Why Are People Defending Hoke?
I for the life of me don't see him staying..
From Marcus defending him and Jon Jansen defending him today on his podcast..
Is it the Carr faction grasping at straws??
On a side note did anyone listen to Marcus Ray this morning?
He basiclly called Hoke out when he was stating OSU out coached MSU..
Amazing.
November 12th, 2014 at 11:34 PM ^
Also excellent point, see me and my ex-gf...?
Am I doing it right?
November 12th, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 3:59 PM ^
deservedly so, I understand.
November 12th, 2014 at 4:07 PM ^
That's another reason Hoke needs to go. People defending him are stating that he needs to look at the staff and make changes.
He already has made changes.
There is only so much you can do to deflect blame.
Hoke can get up before the press and say he has to coach better every day but that's the problem with this program. It's all talk. There is no action whatsoever.
He needs to go. His assistants need to go as well.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:18 PM ^
Probably bc they know him well...I think they overlapped with him while he coached our D-line in the 1990s, but not positive
November 12th, 2014 at 3:29 PM ^
Ray and Jansen were on the team when Coach Hoke was on staff. And that's likely the short answer to the OP's question.
November 12th, 2014 at 4:23 PM ^
Think about it. We have a new President that admitted he knows nothing about athletics and an interim AD who is a retired furniture sales/CEO. The easiest course they can take is to retain HOke and let the initial outrage die down because the season is over and basketball becomes the fans focal point.
Hackett will stay and monitor next season and if the program continues its slide they hire a permanent AD and hand him/her the mess.
November 12th, 2014 at 4:47 PM ^
Man you really have a low opinion of the people in charge. Hackett isn't Brandon, he is an intelligent man who can see beyond the short term. Same with Schlissel. They know that retaining Hoke would create a backlash unlike any they've ever experienced. They would need a justifiable reason to retain Hoke, and as far as I can see there aren't any.
November 12th, 2014 at 7:22 PM ^
is qualified to decide what is best for the football program. Mediocre results and fan unhappiness is countered by high graduation rates for the players and admission office love of student athletes that Hoke is recruiting.
Did you believe Schlissel gives a rat ass if Michigan wins the NC or eveen the B1G? I am sure Hackett is intelligent but what qualifies him in terminating and hiring a coach?
Expect the worse.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:18 PM ^
A bunch of guys who played for him are standing behind him. It's not rational, and it's obviously subjective, but it's a guy they played for and love. What do you do for people you love and support when times are difficult? Agree with it, disagree with it, whatever. But it's not that hard to figure out.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:20 PM ^
I literally said the same thing just a minute later.
Glad most of us are on the same page.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:19 PM ^
...right?
Jeez, let's think before we post. We all know why former athletes are defending Hoke. Anyone who pays attention to Michigan for literally 2 seconds can figure it out.
This isn't his first time at Michigan. He's coached guys who've WON at Michigan. He's a nice guy. He's "THIS IS MICHIGAN."
I mean come on, of course these guys are going to defend their coach --- even if he was just a position coach when they played. I'm sure the Mike Martin's, RVB's, etc. are willing to defend him as well.
This isn't rocket science.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:21 PM ^
It's hard to admit you were wrong. They are part of the group that was driving the train to hire Hoke. To say he should be fired is to admit being wrong. Not everyone is able to do that.
Edit: That's in addition to what people said above about liking him and all that...
November 12th, 2014 at 3:20 PM ^
This is to me a complete mystery. I do not understand why the players who poured 4-5 years of their life to build up Michigan football have a knee-jerk reaction to defend the very people destroying their legacy. It makes zero sense to me.
I would think they would be leading the charge for change. I would hope they would want to see Michigan out of the second tier status and back on top of the football world. I am simply baffled by their support of all things Hoke regardless of how poor the results on the field have been.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:34 PM ^
...until I realized that you weren't.
They poured those 4-5 years out for/with HOKE. That's the difference. We're not talking about alums who've never met the man. We're talking about guys that have played for him.
