Hoke React, No Swearing

Submitted by Brian on January 11th, 2011 at 6:42 PM

ON THIS DAY MY HAIR IS VERY APROPOS

So this isn't two thousand words of swearing as promised. That requires some level of verve to pull off and I'm out of that. I'm depressed and waiting for the other shoe to drop and far too sober. A few things:

"This is not Brady Hoke's fault." Repeat 1000x. This is not Brady Hoke's fault. He seems like a nice enough dude. It seems unlikely he actively participated in the submarining of Rich Rodriguez. Unlike everyone else ever associated with the Michigan program with even the most thinly plausible of resumes, he actually wants to be the head coach here. So that's nice.

This is a stupid hire. It will always be as stupid hire and David Brandon just led the worst coaching search in the history of Michigan football. He managed to chase off half of an already iffy recruiting class, hired a Plan C coach on January 11th, probably ensured the transfer of the reigning Big Ten Offensive Player of the Year, and restricted his "national search" to people who'd spent at least five years in Ann Arbor. Michigan just gave themselves a year of USC-level scholarship reduction voluntarily.

What are the chances that the best available coach is a 52-year-old with a 47-50 career record and no experience as a coordinator? Why weren't a half-dozen coordinators with time and results on their side given the opportunity to interview? Why did Brandon waste time with Les Miles, a guy on the downside who may not have even gotten a serious offer? After learning a hard lesson about program continuity with the last hire why did Michigan hire a guy who professes to hate the spread 'n' shred a day after two spread teams played for the national title?

I'd rather have Rich Rodriguez entering year four with a new defensive staff than this, a total capitulation. Does anyone remember Tressel's record against Lloyd Carr? 5-1. Change was necessary. It didn't work, but that doesn't mean you go back to the stuff that required change.

Michigan should still be better next year. It depends on what goes on with the offense. Calvin Magee has already been hired at Pitt, so don't get your hopes up about tempting Denard by keeping the offensive staff that matters (QB coach and OC) unchanged.* The defense should be much better simply by virtue of returning approximately ten starters if you throw in Troy Woolfolk and not dragging the devilishly handsome corpse of Greg Robinson around. At the very least Hoke should have a quarterback, even if it's redshirt freshman Devin Gardner.

A completely average coach should be able to take 20 returning starters on a 7-6 team that sees the schedule ease considerably and get to 9-3. That's good, because that's probably what we hired. If Denard's out the door all bets are off except "will Brian cut down or across?"

*[Tony Gibson immediately found work at Pitt, too, which is amazing: the most maligned position coach on RR's staff is unemployed for ten days while most of Carr's coordinators fled to the NFL to be an assistant (to the) position coach. The exceptions are Stan Parrish, who is on a quest to rack up the worst winning percentage as a head coach in CFB history, Greg Mattison, who left voluntarily for an equivalent job at Notre Dame and shouldn't count as a pro, and Ron English, who got hired by Kragthorpe.]

Prepare for the media 180. This hypothetical 9-3 will cause the media to fall all over themselves declaring Brady Hoke the polar opposite of Rich Rodriguez (lazy media meme #1 is already underway) and whipsaw Michigan back to the positive side of the media ledger, whereupon that period where Michigan State could literally have 20% of their football team descend upon innocent bystanders in back to back years while Michigan gets painted as the Program Out Of Control will end with authoritah. Sportswriters—even the good ones—love nothing better than holding themselves above the outraged plebes, arguing that whatever they think is foolish.

We're unhappy, so they'll defend Brady Hoke to their dying single-sentence paragraph. This would have been a fascinating dynamic to watch if Miles was the guy. Seeing Rosenberg paper over Miles's oversigning hijinks would have been hilarious/infuriating. Since it's Hoke it will just be generic "why can't you be happy going 9-3 every year and beating OSU 30% of the time, I mean look at Rodriguez!"

Prepare for the program alum 180. Judging from twitter, Michigan guys in the NFL are happy, so there's that. At least we won't have Mark Bihl advising recruits to go to Michigan State and Dhani Jones walking into David Brandon's office and demanding a firing. Thanks for your support, guys! Your loyalty in this tough time is appreciated.

This is actually Hoke's main asset relative to non-Michigan candidates: the program won't be actively hoping he fails. This is not an insignificant bonus relative to Rodriguez.

The Gene Chizik plan is dodgy, temporary, and requires a bucket of money and amenable prospects. All right, so maybe we can hire the next Gus Malzahn and the next Ted Roof and import JUCOs like Nick Fairley and Cam Newton. This is lazy media meme #2, because lol those crazy fans, amirite?

