How do we evaluate Hoke's first year?
So my housemate and I were having a conversation regarding the coaching change. I made it clear that i was a huge Rich Rod supporter, and wish he was still the head coach. My housemate stated that he couldn't wait until Hoke won 8 games this year, to show me that he was the right choice.
This is the exact attitude that I disagree with. I have 100% confidence that Rich would have won at least 8 games this year, followed by 9-10-11 win seasons every year after. With that said, now that Hoke is the coach, I obviously completely support him, and do indeed hope that he wins a NC here.
So my question is, what do we look for in this first year from Hoke in order to begin to evaluate his progress?
February 18th, 2011 at 6:06 PM ^
February 18th, 2011 at 6:07 PM ^
We evaluate it by looking at the W-L column
February 18th, 2011 at 6:07 PM ^
February 18th, 2011 at 6:10 PM ^
It'll be hard to TRULY evaluate until we are seeing what he does with his own recruits, etc.
However, if he has a worse year (somehow) than last year (with the talent he has), there will be critical evaluation.
February 18th, 2011 at 9:24 PM ^
Do you mean when his recruits are upper classmen or when they are freshmen and sophomores?
February 18th, 2011 at 6:10 PM ^
He seems to have his mind set on winning B1G championships so I guess I do too.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:58 PM ^
I am stealing it. "Giving you full credit of course."
February 18th, 2011 at 7:31 PM ^
Dude.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:13 PM ^
i belive RRods team wouldve won at least 9 games next year before the bowl game. For me to say Hoke was the right choice next year they need to win at least 8 and beat MSU and OSU.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:29 PM ^
February 18th, 2011 at 6:13 PM ^
I'll evaluate him like I would any other coach. By his fashion sense and the use of the word "tremendous". So far he's not doing so well.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:17 PM ^
please tell me your joking. i think you are but i've seen some stupid people say very identical things and be dead serious.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:22 PM ^
yes, because he is actually gonna evaluate a coach because of what words he uses in his vocabulary.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:29 PM ^
He must be joking. I've heard Hoke say tremendous A LOT.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:21 PM ^
whoosh!
February 18th, 2011 at 10:00 PM ^
Did you see that? Something just passed overhead!
February 18th, 2011 at 6:59 PM ^
Is the use of tremendous bad? The guy uses the word all the time.
I don't think you can look at just wins and losses, though it's a big thing. I want to see how the defense improves, if the offense is worse, how recruiting is. With any coaching change, you might have a step back, but wins and losses sometimes don't tell the entire story. If our defense improves a good amount and we have a good recruiting class, then I think he can get away with a 7-5 season. I hope he does better, but I think there are other tangible things to look at than just wins and losses.
February 18th, 2011 at 9:32 PM ^
That's exactly how my brother-in-law (State fan) is evaluating him. The first thing he said to me this weekend, "I saw Brady Hoke walking around in sweatpants the other day." I guess State fans have higher standards than sweatpants for their coaches. I personally could care less, but that's just me.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:22 PM ^
Being better than 3-9 overall and 2-6 in conference.
To me, though, it seems as if the expectations are to return to what Michigan was back when Lloyd left. With that, it involves an 8-4 record with a bowl win. Hopefully the 4 losses won't include any horrors and such.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:31 PM ^
maybe the theme for 2011-12 can be "A Return to Mediocrity"
February 18th, 2011 at 7:41 PM ^
Is that better or worse than "A Continuation of Crapulence?"
February 18th, 2011 at 6:25 PM ^
You won't get a lot of data this year. The W-L column is good as always, but in this case, I think discipline / mechanical improvements might mean more.
February 18th, 2011 at 6:46 PM ^
It would be good to see defensive guys do what was called in the days of Yost "tackling."
February 18th, 2011 at 6:36 PM ^
BH drops about 30 lbs. He really does need to shed some weight. It's not good for the joints to be carrying that extra baggage around at his age.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:22 PM ^
Is that you, Charlie Weis?!
February 18th, 2011 at 6:40 PM ^
is the team better at the end of the year than at the beginning of the year?
February 18th, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^
February 18th, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^
You dont. You expect the worst and hope for the best, knowing that given time Michigan will win 75% of their games and EVENTUALLY close the gap with OSU. And this time, you're going to freaking APPRECIATE it!
February 18th, 2011 at 6:54 PM ^
February 18th, 2011 at 7:37 PM ^
Have you even looked at the 2012 schedule? It's kind of brutal. I wouldn't have even expected ten wins with Rich Rod with that schedule.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:50 PM ^
February 18th, 2011 at 6:58 PM ^
I will be most interested in how the defense improves through the season. I think this is the season when many young men on the defense will grow and develop into a solid group by season's end.
My goals for Hoke this season:
1.) Beat OSU at home.
2.) Win at least 8 games.
3.) Our conference record to be at least .500.
4.) Our defense to improve to within the top 60 defenses in div 1.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:10 PM ^
How do we evaluate Hoke? It will be a good sign if Brian submits a post-OSU game UFR this year. If we are mired in a post-apocalyptic state after getting demolished, demoralized, and manhandled by the Buckeyes again, there will be no UFR. No UFR=bad evaluation.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:24 PM ^
I'm hoping for mega muppet video clips on the site after the last game of the season.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:30 PM ^
It's going to persist throughout this coming year, and probably well into the next.
This particular post is well put, and doesn't make me want to stick my finger in my eye, but the way it is framed does boil down to "How much credit should Rodriguez get for this season?" People are going to want to weigh in on this question, but I just don't care. Coaches matter, but THEY DON'T PLAY. The players have a new coach, but it's still the same team. That's what I'm interested in.
