Exerpts from JUB on WTKA this morning

Submitted by Erik_in_Dayton on

John U. Bacon talked to Sam on WTKA this morning.  Here are some of the more interesting things he said:

1. The administration's timeline for picking a new AD may be very different than the fans' timeline.  He referenced athletics/football as being "not Schlissel's thing." 

Neither JUB nor Sam have heard anything about having a new AD by the end of this month.  JUB referred to "very good sources" who haven't mentioned this...Note: JUB was not saying that Michigan won't have a new AD by the end of the month.  He just hasn't heard that it will.

2. He mentioned that, in his opinion, it's easier to hire a new AD quickly than it is a coach.  He also said that it might be more important for the new AD to have Michigan ties than the new coach, because the new AD will have to unify various factions.

3. Hackett, not Schlissel, appears to be running things as far as finding a permanent AD. 

4. He thinks Coach Hoke will be back if he manages to beat OSU and finish 7-5.  He believes Michigan would prefer not to make a change.  EDIT: Let me add one thing:  He was talking about this in the context of saying Michigan is conservative (in a non-political sense) when it comes to making changes with regard to any issue. 

5. He thinks there's a 50-50 chance of landing Jim Harbaugh if Michigan fires Coach Hoke.  He said it's "far from a done deal" and said Harbaugh wouldn't come back to college for any other program.

6. He thinks an experienced AD will be important if Michigan can't land Jim Harbaugh.

7.  He would "bet against" Michigan landing John Harbaugh.

8.  The "Michigan Man factor" will be an issue when hiring a coach but not an overwhelming one.  He thinks Michigan learned from hiring Coach Hoke that being a "Michigan Man" is overrated. 

 

http://www.wtka.com/page.php?page_id=87

MGoBoard
Football

Steve in PA

November 7th, 2014 at 3:19 PM ^

Don't see "Everybody Steals, Everybody..." much anymore.

I do agree with the other poster though. My TV viewing on Saturdays is already way down this year.  I try to at least watch the 1st half of Michigan games now but that could very easily be replaced by other things if Hoke is back.  Life's to short to be ruined by stubbornness and ineptitude.  Especially if I can clear the honeydo list before basketball season.

Joined: 08/10/2009

MGoPoints: 6327

LSAClassOf2000

November 7th, 2014 at 11:22 AM ^

#2 and #8 on your list are somewhat related in my mind, and if that's the route they go, I can see Michigan trying to focus on an AD with ties to the school and then leaving the idea of a coach with a previous Michigan connection up in the air. An athletic director with Michigan ties / roots probably is in a much better position to execute the salesmanship that might be needed if in the end we hire "outside the family", if you will (and failing Harbaugh, there are some nice names "outside the family" as we've discussed in many diaries / threads).

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130636

Perkis-Size Me

November 7th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^

Even if Hoke beats OSU, I still don't want him back. I'd be glad that he'd get to ride off into the sunset with a victory over his hated rival, but there's just too many things he's done, or failed to do, that would make me want him back even if we finish 7-5 and then win a bowl game. Recruiting would continue to suffer, and even with the guys we bring in, there'd be slim to zero chance that they'd get a chance to develop much under Hoke.

50-50 shot at Harbaugh is good enough for me at this point. I would've expected much less. Hopefully we can find a way to make it happen. This program has been in the crapper for way too long.

Joined: 11/30/2011

MGoPoints: 105763

Erik_in_Dayton

November 7th, 2014 at 11:37 AM ^

...they're entertaining the possibility in roughly the same way any one of us has to entertain the possibility that we might someday meet someone who looks exactly like us and who has our exact same name.  We can't rule out potential of that event occuring, but that doesn't mean we think it's at all likely. 

Joined: 12/03/2008

MGoPoints: 59152

WolvinLA2

November 7th, 2014 at 1:09 PM ^

This is not exactly the craziest thought people on this blog have entertained, you know.  Stop acting like it's a done deal.  Upsets happen in football all the time, especially in rivalry games.  

