Michigan State Postgame Presser Transcript: Brady Hoke

Submitted by Heiko on November 3rd, 2013 at 4:56 PM

"You should have used a different game plan."

Your rushing offense –

“A lot of negative yardage plays. I thought there were some pretty good runs once in a while in there, but you snap the ball for a 20 yard loss, you get sacked I don’t know how many times, so your yardage part of it isn’t very good. You put yourself behind the 8-ball a little bit not executing, and then you’re forced into doing some things you don’t want to do the whole time.”

What does the offensive line need to do to protect Devin better and avoid sacks?

“It’s not just the line. There’s backs involved, there’s routes involved, there’s timing, all those issues are part of it. We have to get better.”

Did all the shuffling on the offensive line have something to do with it?

“Nope.”

What’s Devin’s status? He sat out the last series.

“Yeah, he got pounded a little bit. He was a warrior out there that last drive before the interception at the end. He did a nice job getting us down the field, had taken a lot of shots early in the game. He just was a little bit worn out.”

Does he have an injury?

“No. I wouldn’t say he has an injury. I would say beat up. If that’s an injury, then that’s an injury.”

In the history of this game, the team that rushes for more yards wins. How critical was the rushing game today?

“Well it’s always critical.”

Why do you think there were so many negative yardage plays?

“We didn’t execute as well as they did.”

That’s it?

“Pretty much.”

Taylor Lewan’s personal foul?

“I didn’t see that. I think that’s his frustration more than anything.”

You had a couple trips to the red zone in the first half. Did you think about taking a shot in the end zone at all?

“I think if we wanted to take a shot, we would have.”

There’s a lot of talk before the game about the toughness gap between the two teams.

“By … you guys?”

Yeah.

“From two years ago.”

Right. Did it disappoint you that the gap seems to have widened?

“I don’t think so. I think our kids played hard. I don’t think we executed very well. There’s eight to six plays in a game like this that make a difference. And if you go back and watch it again, you’ll see there’s eight to six plays that made a difference in the game from a standpoint of momentum, standpoint of confidence, and what you want to do. That’s part of it.”

How big was it to give up that touchdown before the half?

“That was a disappointing drive there at the end of the half. It drives you crazy. You give up points right at the end of the half, and it’s disappointing.”

How do you not allow a game like this to beat you next week?

“Well hopefully you do a great job as a group of leaders. Talk about coaches, senior captains, all those guys. Understanding where we are and what we need to do. I know they signed up for a guaranteed 12 games.”

With so much emphasis on a Big Ten title, what does this team have to play for?

“Still. It’s not in our hands. But you never know unless you’re forecasting for us now. Who knows?”

Does it surprise you that there was a lack of execution with the two weeks off?

“No. I think there’s more made out of that than anything else. Does it surprise me? Yeah. It surprises me. It has nothing to do with two weeks.”

Did you think you’d be further along?

“Well I was hoping.”

Is it coaching that you have to go back and look at?

“You always do.”

MGoQuestion: Going along with that, were you satisfied with the preparation and game plan?

“Yes. We wouldn’t have run the plays we ran unless we were satisfied.”

MGoFollowup: But considering the result …

“Hindsight’s always 20/20, right?”

What did you make of Michigan State’s defensive line and Shillique Calhoun?

“I think he’s a good football player. We’ve had a lot of respect for their defense all week going into this game, and I grabbed Max Bullough afterwards because he’s one of the guys I like watching play football. We have a lot of respect for them.”

Do you think the identity of this team is that it needs to get better in the trenches?

“That’s part of it. We haven’t played the way we like to every game.”

When Devin did have time, how did you think he played?

“I don’t know. Pretty good. But it would be nice to give him more time.”

What do you tell your fan base and alumni about dropping five of the last six games to Michigan State?

“Well, they’ve won five of the last six. Something like that. Well, we gotta keep working.”

Five of six is pretty significant. Do you think there’s that big of a gap?

“I don’t think there is a gap. I think they played awfully well, executed awfully well. I don’t think we did.”

