Make the case for retaining Hoke

Can I make the case for funding the Warren G. Harding memorial in D.C. instead?

He's the nicest guy who is a bad coach out there... or, is he the worst coach that is a nice guy out there?

Either way, he's a great guy.

His players have GREAT practices.

I'm a lawyer as well as an engineer, and I can tell you that both math and law lack the tools necessary to make this case compelling.

There are literally no supporters left. One guy a week floats out the "what if he wins out", but there are no supporters. Calm down, he's gone, just let it happen.

that could actually make a logical or even common sense reason to keep him and no one can.   .....I guess if the Administration came out and said "We contacted Harbaugh - he said no, Miles said no, Mullen said no, Stoops said no; Todd Graham said no, Patterson, Briles, and Mark Stoops said no.  Even McElwain at CSU said no.  Even Harmon at OSU said no.  There is no one else so he stays."  That would be the only way, but they would lose so much money on lost season tickets and empty seats every week, not mention all the suites would not be sold that any change might be better.  I pray to all that is Holy that Hoke and the entire staff gets canned, cuz this is as bad at RR's first year.

Hoke is now an impressive 4-0 against Northwestern. If that's not a reason to keep him, then I don't know what is.

No.

There's only a couple things I can say with a straight face and actually believe them.  One is that three OC's in three years will ruin our QBs.  Well, Morris, mainly.  He already looks lost out there.  Two is that Mattison is pretty good, and I'd say pretty tough to replace given his resume, attaction to recruits, and overall ability.

I don't care about the great guy stuff or the good-at-recruiting stuff because it tends to imply that you can't find those in the next coach either.  The only really worthwhile arguments for keeping a floundering coach involve clear negatives that come out of the transition and losing things you can't easily replace.

First is that this has been a clean and respectable program under his time.  There have been incidents, but I am happy with how they have been addressed with the best interests of the team, school, and individual given due weight. Graduation rates are excellent.  Off the field, I have no complaints at all.

Second is recruiting has been beyond expectations. 

Third is that offense still has obvious and known issues that may be due to youth, execution, or just bad luck.  If we have to blame someone, Coach Hoke is the target that is easiest to identify.  But with Jesus on the sidelines, wearing headphones, the snap still hits Funchess as he is running in motion.

Fourth, transition can be rough.  We have done enough transitions to know.

I know the sentiment of the frequent posters and respect their opinion.  I would prefer to only change head coaches if I had an excellent (proven) replacement in the wings waiting.  Unlikely he will stay because of the friction and division that now exists, but his dedication and loyalty have been unquestionable.  Keeping him as a position coach would have some tangible benefits.

But what the hell, I was in favor of keep RR to see what he could do with Denard one more year, so my judgement is clearly questionable.

Will Hoke be fired?  Most likely and there is a strong argument that he should be.   I agree with a lot of it.

However, I don't think the torch and pitchforks crowd is giving an honest evaluation.   There is an argument to be made...

1. Counter to  "these coaches can't develop talent".  

Counterpoint #1:  Jake Ryan and Frank Clark.   Our 3 stars developed to seniors look just as good as Narduzzi's senior 3 stars after a number of years in the program.  Add younger players like Willie Henry, Jourdan Lewis and others to this list as well.  

Counterpoint #2:  The o-line and running backs have improved.  Are they great?  No.  But, less tha a year into the zone scheme we are seeing improvement and the line and running game are becoming serviceable ,with the bulk of the talent being Freshman and Sophomores.   The line and backs is young and there is ample reason to believe it will take a step forward next year.  These are Hoke's guys and you could argue that he should be judged after they are juniors.

2.  The defense is good

No question the offense stinks, but the defense does not.  Half of the equiation is there. 

3.  Offense System Change

While admittedly it came late, Borges WAS fired and Nuss brought in.   The move was applauded by all.  Now the same crowd doesn't want to give a second year to see if they can actually implement the new system and develop the young talent? 

Gardner is not doing well in the new system and the running game is not yet strong enough to carry the offense. 

3b.    How about some upperclassmen on offense?

Take an honest look at the roster and take away the upperclassman who were walk-ons or low ceiling players.  The biggest disappointment is the play of Gardner and the Funchess dropsies.  Should expect more from the upperclassman leading the offense.  

5.   Hoke has done well with other aspects of the program that Michigan fans claim they care about

Careful what you wish for with some coaches that are being touted as the next winners.

