I have seen a variety of arguments against Hoke being the best possible coach for the job, etcetera, and I wanted to take just a minute to go over a few that stood out to me and see what you all thought as well.
1) Dave Brandon's choosing of Hoke was specifically related to him being a "Michigan Man" and not to whom was the best coach for the job.
We do not know what Brandon’s method for choosing was. How can one imply that “Michigan Man” was of vital importance when Brandon specifically said he was referred to Hoke by MANY people, inside and outside the program?
2) Michigan is an arrogant program for choosing from their past, assuming that will work out best for their future.
Again, the impression that this is an arrogant program assumes that Brady Hoke was hired PRIMARILY for his experience at Michigan, rather than that being, as Brian said he thought/hoped, a relevant bullet point. Keep in mind, if recent performance is much more important than past, as Brian said specifically, then Brady’s recent, excellent outcome years at Ball State and SDSU should have much more relevance on his selection than past years. Likewise, Rodriguez recent failure years should have much more impact than his past major successes.
3) The hiring of Hoke to take Michigan football back to being "Michigan football" means a return to the Carr era way of things.
Because he was an assistant under Carr does not mean he does everything the way Carr does. He has been stated several times seems to have a variety of flexibility Carr never did.
4) Hoke will attempt to out execute without out recruiting.
The premise that Hoke will not recruit well enough to compete with the major programs is ridiculous. What is the basis for that? His recruiting at Ball State and SDSU? Not relevant. Recruiting at those institutions is difficult because of the lower tier of the schools themselves. Because he’s not a big name? As I recall, Jim Tressel fresh out of YSU recruited VERY well.
5) Michigan's goals are returning to the Carr area orientation.
You have a short memory. Michigan had other coaches before Lloyd Carr and getting back to Michigan football does NOT mean raising the ghost of Carr.
These are some of the primary arguments I've seen against Hoke, and they all seem to be full of holes and assumptions. Hiring Brady Hoke does NOT mean rehiring Lloyd Carr. He's not the same guy, even if he did work under him.