

But he's got to be able to add input and generate positive results. Borges had some of the worst playcalling any of us have EVER seen. There were also a number of times where we should've gone no huddle to get a rhythm or to SCORE cause we were down and there was nothing.

Things like this can come from the head coach, even if he's not the expert. Borges isn't the only one to play for the offensive struggles last year. If he was, then call him co-head coach and give him equal money.

There are plenty of applications where Hoke could be more involved/understanding with the offense without actually calling plays or even close.

Many reported that a reason Nuss left Bama was because Saban was TOO involved. I'm not suggesting Hoke be that. But he's got to be more than he has been in the past. If not, hire a co-head coach and we'll just role with two guys at the top.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

Magnus

February 8th, 2014 at 10:47 AM ^

Your entire post assumes that you know exactly what's going on the sideline, and it assumes that Hoke's suggestions would have improved the offense.

You don't, and there's no proof that it would.

So I'm going to disregard your post.

Commence the calling of names.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 165909

Magnus

February 7th, 2014 at 7:22 PM ^

That's why the coordinators make around $1,000,000 a year. He's hired to be the CEO, face of the program, etc. The coordinators are hired to piece together the offense and defense. If you really want the head coach to micromanage the entire offense and the entire defense, you're going to have a very difficult time finding someone who can successfully do both. Good luck.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 165909

WolvinLA2

February 7th, 2014 at 2:56 PM ^

Maybe this isn't a perfect analogy, but if you have a company where the CFO (a guy with a primarily, if not strictly, financial background) becomes the CEO, how often do you want him meddling with what the VP of Marketing is doing?  Or R&D?  

Typically, in any organization, the guy in charge has strenghts and weaknesses like anyone else.  The best leaders are the ones who are able to identify their weaknesses, admit them, and find the best people to handle those areas.  Hoke has always done the first two, and when he wasn't able to do the third, hired Nussmeier.  This is what we want.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Mr. Yost

February 7th, 2014 at 5:08 PM ^

I don't expect Hoke to get THAT involved. But in your organization...those people have to answer to their boss. And just because their boss can't do what they can do, doesn't mean he/she isn't responsible for it and shouldn't have a working knowledge of what they do and how they do it.

I don't want Hoke calling plays. But I would've loved to have seen him tell Al during the PSU game to stop running the stretch play that was losing yards. I would've liked to see him say "this isn't working, maybe we should try something else."

He doesn't have to pick specifcally what that "something else" is...but just to have the insight and knowledge and understanding to know what we need to be doing is enough.

So no, he doesn't need to call plays. However, he needs to be more involved where he can at least go "stay with that" or "stop that" (I'm being short because I've responded to this twice now).

Just like if Rich Rod were to ever say "hey, we're giving them too much cushion...let's try walking the CBs up some this possession" I wouldn't mind. Not if we were losing by 20+ because our DBs are 15 yards off the line.

It's just the simple checks and balances of a team that I'm talking about.

Some (not you) have taken it way out of proportion.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220

WolvinLA2

February 7th, 2014 at 7:17 PM ^

I think Hoke is about as involved with the offense as you're suggesting he should be.  You said in your first paragraph that those people (the assistants) need to answer to their boss.  I'm willing to bet Hoke had discussions with Borges before he fired him.  Hoke clearly new Borges wasn't getting the job done, and I can't imagine he kept that to himself until Borges was let go.  

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Mr. Yost

February 8th, 2014 at 12:59 AM ^

...but in game is what I'm talking about. I don't care about what they talked about after the loss.

What I'm saying is the head coach should have a reasonable pulse in everything. He doesn't have to be an expert, he doesn't even have to do it or have a DAY of experience doing it. But you need to at least have an idea.

The general assumption with Hoke has always been "well, Borges knows more than me about offense so I'm not going to get involved."

That is very true, but it doesn't mean you can't get involved in a limited capacity. There is a middle ground. Hell, there's even a LITTLE ground that Hoke can stand out without before completely absent (unless it's the end of the game).

Nussmeier just left Alabama in part because Saban was TOO controlling. I'm not suggesting Hoke be that. I'm saying, you can ask question, give input, and make certain demands without stepping on toes or taking over the job.

There is no reason the play calling should've been as bad as it was last year. As head coach, Hoke has to at least be able to say "stop this, it isn't working...why don't we try that." Even if it's a learning process and he's just asking questions. ANYTHING.

Instead he just stood there over and over with his arms folded and then clapped as the punt team ran onto the field.

Joined: 07/25/2011

MGoPoints: -9898220