6.   The staff can recruit when not threatened with termination.

One could make a reasonable argument that Hoke should be given a 1 year extension to stabilize recruiting and evaluated based on next year, specifically does the defense maintain and/or get better and does the offense take a step forward in its second year with maturing talent?

OK, have at it.

 

It's Michigan. 

 

Brandon is gone I hear Hoke is going to wear a Headset next season????

Dave Brandon was trying to undermine him as a coach and had caused turmoil with the team. Maybe he can argue that he has struggled to develop his players and he has now figured out the problem and can fix it. Both are stretches.

First off I don't know if I should comment in this thread because I'm an electrician not a lawyer so I don't know if I qualify for your standards. Second F you ( /s ) I have been entertaining myself in the GMAT thread with this exact discussion and now no one will come over and play.

be compelling but there are plenty of good questions out there. How much did Brandon meddle? Whose idea was it to bring in Nuss? Whose idea was it to start Morris? Hoke didn't come to Ann Arbor to reload (like Urban), he had to rebuild. This program began to lose its way in Carr's last years. It was running on fumes led by a coach who wanted to retire the year or two before because he acknowledged he'd lost that drive. Rodriguez drove it further away from shore. Hoke has stocked the roster with guys who are all on the same page. (Or do we forget the infighting and references to other agendas?) The constant charge that he doesn't develop talent never stops to acknowledge the role of a foundation. A freshman that comes to a team where half the roster is in year 3, 4 or 5 is provided a functioning system, reinforced by multiple years of experience. Beilein talks about this a lot and how much a team needs system guys. My argument would be that Hoke dealt with a meddling AD. has done a great job rebuilding the roster and has not become defensive even as the knives are sharpened. He might not make it but he deserves respect.

Team looks horrible and head coach says, "Well we practices really well this week."

Hoke?  No, that was Mark Trestman last night.  As a Bears fan and UM alum, the parallels of the two teams couldn't be more obvious.

But being a lawyer, the case "for" Hoke is more procedural than substantive.  (Thems big lawyereeze words.)  If the new AD won't be in place in time to hire a new HC, then Hoke has to wait it out another year.  Plus, give Nuss a year more to work with Speight or Morris, and the D hasn't been godawful as in the RR years.  That's the only outcome I see.

But I think Hoke is gone after our last game, and given the way it looks, that'll be the day after OSU.  Don't see us beating UM (the other other UM).

to do with getting people to somehow suggest that divine intervention can save this regime going forward. 

There are good things that Hoke has done to this point in his tenure: recruit, hired a solid defensive coordinator who changed the complexion of the defense, and he's taken care of the kids in his program with some tough love. Graduation has improved while attrition has been virtually nil. There have been some off-the-field issues with the roster, but he's handled most of those pretty well with one glaring exception. 

I think his personality issues on display mostly in non-illuminating press conferences are borne out of his own desire to give the impression of controlled leadership, even though I think his policy regarding injury information is rather silly and has hurt his own image in the process. 

Hoke has beaten each of Michigan's rivals at home, with four wins overall, including two over ND in spectacular night games, mostly  with his former quarterback now playing running back in the NFL. No wonder Michigan fans love Denard Robinson so much. 

With his current qb, who despite being in the program five years, and entering as a five-star player and one of the nation's top recruits at his position, and while perfoming heroically at times under the tutelage of three OC's and who knows how many different offensive schemes, has beaten Notre Dame just once as a starting qb. 

Michigan hasn't beaten any rivals in road games with Gardner besides Minnesota.  And scheduling quirks, notwithstanding, even RR beat ND on the road, and took MSU to overtime trailing by two scores late in his only contest in East Lansing, using two different qbs in that game. Devin played as a backup in the trash tornado contest as a freshman and had a rather whirlwind, yaketey sax moment in that contest. Anyway it was a prelude to an up and down career.

Hoke inherited both Denard and Devin, and he hasn't recruited any qb who could take the mantle of leadership from either and successfully direct this team going forward without reservation about the future. There are hopefuls on the roster, but nobody who could be ready to go and win a game if Gardner were unable to start. 

The problem with Hoke's program direction is that while it extols the values and virtues of the past and seeks to recreate the ideals of Michigan football tradition, it does so without the internal competitve fire and desire that stoked the confidence and fight in teams Hoke was once associated with under Lloyd Carr.

I think injury has hurt this team a bit on both sides of the ball and upset their winning ability this season. But every team battles injury and the good teams overcome it by plugging in people who make a difference. This team seems incapable of getting out of its own way and finding an identity, a rhythm,  a mission or any sense of itself.