Comments

Sten Carlson

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:07 PM ^

Dileo didn't play, and the DID call short quick passes, some were completed, and several dropped.  You have to look at what MSU gives you schematically.  They don't give short quick passes, they give deep balls up the middile.  But, they're not going to give you time to throw those passes, unless you have an elite OL, which we all know Michigan doesn't.  So, what then?  Again, you armchair OC's all throw out suggestions, but they did those things, they didn't work.  Why?  Because, as coach said, the players didn't exectute them.  Hoke takes full responsibility for them not executing, I can promise you that.  But, saying the plays were there, they just didn't execute them isn't a cop-out, it's the facts.  What more do you want?

Holmdel

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:40 PM ^

then you will devise a game plan to defeat them, unless you are fail.  Inexperienced OL + two weeks + our game plan + on the road is always better than experienced top-ranked defense + one week + their game plan + at home.  Funk has had three years to develop in-game chemistry among Bosch, Magnuson, Glasgow, Bryant, Kalis, not to mention all of his previous years on the planet, and still can't dominate MSU.  He must go.  

Sten Carlson

November 3rd, 2013 at 7:03 PM ^

"Funk has had three years to develop in-game chemistry among Bosch, Magnuson, Glasgow, Bryant, Kalis..."

Speaking of "failing", every player you've mentioned Bosch (a true freshman), Magnuson (a RS freshman), Glasgow (a walk-on and RS So.), Bryant (a RS So.), and Kalis (another RS freshman).  So, Funk has NOT has three years to develop in-game chemistry as only 2 of the 5 you listed have been in the program for 3 years, and one has only been here since last spring when he was an EE.

You = FAIL!

Blue X2

November 3rd, 2013 at 7:34 PM ^

I agree with your point and think Hoke needs to look in the mirror and have some serious reflection on his O Coaching staff.  He has more talent now than he did in 2011 and this team has steadily regressed since then.  Maybe Denard was a bigger positive influence than we even thought and masked a very poor offensive coaching staff.  they have a 5 star QB that was arguably the best QB in the state for 2 years before he came to Michigan.  He just got beat by a no-name sophmore 2 star.  Hoke talks about accountability and how players need to earn their position eveyr week.  Perhaps he needs to look in the mirror and he and Borges need to win their position also.

trueblueintexas

November 3rd, 2013 at 5:50 PM ^

I wish the reporter that asked about the growing gap between the two teams would have brought up the offenses scoring over the past three games against MSU to help support the statement. I'm sure Hoke would have quickly pointed out last years win, but at least Hoke would have had a specific issue to address which supported the question.

Leonhall

November 3rd, 2013 at 5:58 PM ^

Like to know regardless of the line play why derrick green, justice Hayes, or Deveon smith can't get a fricken carry? Also, why the hell can't we run behind lewan? Or even schofield, they're supposed to be so damned good? Also, why does every pass play seem to develop from the snap so DAMN SLOW? Shit, I felt
Ike my tv was in slow-mo mode on most pass plays...we look like my sons fucking flag football team....SLOW! Hate to say it, I really do, and I'm 100% behind Brady! but I'm beginning to think he may just be a stop-gap coach.

goblu

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:05 PM ^

The returns are in and here are the grades so far...

Recruiting A
It's the only reason I have hope going forward.

Developing Talent C-
After 2 and a half years how many guys have turned into studs through training from this staff? 2 (Ryan, Lewan). Countess maybe...where's all the linebacking, offensive and defensive line talent? As young as some of these guys are you should be able to see some sort of indication of play makers at this point. I don't see it.

Game Plan C-
When have we gone into a game where we were under dogs and some how through an outstanding game plan we came out victorious? Not one. How many games have we put together a full team effort and just completely overwhelmed the opposition.

In Game Strategy F
How many times have we seen in game adjustments that completely turned games around?

Team Identity / Poise?
This team lacks an identity, and poise. It's soft team that is easily rattled. Often rattled by inferior teams..Penn St, Indiana, UConn, Akron....just this year. Hoke been selling this smash mouth, down hill running team and a Raven's like D. I'm sorry, I don't see it. I made excuses for RR and I'm seeing history repeat itself again. I hope I'm wrong.

