Hardware Sushi

February 4th, 2011 at 11:09 AM ^

I guess you could say MaizeNBrew Dave didn't exactly agree with Brian. I always enjoy a good disagreement between these two.

I am preparing for an entire offseason of disagreement....

BLOGFIGHT!!!!!!

wlubd

February 4th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^

I don't want to start rehashing my beefs with "The Process" because it won't benefit anyone so I'll just say this.

It was a good recruiting class, It probably would have been better if RR were retained/canned in November, and I still have no confidence in Dave Brandon as AD.

I also think the article completely missed the point but I'm sure Brian will address that.

Beauford Bixel

February 4th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^

So yeah, I'm one of the writers over at MaizenBrew, and can most assuredly tell you that the post written by Dave was not designed to increase traffic or link-troll over to Mgoblog.  I don't wholeheartedly agree with Dave - this is the fun of having multiple writers on the same blog - and I'm not coming over here to explain or defend the post.  It's out there, and there aspects that I generally feel are agreeable, and other aspects that I feel are a bit hyperbolic (is that a word?)

However, I've seen a few posts in this thread about how MnB wants traffic so we're attacking the super-power Michigan blog, and I can promise you this is not the case.  Dave can come over here, if he wants, to defend his thesis or give reasons why he wrote the post the way he did, but a traffic bump from mgoblog links is not one of them.

MaizeAndBlueManGroup

February 4th, 2011 at 11:16 AM ^

I agree with Brian about the disaster that was "The Process". However, it also does seem like Brian has been searching for reasons to be negative. To me, this was most obvious when he was complaining about the black-ness of our staff. Its almost like because he said there was a "zero percent chance" Hoke would be hired, he is trying to put a negative spin on everything just to justify that quote. IMO, being wrong about the "zero percent chance" doesn't hurt Brian's credibility at all so there is no need for him to continue with this criticism for the sake of criticising.

MattisonMan

February 4th, 2011 at 12:08 PM ^

It seems to me that at this point, mgoblog is appropriately positive about a recruiting class that ranks in the 20-25 range.  The enduring gripe I've seen is the stark contrast over the media swooning over Hoke vs. the incessant negativity towards RR when he was here.

As for the process, Hoke was without question CHOICE C or lower, regardless of how you feel about him.  I think it would've all gone smoother if it had just moved faster...less time lost recruiting, less appearance of us being desperate, etc.  So yeah, I'd say that's a fair reason to be upset at Brandon.  But I don't think the editors at this blog deserve to be called negative nancy.

 

jmblue

February 4th, 2011 at 3:30 PM ^

People need to give up this idea that RR faced heavy scrutiny from the local press immediately after taking the job.  The truth is, the vast majority of stories about him in the Michigan media during the 2007-08 offseason were positive.  The WV press went after him, but that was dismissed as sour grapes.  It was only after the 3-9 disaster that the knives started to come out.  You can argue that it was too early for the media to turn on him then. but that doesn't change the fact that at this same point in his tenure, RR was well-received here.

 

CWoodson

February 4th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^

There is no reason to think Brian is trying to keep credibility here and thus is being negative for negativity's sake.  He thinks that Hoke should not have been considered for the job based on his record, and WOULD not have been considered but for his being a MICHIGAN MAN.  This is not unreasonable.

The people being ridiculous right now are calling out 1) anyone who isn't saying HOKE IS GOD before he coaches a game and 2) anyone who notes this recruiting class is sort of mediocre (though I'm impressed Hoke pulled it together).  There is reason to be pessimistic - it's not fun, but it's there.

When Maize and Brew supports the process primarily by arguing Hoke is a good coach (because they like him) and is a Michigan Man (which they like) and is a "stellar recruiter" (which LOL - no evidence of anything beyond competence).  Be optimistic all day, but there's little evidence that they're right.  They defend the process by attacking strawmen like "we could have had Harbaugh" - nobody intelligent argues that.  They have no explanation for why Patterson wasn't seemingly considered, and their justification for Brandon's late decision was that RR's tenure logically hinged ON THE OUTCOME OF A SINGLE GAME.  Give me a break.  I truly hope Hoke works out, and I'm pretty optimistic, but believing he's a good guy doesn't make anyone who questioned this hire irrational.

wlubd

February 4th, 2011 at 4:10 PM ^

If the outcome of the game actually mattered to Brandon then he's far dumber then most people think IMO.

This is a man who for all intents and purposes seemed quite competent and said all the right things during the season that one game didn't make a difference in the grand scheme of things. And it shouldn't.

Yes, the bowl game sucked, but there is no justification for leaving RR up in the air for 5-6 weeks before the game. Reality is, DB's decision should have been made the Sunday or Monday after the Ohio State game because that is when the season really ended. What exactly was RR supposed to prove in a bowl game against an SEC opponent (who was frankly a lot better than us), after a 5-6 week layoff with no f'n idea if he'd have a job come January 2nd?

It's assumed that the bowl game didn't matter because in no realm of the imagination should it have mattered. Either way, Brandon comes out looking bad, for A) nearly torpedoing the program by making a coaching change in January or B) Basing his opinion on the bowl game and going back on everything he said during the season, as well as being a complete moron.

wlubd

February 4th, 2011 at 5:16 PM ^

You know what?