NEW MGoRULE
Discount any public support for Hoke from anyone who played for Hoke or Lloyd Carr.
I mean it's nice and all...but no reason to get bent out of shape about it. That's like getting mad at the mother who calls her son "a good kid" after he's arrested.
This should eliminate much of this noise and it'll leave you with a more reasonable number of people who publically support/disapprove Hoke.
Just remove all Hoke/Carr players and then come back to the board when you have a bunch of people who don't fall under that umbrella shouting their praises for Hoke.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^
So I guess if that's true (and it probably is) then Funchess was right when he said to the effect that wins and losses are just statistics. It would also seem that the desire to win is stronger in the fan base than the players because they are apparently content with a mediocre football team as long as their buddy - the likable Brady Hoke - gets to run it.
I'm sorry but that really shocks me. I would've thought that the pursuit of excellence ran stronger amoung those actually competing and the tolerance for failure would be lower but if you are right that's not the case. In fact it would argue that the fans, not the players or the coaches, expect Michigan to be great and they're quite content with a "boys club" with one of their pals running it.
Sad.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:53 PM ^
I'm thinking the former players do care about winning and excellence and they think that Hoke can somehow get us there. It would be interesting to hear their takes on why it hasn't been working. Sometimes people are too close and lose objectivity.
November 12th, 2014 at 3:59 PM ^
Is lack of objectivity the only possible reason? Is it possible--can the thought even be conceived--that they have some useful information not available to most of us here?
November 12th, 2014 at 4:10 PM ^
This could totally be the case! Hoke is playing the long game rope-a-dope. He has purposefully instructed the team to play terrible football in 2014 in hopes of putting future opponents off their guard!
November 12th, 2014 at 4:32 PM ^
dave brandon hired hoke because he knew he would drive the team into the ground and then jim harbaugh would have no choice but to come rescue them, and then dave brandon would be hailed as the savior who hired harbaugh.
November 12th, 2014 at 4:37 PM ^
on to something there
November 12th, 2014 at 6:06 PM ^
and he would've gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids.
November 12th, 2014 at 6:15 PM ^
Didn't we see enough terrible football in 2013? I don't even get excited about Saturdays anymore because even if we win it is boring football. I never thought I would see the day that Michigan football would become basically unwatchable.
November 12th, 2014 at 7:49 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 4:11 PM ^
I didn't offer up lack of objectivity as the only possible reason (or at least I didn't mean to). If i thought it was solely lack of objectivity, then why would it be interesting to hear their takes on why it hasn't been working?
November 12th, 2014 at 4:25 PM ^
Since you closed with it, I thought it was your main point.
I agree completely about wanting to hear their takes, but I can imagine some scenarios they wouldn't be willing to go public about. Vague tidbits get dropped every once in a while--I keep thinking about Mattison's odd comments to the effect that we have no idea what Hoke goes through--and I always have the sense that we're all missing the most important pieces of the puzzle.
Not having that piece, I don't claim to have any idea what should be done. Maybe the solution requires a new head coach, but I'm fairly sure that isn't the entire solution any more than the solution a year ago was a new OC.
November 12th, 2014 at 7:52 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 4:29 PM ^
ya mean, the kind that will change our won-lost record these past 3 years? That and the downward trajectory is really the only useful information to be had.
November 12th, 2014 at 4:35 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 4:36 PM ^
it's that they are too blinded by loyatly to see Hoke's faults. At least in my opinion anyways.
And I wholeheartedly agree that former players want to win more than us fans. You fellas have more invested. I don't doubt that and it certainly does not offend me for you to say that.
However, watching this program flounder kills me. I may not have the same emotional investment as you do, but I do love UM football. I'll watch no matter what. I'm used to bad football so I know how to cope.(Lions, EMU)
But, man, watching those Winged Helmets struggle so pains me. It pains me more than anything in sports to see this program be so irrelevant.