Problems:

  • Who is Gus Malzahn? Texas just blew their coaching staff up and hired Manny Diaz and the Boise State OC, so they're off the table. It is January 11th. Next up is… I have no idea. Honestly, if you were going to poach an up-and-coming coordinator your best option on defense is none other than Scott Shafer, and on offense there isn't anyone, really. I'll believe Michigan has hired Randy Shannon as a DC six months after it's announced, but that's what this plan requires: hiring Randy goddamn Shannon as DC at a million a year.
  • JUCOs are not available, and I'm not sure anyone can wave a towel like Trooper Taylor anyway.
  • We hired a manball advocate unlikely to stick with the bits of Michigan's team that kind of worked, and his defensive coordinator is going to be the head coach at SDSU.
  • To date Michigan's pay packages for assistants have been pathetic. Brandon promised that would change. He also promised a national search and hired a guy who will probably be one of the lowest-paid coaches in the Big Ten.
  • The figurehead approach leaves you vulnerable to having your quasi-HC poached, as West Virginia found out when Doc Holliday was hired by Marshall and Auburn will find out soon enough. If you can plug and play Cam Newton that might work, but Michigan can't.

Also, Chizik was an established ass-kicking BCS coordinator who led the nation's #1 scoring D at Auburn, was 5th in yardage allowed in back to back years, won the Broyles award, and then went to Texas to win a national title opposite Vince Young. He didn't really need Roof. He had Gene Chizik. He did not immediately turn Iowa State into a team of ninjas but Chizik was a better hire than Hoke even absent the ludicrous money that went into his staff. Hoke's never even been a coordinator, and his results as a head coach are less than a slam dunk.

I am all in for being wrong. Or not really so much wrong as properly skeptical in an environment where success turns on a blade of grass and real games are few and far between and randomness is so important. Kenpom just put up a great post today about +/- and its general lack of usefulness as a stat because of its immense noise—college football has a lot of noise. It is possible that Brady Hoke was just unlucky or unprepared and that his last three years are more representative of his talent than his first five. I won't become what I hate, Emperor Palpatine.

With the dual boosts of a pliant media and cooperative network of former players plus a program that should find itself on an upward trajectory instead of a downward one, everything's set up for him to look like the white knight who "saved" the program and ride that to something approximating success. Michigan's just thrown in the towel on being a national power but this could be Nebraska after Callahan instead of Notre Dame after Davie.

Comments

zlionsfan

January 12th, 2011 at 9:50 AM ^

depending on whether or not he declares after his junior year. It might also be true that his best chance of getting an NFL job will come from playing in an offense tailored to his strengths, and right now, that would not be a pocket-passer offense.

What we saw this year seems to suggest that he could work on mechanics and reading defenses; it might be better if he is not also absorbing a bunch of two-back formations and '70s-style plays.

Running a two-back offense isn't necessarily a prerequisite for the NFL - Brees ran a shotgun offense at Purdue (not the spread as it's run today because the QB wasn't expected to run at all) - and more aspects of NCAA-style spread offenses are finding their way into the NFL, but it is true that no teams are rushing to implement the QB-run side of those schemes. (Yes, the Lions did run some plays like that with Stanton, and they did work fairly well, if for no other reason than that NFL DEs don't exactly expect to have to play the read option, but they're hardly a staple of Linehan's offense.)

Leaders_and_Best

January 12th, 2011 at 2:35 AM ^

Everyone that transferred early last go round were the "questionable character" types such as whining-ass Mallet, and family man Boren. Then Barwis drove off the rest of the lame-asses who were allowed to coast under Carr.  Seeing as how these players have been through Barwis Hell already, the transfer rate should be low. Unless of course Hoke turns out to be a total douche. Seeing as how many people didn't give RR a chance from day one, I refuse to do the same with Hoke as we all know, only the Sith deal in absolutes and I would like to avoid being voiced over by James Earl Jones (although that would be cool).

I suck at photoshop but could someone make the Obama Hope poster with HOKE instead, jst to piss people like brian off.

