I think I get it now
January 12th, 2011 at 11:53 PM ^
Understanding the rivalry does not win the rivalry games....just ask Lloyd.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:07 PM ^
January 12th, 2011 at 11:12 PM ^
January 12th, 2011 at 11:18 PM ^
What if he takes over for Tressel at OSU or for Dantonio at MSU?
/jk
January 13th, 2011 at 12:25 AM ^
Would never do that, at this point, he understands Michigan Football and now knows, coaching at either of those places...well, that would be sacrilege!
January 12th, 2011 at 11:12 PM ^
Today was just a lot of fun. Seeing everyone on board and the ex-players there. Hoke banging on the podium talking about the Ohio State game over and over. Hard to connect these sorts of things to the game day performances, but it felt right. It has been a while since it felt like we were stirring things up and siezing the initiative. If this approach adds up to bringing the players together and it turns out they want to play for this guy like everyone says, today was more than fun.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:18 PM ^
I always thought it was crap when people said RR didn't get it, especially since he was involved in another major rivalry (WVU-Pitt) but getting it isn't enough. Did Urban Meyer understand the Florida rivalries when he came from Utah? Did Pete Carroll understand USC-UCLA when he started? The only thing that mattered is that they won titles and they shut up the critics. I love the emotion at the presser today but it needs to translate into victories.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:23 PM ^
When I look at Brady Hoke's mug, I can't help thinking of the term, "Slobberknocker." That's not a bad thing. I know it is or was one of Chris Spielman's favorite terms, but I can't help but think that we're going to return to a style of football that will have announcers drooling about our slobberknockers. I think that's what the Hoke hire is about, at least in some small way.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:26 PM ^
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOnjglu2bpM
tell me this doesn't fit the last week.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:39 PM ^
I think this is an excellent hire. Short term will be a little painful and won't ease the frustrations of 5 of the last 6 years of Michigan Football
January 12th, 2011 at 11:40 PM ^
I was impressed by our new coach. In all honesty, I didn't know much about the guy other than the highlights. I like his attitude, confidence and love for M. He certainly has passion for the team and his players.
I've always been an RR supporter but now that ship has sailed I'm all in for Hoke and M!
GO BLUE!!!
January 12th, 2011 at 11:52 PM ^
Not saying that the headline needs to be "Brady Who?" or anything crazy like that, but I loved to see a guy that felt honored to be at that podium in that postion. I always supported RR but it always seemed to me (just my opinion on the guy) that he felt like the UM job was just a stepping stone to the next level. RR never seemed to get "it" and this guy really seems to get "it". Welcome aboard Mr. Hoke.
January 12th, 2011 at 11:53 PM ^
The thing I liked the most is how he said the coaching staff's job is about the players.
I know we are spending a lot of time talking about the coaches but it really is not important to me. I love the team no matter who the coach is. I've been enjoying the games through four coaches and that is not going to change now with the fifth coach.
I hope we win more but I'm still going to enjoy the whole experience no matter what. Michigan football is not about the coach for me, it is about the team.
RR is going to be just fine.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:41 AM ^
UM fans bitching about Bo, can't win the Rose Bowl, Gary Moeller did well drove drunk (like JH) and lost his job, Loyd Carr too predictable, conservative, there were a lot of fans wanting a complete change. So "they" hired RR to do just that, bring in the spread. They picked the best guy for that. My biggest sadness when they hired RR was that I knew the string of pro QB's and wide receivers UM put out would change. I liked how we played, tuff D pro style and effective O. Sure sometimes we lost ganes we should not have because we were too predictable and maybe at the end LC lost his edge, maybe. When RR was hired I supported him, I still believe with the complete overhaul "they" hired him to do they owed him a 4th year. I do think the results would be better next year, the team is pretty much sophomores and next year will be juniors and better. RR did fail in two areas, D was not strong practicing against spread and then playing big 10 plow offenses, and his recruiting was suspect, he shot himself in the foot recuirting too much on O and too many lesser star recruits. It will be interesting to see how the change back will effect the results over the next 3 years. Good luck coach Hoke.
January 13th, 2011 at 12:46 AM ^
January 13th, 2011 at 1:07 AM ^
So that's what it looks like when a coach is surrounded by support. RR wanted it to win badly, but failed to do so. It wasn't for any sort of lack of "understanding."
January 13th, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^
Not that anyone cares, but I supported Rich Rodriguez and disagreed with the decision to fire him. Some of the things that I will miss the most are exactly what many people have been complaining about for the past three years.
I liked that each game on the schedule was equally important to him, and I'm glad he didn't act like Michigan vs. OSU is single greatest rivalry in all of sports. Most of the sports world (emphasis on world) doesn't give a shit about American football...let alone college football.
I also liked that Rodriguez's teams did not have a sense of entitlement. Almost everything out of Hoke's mouth at the presser today came off like it was designed to placate the loudest and most annoying segment of our fanbase. I damn near puked when he emphatically declared: "THIS IS MICHIGAN"...three or four times. No, Mr. Hoke--your hiring makes it official--this is Notre Dame. (Okay, maybe not, but seriously...can you name another place where people think like this?)
That being said, Rich Rodgriguez was fired, and I'm over it. Brady Hoke is our coach and I support him. I only request that people not use terms like "the RR era," because I think it's misleading and, well, three years is not an era. "The RR experiment," would be more fitting, but even then, that's with the understanding that we never got to test the hypothesis.