Exerpts from JUB on WTKA this morning

Submitted by Erik_in_Dayton on November 7th, 2014 at 11:12 AM

John U. Bacon talked to Sam on WTKA this morning.  Here are some of the more interesting things he said:

1. The administration's timeline for picking a new AD may be very different than the fans' timeline.  He referenced athletics/football as being "not Schlissel's thing." 

Neither JUB nor Sam have heard anything about having a new AD by the end of this month.  JUB referred to "very good sources" who haven't mentioned this...Note: JUB was not saying that Michigan won't have a new AD by the end of the month.  He just hasn't heard that it will.

2. He mentioned that, in his opinion, it's easier to hire a new AD quickly than it is a coach.  He also said that it might be more important for the new AD to have Michigan ties than the new coach, because the new AD will have to unify various factions.

3. Hackett, not Schlissel, appears to be running things as far as finding a permanent AD. 

4. He thinks Coach Hoke will be back if he manages to beat OSU and finish 7-5.  He believes Michigan would prefer not to make a change.  EDIT: Let me add one thing:  He was talking about this in the context of saying Michigan is conservative (in a non-political sense) when it comes to making changes with regard to any issue. 

5. He thinks there's a 50-50 chance of landing Jim Harbaugh if Michigan fires Coach Hoke.  He said it's "far from a done deal" and said Harbaugh wouldn't come back to college for any other program.

6. He thinks an experienced AD will be important if Michigan can't land Jim Harbaugh.

7.  He would "bet against" Michigan landing John Harbaugh.

8.  The "Michigan Man factor" will be an issue when hiring a coach but not an overwhelming one.  He thinks Michigan learned from hiring Coach Hoke that being a "Michigan Man" is overrated. 

 

http://www.wtka.com/page.php?page_id=87

Comments

Wolverine Devotee

November 7th, 2014 at 11:28 AM ^

Michigan has beaten the following teams

  • Appalachian State (3-5, lost at home giving up 55 to an FCS school)
  • Miami University (2-8; previously held losing streak that dated back to my junior year of HS)
  • Penn State (4-4; shows no pulse)
  • Indiana (3-5; down to 3rd string QB named Zander)

We all know what will happen in Columbus. There is zero chance they win that game. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't win on Saturday solely due to the fact that it's a road game. 

Example: Rutgers sucks. Michigan made their struggling QB look like a Heisman candidate.

gwkrlghl

November 7th, 2014 at 11:51 AM ^

but for how much Tressel pwned Lloyd and Richrod, Hoke has come awfully close to winning 3 straight vs OSU

2011: #17 Michigan defeats UNR OSU 40-34
2012: #4 OSU defeats #20 Michigan 26-21 (and Michigan had a 2nd half lead)
2013: #3 OSU defeats UNR Michigan 42-41

A few small things different and Hoke is 3-0 vs. OSU. Hoke's teams play well vs. OSU for whatever reason. I bet we will actually cover the spread in the game this year

gwkrlghl

November 7th, 2014 at 5:20 PM ^

All three were close games, which is why I said 'you can't count these'. Just saying the last two years OSU looked vastly better than Michigan coming into the game and Michigan actually played up to them for once. OSU will appear so much better than Michigan this year, but I bet Hoke's team plays up to them again. I'm not saying we'll win, but they'll keep it closer than many would think possible

Wolverine Devotee

November 7th, 2014 at 12:13 PM ^

Sure, it might not be a blowout. But it will be a loss. 

Sure. PSU gave OSU a scare. Here's the thing: it was in University Park at night.

Here is the incredible Hoke road game victory list

  • 2011 Northwestern (42-24)
  • 2011 Illinois (31-14)
  • 2012 Purdue (44-13)
  • 2012 Minnesota (35-13)
  • 2013 UConn (24-21)
  • 2013 Northwestern (27-19 3OT)

None of those teams were close to being ranked. So far, we've been outscored by ranked teams on the road this year by a combined score of 66-11.

bronxblue

November 7th, 2014 at 1:56 PM ^

As a (slight) counter, that is a two-game sample size and both of those teams have 2 losses combined, each against a top-10 team (and in ND's instance, a top-2 team).  This doesn't excuse UM's crappy road performance, but barring a turnaround this weekend OSU is definitely a step below either of those teams this year, at least when UM will play them.

AmishRule

November 7th, 2014 at 1:49 PM ^

I agree with you Wolverine Devotee, but felt you needed to finish with -- "how in the hell do we instantly forget about the tire fire for the past two years?????"

Drives me crazy that this is even a discussion. Sure go ahead and win out agains two B league teams and grab lightening in a bottle and beat OSU. Now let us all forget about the miserable coaching blunders, awful losses and nonsensical cluster we have all seen the last two years up to this point.