OneFootIn

January 12th, 2011 at 9:14 AM ^

I am with you all the way till your last sentence. How can you jump on Brian, or anyone, for being upset at the ridiculous search process? Can you really argue that it gave UM the best chance to bring in the best coaching staff? I can't. I think you underestimate Brian if you confuse his being upset at the process with how he will analyze Hoke once he's the coach. Brian didn't like the RichRod hiring process either, but I didn't see that affect his analysis the past three years. I myself am highly doubtful about the likely success of a guy with Hoke's background compared to my dream candidates. However, just like I'm sure Brian will, I will not judge his performance before he actually does any performing. It really did piss me off how many people didn't give RichRod a shot and I sincerely hope people give Hoke a boatload more patience and support.

Therefore, I fully support you in the poster campaign. Maybe Brian can put up a new tagline on the home page in the left corner: Hoke = Hope.

No matter who the coach is: Go Blue!

turd ferguson

January 12th, 2011 at 3:03 AM ^

The "completely average coach should be able to... get to 9-3" part of this post seems totally unfair to me.  It's a way to call this move a failure and then preemptively write off an extremely positive year for Hoke as something that's unworthy of praise.  We all know that our 2010 team was a bullshit 7-6.  We were beaten down in all six losses and won tight games against Notre Dame, UMass, Indiana, and Illinois.  Going 9-3 next year would be an accomplishment for any incoming coach.

T.O.P.

January 12th, 2011 at 3:27 AM ^

Carr Haters all but forced him to retire!
<br>Rich Rod never had a shot due to the media and the faction of those who hated him from day 1. Harbaugh didn't even entertain the thought. Miles, a Bo disciple, turned the job down. Why would anybody want to come to Michigan? It is unbelievable to think that "we are Michigan" is enough to warrant the best candidates. Would any of you accept a job knowing that you have no possible chance of pleasing anyone?
<br>Honestly can it get any worse? The program is already a laughing stock in all football circles. 7 straight to tO$U! 3 straight to MSU! The worst bowl defeat ever! The answer is NO!
<br>Accept it. The lore of Michigan has to be rebuilt. That's a hard pill to swallow, but it is an unfortunate fact. We don't know if Hoke is the answer. His experience, his record, we don't know. The fact is that if we don't accept it and get behind him, as one, he will endure the same garbage Rich endured.
<br>Accept it. Look for the positives and love Michigan football with the passion that only we have. Show your support for the program and stop thinking about what might have been!

Brodie

January 12th, 2011 at 3:34 AM ^

Glad to see you're not becoming what you hate

I mean, there is no pre-judging of Hoke based on absolutely nothing more than your own fears and prejudices here. Nope. Totally fair take! Jesus fucking Christ, why don't we at least get through the presser before we start proclaiming what a failure the dude is.

Michigan has thrown in the towel on being a national power? What do you think constitutes a national power? USC? Ohio State? We were never at that level and we certainly weren't getting there any faster with Rodriguez at the helm.

umumum

January 12th, 2011 at 8:44 AM ^

Sorry to be late commenting on a 3:34 am post, but "fears and prejudices"?  First, you clearly misread what Brian posted--he simply reiterated what he has consistently said--that Hoke would be a bad hire.  That opinion didn't and needn't change just because his fear came true.  Second, speaking of fear, did you mean fear that U of M wouldn't be good with Hoke? A legitimate fear IMHO.  Third, prejudice is simply not a word that by definition could apply to his comments.

UM Fan NY

January 12th, 2011 at 5:37 AM ^

is the typical rodriguez apologist. they piss and moan for 3 years that rich never got support from day one yet they are doing the same thing to hoke before he even coaches a game. frigging hypocrites. rich failed miserably as head coach. get over it. he wasn't 'submarined'. he and his staff failed.

the current and former palyers seem to support hoke, why don't we do the same???

MGoCombs

January 12th, 2011 at 8:51 AM ^

We could all re-read the article and see that while being disappointed with the process and subsequent decision, Brian is not going to commision a team of bad but somehow widely-read writers to destroy Brady Hoke before he even has a chance to coach.  You can support someone without agreeing with the decision that put them there in the first place, and you can disagree with someone without completely throwing them under a bus.

Bobby Boucher

January 12th, 2011 at 6:22 AM ^

It seems like this was a very business-oriented decision just like DB has said he does.  He's trying to unify the base and all of the deep pocket contibutors.  Plus, Hoke will be very cheap since he doesn't make much money as a HC to begin with.  However, I don't think this decision had anything to do with Michigan becoming a national powerhouse or winning a NC.  It's pretty evident that DB was more focused with getting back to basics.  Will it win games?  We'll see.

Ed Shuttlesworth

January 12th, 2011 at 6:35 AM ^

Between 2008-2010, Brady Hoke did so much better a job as a head coach than Rich Rodriguez, it's silly even to debate.