Seriously, though, here's the answer: Hoke will be evaluated on the performance of the defense, which is what he was brought in to address.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:30 PM ^
1) be competetive against teams with a number beside their name.
2) not regress on offense
3) the D overachieve.
4) a trip to a bowl (lower level bowl a win, upper level bowl be competetive [a win wold be better, but whatever])
5) a good recruiting class.
If BH delivers these things I would call this first year a success.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:32 PM ^
We evaluate Hoke on a game by game basis and then complete the story when the season (including a bowl game, we hope) is over. DB already taught us how to do this, right?
February 18th, 2011 at 7:50 PM ^
90% of success/failure in college football has to do with evaluating and recruiting the kids who end up becoming good football players when they reach their junior/senior seasons. On that front, we'll probably know very little about the kind of program Brady Hoke can/will build here at Michigan for quite some time. Recruiting rankings will offer some predictions and we'll start to see the occasional underclassmen cracking the lineup to give us a few hints, but nothing definitive will really be known for another 4-5 years.
Hiring coordinators and in-game strategy and all the other things fans obsess about are really only going to impact the season a game or two in one direction or another. Before the 2006 season, Coach Carr (almost certainly handcuffed by a cheapskate athletic department, so he isn't entirely to blame) made two very lackluster coordinator hires (promoting Ron English from DB coach and re-promoting Mike Debord). That team still went 11-2 because Carr had recruited a ridiculous collection of talent that made up the junior/senior class that year (Long, Hart, Henne, Breaston, Crable, Woodley, Harris, Burgess, Hall, Branch, etc.). The seasons before and after that one weren't as good because the talent in those junior/senior classes wasn't as good, not because the coaching was better or worse (if anything the 2007 team stole a game or two considering all the injuries they had to deal with).
As far as Hoke is concerned, he doesn't personally bring a whole lot to the table on that strategery front (has never been a coordinator and has taken a hands off approach with the guys he hires to run his offense/defense). On the other hand, I think if Carr had hired Borges/Mattison instead of Debord/English, that team could very easily have won the national title. At this point I'm very optimistic that Hoke will end up getting as many wins as possible out of the team he inherits in the near future. As for building his own program here at Michigan, we'll have to wait a while to see, but I expect most observers will have their opinion of the guy locked in place long before that day comes.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:56 PM ^
I really don't think we can evaluate him based on his first year really. Even Saban sucked in his first year at Bama, and that dude is probably the best coach in college football whether you like him or not. We just need to be patient.
February 18th, 2011 at 8:02 PM ^
He is implementing a new system so there will be some growing pains (but not 2008-type growing pains, god forbid).
He also will have a team that is not all freshmen and sophomores, so the ole' "wait till next year" to see some success won't fly.
BH 1st year success =
- Min 7-5 overall
- Min .500 Big Ten
- Win over two of the Bigs - OSU, MSU, NEB, IA, ND
- Still in the conversation for the B1G West (or whatever the F it's called) at the end of October
- Competitive New Years Day Bowl game
- No blowout losses
- A pulse on D
- A competent O that uses Denard effectively
- No punts on 3rd and 6 at the opponent's 35 yard line
- Some Field Goals
February 18th, 2011 at 8:02 PM ^
He needs to beat Michigan State. Got no problem saying RR would have done (and if he hadn't even this RR supporter would've turned), and Hoke needs to as well. Preferably into the ground.
February 18th, 2011 at 8:25 PM ^
Really? I know its important to beat Sparty so we can return to being big brother, but i think a win over OSU is much more important. Maybe that was a given in your post though.
Personally, I'd really like a win over Nebraska. Maybe more so than a win over Sparty. Michigan-Nebraska is going to develop into a big rivalry, in my opinion, and I want to see a win to start (kind of like in the PSU series).
February 18th, 2011 at 8:47 PM ^
I think important in this case means "must". We aren't expected to beat OSU, so if we lose we really shouldn't get our panties in a bunch. Let me ask you this, be honest, after which game were you more depressed MSU or OSU? I'd argue a majority of the ppl here would say MSU upset them more
February 18th, 2011 at 9:41 PM ^
Basically, yeah. Lloyd lost to OSU more than RR did this decade. RR got fired for not beating MSU, essentially. Because that's a baseline expectation. Part of our identity as Michigan is a rivalry with OSU, and beating MSU except in the event of improper timekeeper intervention. It's like: Beat OSU, but don't lose to MSU, if that makes any sense.
February 18th, 2011 at 11:10 PM ^
February 19th, 2011 at 12:00 AM ^
I grew up in Ohio and i went to College in Michigan. When i lived in Michigan i was very surprised at how big the MSU rivalry is. I think it is bigger for the fans because when you live in Michigan you have to deal with all the damn Sparty fans. Living in Ohio the OSU game is bigger because you have to deal with all the damn OSU fans.
February 18th, 2011 at 8:23 PM ^
There's an awful lot of neg-banging going on early in this thead, and it confuses me.
Question: How do we evaluate Hoke's first season?
Answer: By how many wins he has.
I don't find that to be snarky or overly simplistic. Sure it could be expanded upon, but ultimately his win total at the end of the season will be the first thing we look at.
If we win 3 games this season, I don't give a shit if the 9 losses are all by 1 point in overtime, I don't think many people will consider it a successful season.
February 18th, 2011 at 8:25 PM ^
You asked for it.
February 18th, 2011 at 8:34 PM ^
Why I oughta....
February 18th, 2011 at 8:27 PM ^