Lastly put on a headset fer god sakes...even if they don't function. He looks like Bobby Bowden in his final years at FSU..clueless.

BILG

November 3rd, 2013 at 7:11 PM ^

I had the exact same grades in a prior thread.  I combined game plan and game strategy together into game day coaching.

A

C-

C-

This does not a top ten program make.  If you want to be a figure head coach, you need amazing coordinators.  I trust Mattison (D has been solid to good for 3 years with meh talent, and we have studs coming in).  Offense (most specifically the O-line) is a total cluster fuck.

Reader71

November 4th, 2013 at 12:05 PM ^

Its funny how those categories work though. Its easy for us to judge recruiting, we have Rivals, Scout, 247, and ESPN to do that for us.

There are no sites dedicated to developing talent, game plan, in game strategy, or team identity. So we use our own set us criteria and make judgments. For what its worth, the guys that coach are generally in favor of the staff. The guys that played are generally in favor of the staff. I'd say these guys know more about football, particularly coaching football, than guys who watch on TV. Not saying they can't be wrong, but I do think there is a higher probability of them being right than the average Joe.

evenyoubrutus

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:09 PM ^

Feel free to crucify me but reading this is like reading a Rod Marinelli press conference. I'm not comparing him as a coach to marinelli, he just seems to give the same kind of BS, disconnected answers.

Petey6904

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:12 PM ^

I am convinced that the way this team is playing falls on the coaching. There are teams in this league that are playing freshman on their o-line that do not have this many problems. I understand loyalty and can sympathize with coach hoke, but changes need to be made. I am in the fence about Borges but I think it is time for funk to go. There is no way the line should be this bad. We have the talent, we just need to coach these kids up. I use the 49ers as a reference. They were alright and when Harbaugh took over they took the next step. The only different variable was the coaching.

blueball97

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:17 PM ^

Comparing professionals to college players isn't a good idea. sF was loaded with talent and had a system in place. Michigan is still acquiring talent and doesn't have a system in place. The biggest problem has been not implementing what they wanted from day one. Take your lumps in year 1 and 2 to establish identity, now you are in year three and just trying to implement a system with everyone, including Lewan and Schofield instead of having two guys with 3 years experience in trying to do what you want.

blueball97

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:13 PM ^

Mattison's game plan was sound, you wouldn't expect MSU to have 4 79+yd 10+ play drives resulting in two TDs and two field goals, they hadn't done it all year. Borges had a good game plan with some bad calls mixed in (3rd and two read option inside the red zone). We simply can't execute, wether it is coaching in practice or just being intimidated by the moment, we flat out have no big time play makers on either side of the ball. We have had very few game changing plays go in our favor all year. The ND game may very well be the high point of our season. At this point Hoke and company should get some slack (he has more BCS bowl appearances and wins than Dantonio).

Monocle Smile

November 3rd, 2013 at 8:28 PM ^

Is it non sequitur hour yet again? What does this have to do with what either of us said thus far? At Penn State, James Ross and Frank Clark started the 2nd half momentum, then Gardner and Funchess teed off for a bit. We made plays. Then the coaches decided to bleed an entire quarter of football and Channing Stribling got burned because he's not a playmaker (yet).

Desmond Morgan saved our bacon at UConn, as did Fitz.

We missed a few open opportunities yesterday, yes. Those opportunities were few and far between because Gardner was eating dudes constantly. This is something entirely different from saying something as idiotic as "we have no playmakers."

blueball97

November 3rd, 2013 at 9:42 PM ^

PSU game, Stribling has two chances to end the game, doesn't make a play. 1st half MSU, Gardner is late getting the ball out the entire first half. If you are a playmaker you consistently make plays, they don't gave be spectacular, but they have to be made at critical times. We have Jake Ryan who has done that consistently on defense and Gallon on offense. Funchess has been great at times but has dropped numerous balls as well.