And I love Brian's passive-aggressive meme that Rod would have been AT LEAST 9-3 next year by just showing up -- as if such a thing was remotely self-evident.

San Diego State's offense was better than Michigan's in 2010.  Their national offensive ranking was higher than Michigan's and they put up 34 points at TCU, a team Wisky scored 19 on in the Rose Bowl.

zlionsfan

January 12th, 2011 at 10:13 AM ^

which is the source of some of the concern about his hiring (that his success to date has been achieved against significantly weaker opposition).

FEI rates the Aztecs offense 26th: not bad at all, but quite a bit behind Michigan's. Look at their schedule and you'll see a bit more clearly. New Mexico, New Mexico State, Utah State, Colorado State, Wyoming ... and they scored only 30 at New Mexico and 24 at home against Colorado State. Michigan's offense did not have any problems with weaker teams, with the exception of the game in West Lafayette in inclement weather.

Also, SDSU's offense put up 28 at TCU, and 14 of that was with the Horned Frogs protecting a fourth-quarter lead late. The other 7 came from the defense and special teams (pinning TCU deep and getting a sack/fumble/recovery TD).

Mentioning the offense is exactly the wrong approach. You've picked out the one area where Rodriguez showed a reasonable amount of success ... you should be focusing on defense instead. Although SDSU's defense wasn't that good in context (59th overall, against the 108th-toughest set of offenses), it was still miles ahead of the MAC-level effort here. That is what got Rodriguez fired, and turning that around will help Hoke to fix things in Ann Arbor.

As for 2008, well ... Hoke deserves some credit for beating a relatively good Navy team, and he can't be blamed much for having a really weak schedule, but he didn't get out of the MAC unscathed (the loss to Buffalo in the CC was disappointing, especially given Gill's struggles at Kansas), and of course he was gone before the bowl game, so we don't know how much of that loss was on Parrish and how much was simply from the Cardinals being a mediocre team with a favorable schedule. Hoke took a non-AQ team to a reasonable level of success, but he's far from the best example of that, and even his Ball State tenure raises some interesting questions.

Most of the commentary this season was about survival: with a lot of the team returning in 2011, that would be the real chance to turn things around. If the secondary would be healthy, and if some competent LBs could be found, an average defense plus an offense with a more experience Denard would be expected to improve upon this year's team, especially if the FG unit didn't suck balls. Given that a condition for RR's return in that scenario would have been changes on the defensive side of the ball, 9-3 wouldn't have been out of the question.

wvgoblue

January 12th, 2011 at 6:41 AM ^

OK here's how it's going down.  Today at the press conference Hoke takes a long pause, slams over the podium, does his best Mike Golic impression with a hint of the Big Boss Man, calls out Tressel on the spot, Vince McMahon gets word and the PPV is this weekend.  Problem solved.

umumum

January 12th, 2011 at 6:45 AM ^

It's really not.  For most people, including Brian, who I take at his word, carping on this choice has nothing to do with Hoke as a person and little to do with him as a coach in the abstract.  I'm thrilled he wants to coach at Michigan.  Rather,  this is about process and Brandon's abject mishandling of every aspect of it--the firing of RichRod, the so-called search, and the final result (Hoke) as it appears TODAY. 

The decision to fire RichRod is obviously a matter of disagreement on the board, but the the manner in which it was handled really shouldn't be--it was awful.  If Brandon really never offered Harbaugh or Miles--and presumably didn't meaningfully seek out any other nationally-recognized HC or coordinator-- that should be considered unbelievable (I have a process--I'm going to hire Hoke).  And Hoke's very very questionable resume--please not the "Michigan man" stuff--is absolutely relevant in evaluating BRANDON'S DECISION.  A terrible choice for a school like Michigan.

People are right that we can't and shouldn't criticize Hoke until he does something.  First up will be his staff.  For me, if it is loaded with people from Lloyd's regime and his staff at SDS, that will be mark one against him.  If he surprises, then he will deserve kudos.  Then we will see who he keeps, who he can recruit--thanks again Brandon--and how he does in the Fall with many returning players and a soft schedule.  That too will be on Hoke.  At that point, I hope I will be firmly on his bandwagon.  But that won't change the embarrassing way this whole debacle went down.

steviebrownfor…

January 12th, 2011 at 7:03 AM ^

you're not alone.

you're allowed to be dissappointed.