People, including Sam, talk about the apocolypse if we don't get Harbaugh. I find that a bit much, as long as they have a very good alternative hire. Now keeping Hoke can make me envision an apocolypse.

We satisfy our ultimate desire of a regime change by assuming we won't beat OSU, so their won't be a run and a possiblity of Hoke returning. What the hell? The decision was easily made after the beat down by MSU, this after the beat down by ND -- two of our other rival games satisfied my reason to say goodbye.

This is where I can only assume certain people that have some connections get used as a tool to see if certain alternative ideas would be acceptable. If this is the case here, those pushing the idea are laughable.

Muttley

November 7th, 2014 at 2:43 PM ^

 

 

Sagarin seems to be a little overly negative on Michigan, as the actual spreads have been a little better than his projections. LSA2000 did a similar analysis using Massey numbers, and if memory serves, he came up w/ 2.5%, which I think is probably a better estimate.

 

Remaining Regular Season Game Win Likelihoods

Proj Spread Opponent Win Likelihood Sagarin Rank Last Week Sagarin Rating
-- Mich --- 70 71 69.21
------ -------- ---------- ------- --- -------
-2.7 @NW 42.8% 71 56 68.77
-3.2 MD 41.7% 40 41 75.53
-20.6 @OSU 8.5% 15 16 86.66

 

Probability Distribution of Final Regular Season Record

Reg Season Record Likelihood
----------------- ----------
4-8 30.5%
5-7 47.5%
6-6 20.5%
7-5 1.5%

 

Sources:

  • Projected Spreads via Sagarin
        http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sagarin/
  • Normal Distribution functions using
      Sigma(ActualMargin-ProjSpread)
      calibrated to minimize sum of squares vs
      Chance of a football team winning vs Spread
  • Resulting Sigma(ActualMargin-ProjSpread) = 15

 

MGoChippewa

November 7th, 2014 at 11:18 AM ^

It would take an average margin of victory of 50 points in the remaining games for me to want Hoke back.  This is also assuming he admitted that the last couple of years he's just been trolling us all as well.

aiglick

November 7th, 2014 at 12:15 PM ^

Are you being serious?

I could accept that if the University were willing to lower prices by 50% across the board. That would at least be in line with the program's successes during this recent rough patch. If some people want to donate to the University to make up the difference great.

Truly, if Hoke is back next year, tickets are not decreased, and the Big House remains full then our fan base will have gotten what it deserved.

Hopefully we won't have to find out next year and we get a homerun hire.

Time, as always, will tell.

Red is Blue

November 7th, 2014 at 1:07 PM ^

I am on the fence regarding renewing next year.  I take one of my kids and they've all gotten to the age that they've got other things going on.  Bringing back Hoke might be enough to push me into the "no, thanks" column.

Usual "find a new team" and "quit drinking and go to bed" snarks accepted.

ST3

November 7th, 2014 at 3:19 PM ^

Look, if we win out (odds of that happening are roughly 1 in 1 million) that means we'd finish 8-5. Meh. I'm assuming if we beat OSU on the road, we'll be good enough to beat a tire fire NU team and win at home against Maryland, a team OSU spanked. Hoke would then be 2-2 against OSU, with two close losses. 

I'm trying to understand the Hoke hatred. What is he screwing up besides time management and concussion-gate, which, frankly, I don't think are fire-able offenses. I think it's reasonable to conclude that he didn't see the hit and wasn't fully aware of the circumstances immediately following the play.

What is his job as head coach? He's delegated the offensive and defensive responsibilities to the coordinators. If the offense and defense are falling short, HE should fire the coordinators. He already did that in the case of Borges, and he's only had 9 games for Nuss, a home-run hire according to this Blog, to implement his system. 

His job as he's defined it, is to set the tone for the team and recruit. I think he's failing - this season - on the former, and succeeding on the latter.

Let's look at the extenuating circumstances. This is the season that was most affected by stretching-gate because we have three, count them, three fifth-year seniors that are contributing to the team, and one of those is a punter. There is no senior leadership. Hoke is at fault for not improving the situation by not having defined captains, but if you only have three 5th year seniors and one of them is a punter, do you really get to be a captain by default? Where's the leadership in that? Do you look to the 4th year seniors and have a couple of them selected? What if they haven't earned it? Again, the pool to choose from is not very deep.

ESPN rosters don't distinguish between SR and 5th year SR, but it was easy to look up rosters there. I found that OSU has 21 SR and 25 JR on the roster (46 total), MSU has 17 SR and 27 JR on the roster (44 total) and Michigan has 9 SR and 20 JR (29 total) on our roster. That's almost a full offensive and defensive starting lineup difference between us and our Eastern Division rivals.