Monocle Smile

November 3rd, 2013 at 10:52 PM ^

So not only do you not admit to your earlier stupidity, but yet again distract from the issue. I specifically stated that Stribling is not a playmaker. Why are you acting as if I stated the exact opposite? English? Do you speak it?

Furthermore, what does this have to do with anything you said in that first fucktarded comment? We HAVE playmakers. We need to get them the ball and/or in position to succeed. Gardner is most definitely a playmaker, but it's a little hard for him to make plays when he's getting crubberated every play.

Sten Carlson

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:35 PM ^

Yes, you're 100% correct.  But, going back to what I said earlier.  What if the coaches ARE, in fact, putting the players "in postion to succeed" but they're just not good enough or experienced enough to do so?  What I mean is, a coach can impart all his wisdom and experience on to a player, but if he's not up to the task, and he's all you've got, what then?

PrincetonBlue

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:40 PM ^

That's kind of saying that we got all the players that can't finish onto this one time.  There's no chance in wonderland that's the case.  We've got four stars galore, players one would think are high-achieving types that have a good arrogance about them.  

If we had one or two kids that consistantly underachieve, maybe that's just a problem with the kids.  But when the whole team cannot reach the next level, it is clearly the responsibility of the coaches.

PrincetonBlue

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:35 PM ^

Michigan State and Penn State this year, not to mention Akron and UConn, do not get nearly the same quality of recruits that Michigan does.  Therefore, to me it looks like Michigan should have better execution than any of those teams do.  

Yet, we do not.  Michigan State and Penn State play against us as if they have high-profile recruits banging on their door, begging for an offer.  

Clearly, it's not the players' fault (I consider blaming execution to be blaming the players).  Execution is a problem that is about good days and bad days.  The good guys are bad all the time.  Therefore, it is really a problem of player development and/or game plan.

Blue X2

November 3rd, 2013 at 7:41 PM ^

Hoke should get no slack IMHO.  the Penn State loss was totally on Hoke.  Horrendous decision making at the end of that game created the situation where we had to beat Sparty.  The team was not prepared, period.  Sparty did nothing new but this coaching staff was unable to develop any effective strategy despite two weeks to prepare.  Lewan said they ran the same exact blitzes as they did ini 2011.  So what was our plan to address that?  Have a 190 lb running back block an all american blitzing linebacker.  No excuses.  These are Hoke's players and it is his coaching staff.  He needs to show improvement. period. 

MGoBlueChip

November 3rd, 2013 at 8:07 PM ^

And I don't want to hear the word execution one more time. If your team can't execute something - don't run the play!!! Are we supposed to believe that these coaches can get these guys to run these plays all week in practice, but come game time, they can't run them???? BS. These coaches need to figure out what these kids ARE capable of running and stick to those two or three plays. Coming out after a bye, and looking lost, confused and totally unprepared against a rival that has owned you should get these coaches no slack. I love Brady Hoke's Michigan Man-ness and I love how he tries to take responsibility for everything as the HC, but the bottom line is that we have an average coach at best.

alwaystrueblue

November 3rd, 2013 at 6:20 PM ^

to even think Hoke is going to give any specific ansers to the questions. Even the most basic of questions gets a canned response.

 

Lets face it.....Hoke has no clue what to do in the face of all of this.  He has a team that does NOTHING very well.  At the very best we are barely average in some areas.

 

As for his recruiting prowess...even that is suspect. So far there is no improvement in players that should be showing at least a glimmer of being coached up.  There are big time college programs all over the country doing a lot more with a lot less in terms of the quality of the recruits.  All the Hoke apologists here need to realize that it means NOTHING if you bring in a class of 4 and 5 star recruits if you dont know how to make them into stud college players.

 

This team is a long long ways from being in the same class as OSU.  Its also a long ways from even competing with the likes of MSU, Wisconsin, and fergodsakes we actually lost to Penn St.!  

The rest of this season and the next are looking very bleak regardless of recruiting. And i can see where even some recruits that are paying attention are having 2nd thoughts about joining this team and its apparent lack of direction.