We have no clue what to expect week-to-week from the offense, which, for the most part is so predictable that I wonder why this board was so upset with the former OC, whose biggest sin was great imagination and desire to run a million plays out of a hundred different formations. Yeah, that was an inconsistency issue of another stripe. 

Here is the problem with Hoke as I see it: He created a vision for this team that he never truly built or actually has carried out for a variety of reasons. And, in the process, this has led to a sort of lost sense of purpose.

Yeah, he talks about physicality and toughness. But this vision hasn't translated. It's gotten lost in conversation or his onw translation. it's about winning. But this team doesn't have the ability or the internal makeup among its key personnel to channel the kind of leadership it takes to win in adversarial situations. This team just isn't emotionally tough enough. And that is on the coach. Expectations at Michigan are about playing winning football and this team has not met them. And that's on the coach.  

Last week, I could have, but this week I cannot. I do think Gardner is hurt or just plain awful and no coach could beat MSU, OSU or ND with this Michigan team and an awful QB.

The story has ended.

 

Please stop with this. Michigan beat two horribe horrbile teams. Indiana would have beat us if they had any of their QBs left and luckily we faced Penn State at home at night. There is no case. Luckily Maryland is coming to the Big House or they would blitz us. OSU is going to put up 50 points, easily. Why, Why keep Hoke unless you have come to the conclusion that 8-4 is our ceiling?

Sure.

We are improving in every area this year save one: QB. We have a good DC and a proven OC who can coach up QBs, but our two starters this year have these experiences:

Gardner: Three OCs, three QB coaches, three systems, in five years. Plus one year at WR. Plus he seems to be very injury-prone. No wonder he plays like a freshman.

Morris: Two OCs, two QB coaches, two systems, in two years.

I think Nussmeier can get it done. He did at UW and he did at Alabama. But I don't see how you fire Hoke for this train wreck offense and then retain Nussmeier, who's in charge of it.

I also think we're signing up for at least two more years of the same QB play if we introduce Morris to his third OC, system, and QB coach in three years.

Our D is playing well. Sparty scored more points on ohio than us.

Our offensive line, including a true freshman, is getting better and all return next year.

So, what do we really have to gain by changing the staff at the end of this season? Anyone who believes that a new regime can fix the problem we have at QB in spring and fall camps is likely to be the same person calling for the new coach to be fired halfway into next season.

But since you asked I'll try and give a real answer:

This assumes UM wins out. If that happens I think BH should still be fired if JH has an interest in coming to UM. I guess not even just JH but any top notch option (Stoops, Mullen, Miles, whomever they would be deemed to be).

If there isn't a clear upgrade that is a long-temr solution who is willing to come I think you could argue BH should be retained. He has shown he is a great recruiter, he loves UM and is a good ambassador for the university (if his coaching track record is ignored), he has a terrific graduation rate, genuinely cares about his players, and you can always hope that things will get better as the players experience increases (though evidence suggests otherwise at this point). 

If UM settles for a coach that is less than a sure thing and we get BH 2.0 we could be looking at doing this entire thing over agin in 4 years. To that I would say bite the bullet and ride it out with him until that clear upgrade wants to come. It could also keep the recruiting class as close to in tact as it could be.

Having said all that, that's just the best defense I could come up with but even I'm not sure I can buy it.....I pray some top notch coach comes and rescues us from this abyss.  

I think I need more specifics.

Do you want him to be kept alive? I think I'd need to poke holes in the case so he can breath.

He's probably fairly strong so the material would have to be as well. Depending on what material I used, we may run out cause he's big.

Wheels so he's mobile?

 

Need more info.

Well ... It's a moot point considering we won't be winning out. No chance we beat Ohio on the road with the way we play offense

I am one of said lawyers, so I'll give it a shot (taking into account I'm whole heartedly in the fire Hoke camp and actually think keeping him would be crippling to the program):

First and foremost, Hoke is a good guy. I know the board mocks this sentiment often, but the fact remains he's a quality person, players love him, and parents love him. He graduates his kids and does a heck of a job developing people I'm proud to call Michigan Men. As a virtue of these facts he'll be able to continue to get quality recruiting classes.

On the field, the defense has been steadily improving, to the point that that they're a nationally ranked D. The offensive line is obviously still green, but again, improving. They've started figuring out how to beat the teams they're expected to beat, even if they don't play well (I mean, composure Ap State this year to Akron last year), and how to win on the road. Is the team there yet, no. But they're making progress, and with some staff continuity to get Morris/Speight coached up, they should continue to improve.

That's my best shot.