I pulled up the response which really didn't answer what I was saying and was prepared to answer it but was too frustrated so I decided to just delete my response and neg you instead.

I have no interest in digging up this argument again. It's done, Hoke's the coach and has done an admirable job so far. That is notwithstanding the actions of our AD, as opposed to because of.

Brandon may have been a great CEO but I can't in good faith trust him to be the athletic director of this university after that debacle. He can prove me wrong but it'll take a lot.

That's it for me. I'm keeping my mouth shut on coachin search/process talk. Too irritating for me.

JeepinBen

February 4th, 2011 at 11:13 AM ^

He doesn't actually defend DB at all. All he says is "this class is damn good, so quit yer bitchin'"

Misleading title, but yes, some optimism never hurts in February

 

FreddieMercuryHayes

February 4th, 2011 at 11:14 AM ^

Well no denying where he stands. I think that has been covered many times, and even in such strong terms by posters here. At this point, I'm in the camp that I no longer care. If we end up kicking ass, then everyone is happy and no one cares about the process. If we don't, then heads will roll and we can start this debate up again and learn from out mistakes.
<br>
<br>I for one, want to be happy and not care about the process.

zeda_p

February 4th, 2011 at 12:59 PM ^

At this point, I think most of us are just burnt out and want to watch a team play, you know.. play well.

I'm all up for blog on blog mega super awesomeness discussions.. but this whole issue -- probably for the better -- has me saying 'meh, time to get some food and get back to work' more than anything else.

BlueMk1690

February 4th, 2011 at 11:15 AM ^

how did that article really address the concerns about the process? 

Yeah I think Brady Hoke did a good job salvaging the class from potential disaster but we're not working for the Hozni Mubarak information department here, look at the offer lists of the kids we signed. 

They may  all turn out to be great football players but within the paradigm of recruiting and signing day it's at best a good class and by no means a great class. And Maize'n'Brew Dave doesn't know any better what the future holds for them and us than we do.

The whole argument about the process being bad is that an earlier decision would have assisted Hoke or any other incoming head coach tremendously. I don't think it would have been a superb class even if Hoke had come in on December 5th or something but it could very well have been a better one.

 

Huntington Wolverine

February 4th, 2011 at 11:19 AM ^

"It's a great class because it fills the holes on defense" ignores the reality that these recruits will fill holes in 2-3 years, not next year.  Next years holes will be filled by RR recruits that are no longer freshmen...

I think Hoke will do well here at Michigan but I also think RR's team was ready to turn the corner next year regardless of who the HC was and with or without GERG.  But I'm excited to see what Mattison will do with some really talented players on defense because even though I think GERG could've done better next year with more experience in the secondary, Mattison is in a whole 'nother league.

blueloosh

February 4th, 2011 at 11:22 AM ^

Maize and Brew seems very passionate and heartfelt but completely uninformed about the quality of our most recent recruiting classes.

Try to pair these two statements from that post:

  1. "Michigan had recruited decently over the last two years."
  2. "...when Michigan inks a great recruiting class [in 2011] and people are blaming the AD..."

We recruited very well in 2008, 2009, and 2010.  The 2011 class, to use the dramatic language usually employed for RR, was probably the 'worst in Michigan history' (that being the history of more-than-just-Lemming recruiting rankings...2002 or so).

I don't think it was an objectively lousy class.  I like a lot of the players, and have high hopes for just about every guy.  But if we are judging according to the high historical standards of our program, it was a down year.  That is ok.  There were many factors that made it a tremendously challenging year.  For someone to think Brandon's timing was not one of those factors...that's just willfully illogical.  Of course it was.  That doesn't necessarily mean Brandon made the wrong long-term decision for the program, but it most certainly did not help either RR or Hoke try to assemble and hang onto a class.

I'm glad to see that people are now so adamant about program loyalty--it's a helpful trait.  But this argument seems to get some very basic factual assumptions wrong.

lunchboxthegoat

February 4th, 2011 at 3:52 PM ^

I question your claim that you ever cleared the NCAA clearinghouse and not because you were 'lazy' you're merely lacking intellectual capacity. THAT was the point. You outright painted every single person who ever failed to make it past the clearinghouse as lazy. That is incredibly ignorant. People have learning disabilities, people have extenuating circumstances and some people just don't have the intellectual capacity to do so. You stating they are simply lazy is irresponsible, ignorant, and offensive. I'm going to stop replying to you and avoid your comments like the plague going forward because as I once heard "never argue with fools because at a distance you can't tell who's who."

GWUWolverineFan

February 5th, 2011 at 10:58 AM ^

If you'd like I can link you to my bio which I think is still archived on my school page. I think it's funny you'd find it hard to believe I made it through the clearinghouse, as every single division one athlete, has.
<br>
<br>Demar Dorseys problem was academics clearly were not a priority.
<br>
<br>And those with learning disabilities are treated differently than those without. Extenuating circumstances can lead to an appeal of findings, but unless you can explain how there was no way you could maintain a 2.0 or whatever minimum it was (this was 6 years ago for me) and how you somehow got screwed of graduating high school..
<br>
<br>You sir are a jackass, who definitely was not a collegiate student athlete, maybe in club quidditch, but not varsity.