November 12th, 2014 at 4:45 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 10:03 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 4:43 PM ^
I believe it was reasonable when Hoke was hired to fear that Michigan would be 9-4 most years, a mirror of Nebraska with Pelini. That was my thought, at least. But I think it would have been overly pessimistic to predict Michigan being where they are now in the fourth year of Hoke's tenure.
I believe Hoke needs to be replaced, but I also don't understand how, given their track records, this coaching staff is not doing better. I would read a Three & Out-type account of Hoke's tenure at Michigan with great interest, because I can't explain what's happened.
Hoke wasn't a bad coach before he came to Michigan. Mattison wasn't one. Nuss wasn't one. Does not compute.
November 12th, 2014 at 5:08 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 5:29 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 5:32 PM ^
guys. Hoke may be attempting to run it like his predecessors, but to me it appears that he does not have the ability to achieve the same results. Hoke just isn't the level of coach that Bo, Mo, and Carr were.
November 12th, 2014 at 5:44 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 5:54 PM ^
I honestly think the reason most "muggles" have a hard time (I'm somewhat unique in this regard) identifying with where current and former players are coming from is simply a poor understanding of basic human psychology. Simple as that. Most people are bad at reading people, or accurately empathizing with someone else's mindset. You see it every day in every facet of life, and all societies. mgrowold demonstrated it pretty well above (sorry mgrow, don't mean to pick on you).
November 12th, 2014 at 6:07 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 6:09 PM ^
But it's hard for me to fully appreciate where you are coming just like it is hard for people to empathize with a president. Who truly tries to empathize with a president? No one. People judge and criticize even though they have never been and never will be in a position to fully appreciate the pressures of the position.They can never know what his staff members know.
So to that end I can empathize with you. You know things that I don't know because you have been there. You have seen it up close.
Brady Hoke as well as you and all the other players know much more about the game than I do. I am not so arrogant to think otherwise.
But I know Michigan football is supposed to look like. I grew up watching it. This isn't Michigan football. This isn't the football Bo preached, Mo modernized, and Carr sustained. It's at best a very poor facsimile.
What is especially painful is that the team in East Lansing comes much closer to playing like Bo and Mo's teams than UM does.
November 12th, 2014 at 7:27 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 8:21 PM ^
Don't you find it just a bit ironic though that the one team you identify as being the most "Michigan like" (the 2011) team was almost completely comprised of Rich's players - not Hoke's?
FWIW I really respect your opinion and input a lot. And I'm sorry if I came off as otherwise in my earlier posts.
November 12th, 2014 at 9:02 PM ^
I don't really find it ironic. They were all Michigan football players. Who recruited them is truly irrelevant to me. I have never believed in a coach having their guys -- everyone that he coaches is his guy. To me, that is a fan-only concept. I don't believe that anyone involved in a football team ever thinks that way, unless he is a total fucking asshole.
Also, please stop, you're making me blush.November 12th, 2014 at 6:13 PM ^
I'd prefer to be called a Muppet.
November 12th, 2014 at 10:02 PM ^
November 12th, 2014 at 10:24 PM ^
November 13th, 2014 at 8:57 AM ^
Piss you off. Thank you for your confrence ring. I could never have done what you did for Michigan Football.
I am just asking how you or anyone else can defend the indefensible?
November 12th, 2014 at 4:38 PM ^
How can you make that comparision?
You expect people defending someone they care about to be rational?
Come on, you're way smarter than that.
It has NOTHING to do with the "boys club." It's almost offensive to anyone who's had to deal with the "boys club" for you suggest they're the same. This isn't a club, it's just former athletes sticking up for their coach. Period. It's not about a club or a code or anything. They care about the man who supported them and was there for them and helped raise them.
There are many other factors for them other than wins and losses.
For fans, not so much. 99% of this board has never met Brady Hoke. There aren't as many variables.
Again, it's like someone supporting a family member who's messed up.
I just don't think it's hard to comprehend. It's human nature for a lot of people to stick up for those they care for. That's all this is. It's truly a non-story.