I will not post the same thing over and over and argue with people about it, but yea, alot of people are bummed out with the hire.

swaglikeM

January 12th, 2011 at 7:37 AM ^

Brian on this CC.  We're moving away from a Spread n Shred system that was 9th in the country last year.  We never had an issue on offense.  If we brought back RR and got a legit DC with free reign I think we would be very very good next year with a more experienece DRob and 10 returning starters on D with the return of Woolfolk.

Tater

January 12th, 2011 at 8:09 AM ^

I am also in full agreement with this post, except that I don't share the optimism for a nine-win season.  I watched how USF struggled when they replaced Leavitt's spread with Holtz's offense that looks a lot like Hoke's; the first part of the season was brutal, but they started to "get it" after about seven games or so, and beat a few teams they haven't beaten often. 

As it looks now, unless Hoke is able to come up with a hybrid offense, six wins is a very good target for this team.  On the hybrid thing, though: Hoke has a rare opportunity.  He is obviously THE choice of the Carr-tel, and he can introduce some 21st century concepts to the Carr-tel offense without being "offensive" to anyone in the clique. 

The game passed Lloyd Carr by, but it doesn't neccessarily have to be that way for Brady Hoke.  It is my belief that, within five years, all offenses, NFL and college, will be hybrids of the spread and "old school," like New England has been running for years, but with more running. 

I can remember when teams routinely ran a "full house" backfield, and when there was one WR, one TE, and a "wing" who would now be called an H-back, and two backs in pretty much every backfield.  It took time, but teams started using two wideouts, and then three in some situations, etc. 

Football is evolving.  Brady Hoke may be part of the Carr-tel, but he doesn't have to let it define everything he does.  If he takes the seventy percent of what Carr did that was good, and adds thirty percent of 21st century concepts, Michigan could actually be the "leaders and best" again. 

If he doesn't, I will share Brian's somewhat bleak vision of the future:

Michigan's just thrown in the towel on being a national power...

I am also, as Brian says, "all in for being wrong."

Old School

January 12th, 2011 at 8:19 AM ^

Were the rumors  true that MSC - who lamely claimed she didn't know who the next head coach would be and she is making big bucks to run the place - and LC didn't want either Harbaugh or Miles from day one. The former because he made remarks about the program, and the latter because of old grudges. Cast about the internet, and you will also find pre-decision rumors that Hoke was the choice from day one.

I wish Hoke well because to do otherwise is cutting off your nose to spite your face. But that doesn't mean that I can't be crticial of MSC, LC, and DB for this charade because this is a public university and their course of action seems to have made a public laughingstock of it.

Sven_Da_M

January 12th, 2011 at 9:51 AM ^

Harbaugh said "NFL," Miles said "mmmmmmmbrrmgmmmmblbm" (sound of eating Tiger Stadium grass).

DB can't procure HC services at gunpoint and spirit above-mentioned Bo-wanna-bees to the Big House under sedation.

It's like 90%+ of this board is certifiable on the HC search: ignoring the facts and pounding the virtual podium.

Thank God someone with Michigan ties who doesn't use the hallowed memory of Bo as a career stepping stone really wants a challenge.

I can't wait to see Brady Hoke prowling the sidelines in a pair of black high-top cleats, knowing enough about a good defense so he doesn't have to use the word "Lombardi."

M

January 12th, 2011 at 8:09 AM ^

I, for one, am looking forward to perennial 8-4 seasons sprinkled by losses to teams Michigan should beat and wins over OSU from time to time, then getting crushed in a bowl game.

Talk about a return to Bo/Carr/Moeller.  It was totally worth nuking this recruiting class to get this.

Wolverine96

January 12th, 2011 at 9:23 AM ^

Well its not exactlly like we were on a National Championship trajectory or anything.  Getting trucked by MSU, Ohio State, Iowa, Wisconsin and Penn State for each of the last three years and laying down like the French anytime a team hit us in the mouth gave me lots of confidence for the future under RR. 

But then again I fondly remember the National Championship, 4 BCS bowls and being competitive in every game we played.  Yeah the Bo/Carr/ Moeller era really sucked.

M

January 12th, 2011 at 9:55 PM ^

Dennis Dixon, Brad Banks, and FREAKING Joe Germaine beg to differ.  Oh, and Armanti Edwards is snickering.