Where am I going with this? I think if you want to avoid the continuous coaching carousel that leads to lost recruiting years, you need continuity on the coaching staff, and you have to give a coach 5 years to fully implement their system. There are exceptions to this, of course. If Hoke loses to OSU, and we finish 6-6 or worse, I'd say he's proven that he's not up to the job. If he can somehow right the ship and finish strong, I'm willing to give him one more year.

And one final thought, I'm a contrarian by nature and all these CC threads, Negative Nancy's and Debbie Downer's that are populating the blog are starting to piss me off.

aiglick

November 7th, 2014 at 4:26 PM ^

Well written and argued. FWIW I didn't neg you and it looks like I misinterpreted your original comment, my apologies. I read it that you would be happy he would be back in the event a miracle occurs and he beats Ohio State. That seems to not be the case.

It's just frustrating that we're in limbo, again, and there is so much uncertaintly. FTR at the end of the day I want the leaders of my favorite team to be successful and it stinks that it seems we have to start this process all over. Although this prosepct is a lot more pleasing than another potential 2013 or 2014 which have both been miserable as you well know.

Almost my entire Michigan Football fandom has been tumultous, and we've had to look up at other programs, including some with far fewer resources, while they have more successful seasons. Anyway, I do wish whoever the football coach is next year (including Hoke if we somehow come to that) has more success so we can have some stability for a few years. It would take a lot of faith and goodwill though to ask our fan base to give Hoke yet one more chance to screw the pooch.

I hope Hackett and Schlissel make a good choice for our collective sanity and well being.

charblue.

November 7th, 2014 at 5:30 PM ^

writes each week, it would be clear why Hoke has lost so much faith with the folks here. This is a team, that as constructed should be lightyears better than it has performed.

To get obliterated by your rivals and shutout by one in a historic last encounter in which your offense was listless, the competitveness almost nil and allowing guys to remain in the game at the end to get beat up without any apparent reason or response, suggests to me that this coach has failed on the expected levels of being a Michigan coach.

I don't think that those who speak against the grain here ought to be negbombed and constantly challenged, because one decision that Hoke made this year that this blog wholeheartedly supported was removal of the former OC, who as it turns out, was able to get much more production out of virtually the same team than his successor has. No matter how you view that or Doug Nussmeier as a coach, and many here are extremely high on the guy, he just hasn't managed to coordinate an offense that produces points. Even if Borges was like the chef of Golden Corral with an infinite variety of choices, and required his beleagured Oline to learn his entire menu which changed weekly, and worked well against both ND and OSU, Nusmeier's direction as resulted in a total of 11 points against Michigan's rivals to this point. That is unacceptable. And becuase Hoke made this change and that is a reflection on him, he is accountable for that choice.

What they have done to their warrior leader at qb, whose ability to lead is highly questionable, because if he could why wouldn't he have been an overwhelming choice for captain instead of what he is, a nominal leader by class, age and position. Still, this kid has been put through so much, I don't even hold that against him.

Hoke is accountable for not defining his mission, for not creating a discernible roadmap to success and for not giving any indication that any thing about this program will improve to championship level. Hence, the questions about player development and game management. And the negative feelings about any future with him at the helm.

mastodon

November 7th, 2014 at 5:57 PM ^

I think Hoke's single biggest problem is that he's been extremely loyal to position coaches he largely accumulated in his MAC years, and they don't seem to be that good.  Some seem pretty bad.

It's pretty obvious that Hoke should have upgraded his posse over the years, and he hasn't.  It's his job as HC to  A) evaluate his staff and recognize when change is necessary, and  B) make the change(s).  Who knows if A has ever occurred, but ultimately, B has not.  At the time I wasn't sure whether Hoke acted unilaterally in firing Borges, but I now think DB forced his hand.

Point is, having a staff that is questionable at best, exposes a major HC flaw in Hoke.  He's either oblivious to it, or is too non-confrontational to make changes.  Either way...not good.  The non-confrontation makes sense to me with respect to the who-gives-a-fuck attitude that's allowed to exist on the sideline, and a too-frequent lack of intensitly.  I think he's afraid to lay discipline down on his team, or any attempts are toothless.  Can't have that in a HC.

I like Hoke and have wanted hijm to work out, giving every benefit of every doubt, and made all the excuses.  But when you find yourself tihnking "man, if he'd just replace the whole staff" - and I've thought that - you gotta crack the smelling salts and realize he's got to go too.

WolvinLA2

November 7th, 2014 at 1:05 PM ^

I could accept Hoke being back if we win out.  I wouldn't be excited about him being back, but I sure would be excited about winning out, especially winning in Columbus.  Recruiting would take a step back for a year at least, but it would be a strong finish to the season, especially if we win our bowl, and we'd return a lot of talent for 2015.  

I don't expect this to happen, but it wouldn't be the end of the world.