If OSU loses to MSU this weekend, they will be playing for absolutely nothing against us.  Our guys will be (in their heads, anyway) either be playing to save the coach that they love (and all accounts suggest that they do) or to let their coach go out on a high note, similar to Lloyd against Florida in 2007 (nobody expected us to win that game either).  This is not outside of the realm of possibility.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

Don

November 7th, 2014 at 2:24 PM ^

Eh, I think the opposite would be true—beating the living crap out of us would be the one remaining major goal that every Buckeye team has.

The big difference-maker is the venue. If OSU loses to MSU and then had to play in Ann Arbor, a Michigan win wouldn't be out of the question at all. Since the game is in Columbus against a ranked team, a Michigan win is ridiculously improbable given Hoke's track record on the road.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148371

Perkis-Size Me

November 7th, 2014 at 1:14 PM ^

I'm not entertaining the idea much at all. Seeing that happen is about as likely as Cardale Jones actually wanting to play school.

I'm just saying I'd be happy for Hoke if he somehow found a way to beat them on their own turf. I in no way would want him back even if it happened, but I'd be happy for him that he got to end his Michigan career on a high note.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/30/2011

MGoPoints: 105763

swan flu

November 7th, 2014 at 11:33 AM ^

I bet Michigan would also keep Hoke if he turned Devin Gardner into a perpetually eligible cyborg who ran for 1000 yards a game and dispensed beer out of his armcannon.

 

This is an equally probable scenario as winning the next 3 games.

Joined: 08/16/2010

MGoPoints: 9374

The Baughz

November 7th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^

How in the world can anyone associated with UM think Hoke should be back if they win the remaining games? This is why Michigan sucks. People around this program apparently are ok with being mediocre. This makes me sick. Hoke should have already been fired, now JUB is hearing that Michigan prefers not to make a change? WTF?

Joined: 10/08/2010

MGoPoints: 31913

WolvinLA2

November 7th, 2014 at 1:16 PM ^

There are two schools of thought here.  One is that you don't want to accept mediocrity and keep a coach who isn't taking you beyond that.  The other is that you don't want to be too quick to fire a guy who may be making strides, even if it hasn't shown up in the W-L column yet.  

MSU looked like an absolute mess in Dantonio's 3rd year where he took a solid step back from his second year.  His 6th year was also disappointing where he went 7-6 and only finished above .500 because they won the BWW bowl.  People were calling for his head after that season.  The following year he won the Rose Bowl.

A lot of people wanted Dan Mullen fired before this season.  He went 5-7, 9-4, 7-6, 8-5, 7-6.  He was 16-24 in the SEC at MSU.  Now he has the #1 team in the country.  

Every knew we needed to can RR when we did, but now a lot of fans are saying that we should have given him more time to succeed.  I'm not saying I disagree with you necessarily, just that that's a fine line to walk.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

WolvinLA2

November 7th, 2014 at 2:03 PM ^

It was not nearly the contingent we have, but there impatient part of that fanbase was ready to try again.  Luckily for them, most of their fanbase and administration is patient.  

Michigan fans are not.  We all feel entitled.  And that's detrimental.  Sometimes turnarounds take a little longer. Remember how much we made fun of Dantonio's recruiting like 3 years ago?  MSU fans (both the Mississippi and Michigan, varieties) were more patient with their coach, and now they're in the top 10.  If Michigan fans demand immediate turnarounds from their coaches, it might take us 3 or 4 more coaching changes before we find our guy, which just sets us back even more.  The more transitions we go through, the harder each transition is.  

I'm not necessarily saying that Hoke is the guy.  But being quick to bag someone when you don't think they are has its own drawbacks as well.