Carr would have had 7-5 seasons with this talent and you know it.  My point was RR was on an upward trajectory and would have figured this out and put Michigan on another plane of competition.  Now we're back to where we were, only this time there's no tying for the Big 10 title and backing into a BCS bid.

bigtime23

January 12th, 2011 at 9:27 AM ^

I'm surprised and disappointed at the negative comments here.     Brian is totally off his rocker.     DB is a pro and doesn't make decisions without a plan.  For goodness sake, he worked for Bain Capital for several years.  Bain doesn't do anything without a 50 page strategy document and a plan.   I doubt this process was any different.   He is easily the best AD we've had since DC and will prove himself further as time goes on.      I haven't seen ONE negative comment from any former player and the current team appears to be genuinely supportive of this hire.       Were we really excited about LM coming in with his SEC stank and bringing us down to the level of that phony Tressel?   We're better than that.  We're Michigan. Start acting like it.

wingedhelmetpa

January 12th, 2011 at 8:52 AM ^

However we got here.  Here we are.

For being the leader of "if you don't support the coach you aren't a real Michigan fan" mantra.  Do you think that condemning Brady Hoke because he once worked for Lloyd Carr, is not 35 years old, and hasn't proven himself to your satisfaction is a bit hypocritical?

I love what you do here.  I may not always agree with your analysis but I am always impressed with the effort, the science and the fairness.

And to be fair, I have some level of familiarity with your feelings at this time, because I had those feelings no matter how hard I tried to get rid of them for the last two years of the former regime.

I agree that this search was very macular-degeneration-esque in its peripheral only focus on the "national map" resulting in only seeing the Michigan Men at the fringes.

I am hopeful that we don't get a return to LLoyd Ball - though the Lloyd body of work is to be admired.

I wish you a speedy recovery.

As always ---GO BLUE!

ForestCityBlue

January 12th, 2011 at 8:58 AM ^

We as Michigan fans need to get over ourselves.  I am reminded in this whole choaching search of the movie "Accepted" and the notion that a great university is defined not by the students they accept, but by how many they can reject.  As the "Harvard of the West" we should be able to define our football staff, not by whom we accept, that is hire, but by all the coaches who so desperately want to come but are rejected.  We assume that any coach worth his salt would be speed dialing Brandon begging for the job.  We as a fan base want to revel in all the great coaches we turned away.  After all, look at how many got rejected when WE got in to the Harvard of the West, so why should it be any different for our coach.  We are not a plan C school educationally, and we should not be a plan C school with out football coaching staff.  [Of course the new conspiracy is that Hoke was always plan A...the rest was smoke and mirrors].

If even mighty tOSU had to go to plan C, what makes us any better?  What this fan base needs is a dose of humility.  Brady Hoke did very well in a hostile situation in Ball State, a place where some in the administration were activily undermining him, and did very well in San Diego.  He has the right connections to the program and deserves a shot.  Is this any worse a hire that a coach whose last job was Youngstown State?

I liked Loyd Carr.  But when he left it was more than time for him to go.  I liked Rich Rodriguez and cache that came from having the "inventor" of the spread as our coach and would have liked to see him get a couple more years to see if he could work it out with a new DC.  But that is not what went down.  Hoke is now our coach.  Lets hope Brandon is good to his word and gives him the green to go get a good staff and that all of the glowing things written about Hoke by those that know him or have played for him are more than true.  [Although I was looking forward to trying to finding and wearing an official Michigan a "Mad Hatter" hat to games]  On the whole, I think this is a good hire and I am ready to cheer for his success both on and off the field.

zlionsfan

January 12th, 2011 at 10:26 AM ^

"last job" should probably read "won four national championships".

Hoke showed little at Ball State or SDSU to suggest that he will have the kind of success here that we hope he does. Tressel showed beyond a doubt that he could succeed at the I-AA level; what was unknown at the time was whether or not he could also succeed at the I-A level. (Regrettably, he has, although it certainly seems that he plays by SEC rules to do so.)

That said, I certainly agree that it's time to hope for on-field success. Regardless of what any of us think about the coaching search or about Rodriguez' tenure, I think we all are hoping for success the right way.

Sven_Da_M

January 12th, 2011 at 9:06 AM ^

... you lost me at "I'd rather have Rich Rodriguez entering year four..."

David Brandon knows that sometimes you have to do the right thing, even when it's not the easy thing.

Michigan doesn't need a "name" coach.  It needs a good one who could be great.

Thank God Miles isn't coming; Harbaugh never was. 

jnz

January 12th, 2011 at 9:08 AM ^

We hired what we are now. We are a 2nd tier Big Ten football team that just hired a 2nd  tier coach along the lines of whom Indiana or Minnesota might hire. We waited 1 1/2 months for this hire?