Joined: 11/13/2009

MGoPoints: 58191

switch26

November 7th, 2014 at 2:48 PM ^

Yes there was.. They lost every fucking home game in the big that year. Every msu fan I knew quit watching football. When they were bad in dantonios early years they wanted narduzzi fired cause the defense sucked... Then that summer after they got stomped out by bama they met with bama coaches at some clinic and their defense became incredible magically

Joined: 02/04/2010

MGoPoints: 8309

Red is Blue

November 7th, 2014 at 1:57 PM ^

I agree the the concept of not being too quick to fire a guy making strides even if it is not reflected in the W-L column.  But I'm not seeing strides.  Maybe I make to much of it, but the punt formation really bothers me.  When asked why he uses a traditional punt formation, Hoke just says he is more comfortable with it.  It seems like he ought to be able to articulate the advantages, but it feels like he just dismisses it out of hand.  To me, it looks the attitude is not focusing on what will result in success, but what coaches are comfortable with. 

Joined: 05/13/2010

MGoPoints: 23889

alum96

November 7th, 2014 at 7:48 PM ^

I love how you pull exceptions to the rule rather than the rule.  You pick 2 coaches who had turnarounds and ignore countless coaches whose mediocrity led to more mediocrity.  We have Charlie Weiss at our helm.  Charlie Weiss also sucked at Kansas.  If ND had kept him another 3 years it doesnt look like it would matter.

Also Dantonio did good things in year 4.  Also Dantonio showed some promise early with a bunch of nobodies at MSU - ironically they were led by offense and not defense in his early years.  Also no one was calling for his damn head after 2012.  The question at that point was, was 2010-2011 two years of outlier or was 2012 the outlier.

 

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82517

BornSinner

November 7th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^

#4 would be my worst nightmare come true. It would be the epitome of: 

Who you know mattering more than what you know. 

This is mediocrity and cronyism at its finest. In 2011, we we're going nuts over RR going 7-5 and now Hoke has the potential to do the same thing in year 4... and peoplein charge may shrug it off all because he's a Michigan Man... smh... 

Dear lord I hope that doesn't happen.. 

Joined: 09/20/2014

MGoPoints: 14672

Bodogblog

November 7th, 2014 at 11:40 AM ^

Thanks for compiling, but it does seem like the standard boilerplate available most anywhere on the internet/media.  I don't take JUB's words as gospel as many do, and I'll disagree with some of what he says here.

Look, it's not plausible that they're moving at glacial speed to replace the AD.  Unless.  Unless they're planning to bring in Harbaugh.  In that case Hackett can stay as long he wants.  Take 18, 24, 75 months if you like.  Maybe Hackett wants this job permanently.  Fine, bring in Harbaugh.  If not, you have to have new AD immediately so that guy can hire someone in December/January.  He must know this (Hackett).  It's "not Schlissel's thing" is a lazy interpretation of his academic focus, in my mind.  Though I'm sure he has that (and rightly should), every big donor is probably bringing up this topic with him within the first 5 minutes.  If he responds by saying "ah, we've got time, I'm in no rush..." or "maybe Hackett stays for a little while, and he'll decide what to do with the football coach", he's going to get an earful.  A serious earful from a lot of pissed off people.  If Michigan loses any of the next 3, which odds say are likely, it's going to be screaming earfuls.

Joined: 06/08/2010

MGoPoints: 26674

Bodogblog

November 7th, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^

Understand, and I think that's a possibility.  I always thought it would be squirrels in the end times, but possums a definite possibility.

Here's my chain of logic:
- unlikely that Schlissel is that unplugged not to understand urgency. but...
- if he is that unplugged, surely Hackett is not and would be educating him.  unless...
- Hackett wants this job full time, and knows if he has a home run like Harbaugh possible, he can make that hire on his own.  No one would worry about "the new AD should be able to make the FB coach hire" if it was Harbaugh.  Anyone else?  Yeah, new guy needs to make that decision.
- Hackett is going to take a few weeks here and try to make that plan work.  If not, he'll bring in a new AD quickly and back out.

Still possible that either JUB's sources are bunk (and they are pressing as fast as possible for a new AD), or neither man really gets where we're at and are OK with rolling with Hoke for another year.  But I doubt the latter.

Joined: 06/08/2010

MGoPoints: 26674