Michigan AD: New coach Brady Hoke already helping unite U-M family

Submitted by CHI_BLU on February 16th, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Detroit News article stated here.

 

Link Here

Comments

profitgoblue

February 16th, 2011 at 4:52 PM ^

I didn't attend Michigan Law (undergrad only) but I've practiced corporate bankruptcy law (all aspects) for 10 years at a pretty high level and am happy to answer whatever questions you have.  Send Brian an email with your email and ask him to forward it to me.  He's done it in the past and hopefully he won't mind doing so again.

Go Blue Eyes

February 16th, 2011 at 4:41 PM ^

Listening to Michael Taylor and his stories of Corwin Brown, Tyrone Wheatley, etc. not getting calls back from the new staff regarding coaching positions probably means there will be some ex players that won't be happy with the new staff.

michgoblue

February 16th, 2011 at 4:49 PM ^

Taylor has been on a rant about this for weeks, now.  His issue is pretty much an argument that we should have more African-American coaches, and that guys like Corwin and Tyrone would have satisfied that need.  He is an asshat who is stirring controversy where none exists, especially when (1) Michigan has 2 African-American coaches out of its 10 coaches, as well as an African American hear of recruiting, and an African American strength staffer, and (2) Michigan's percentage of minority coaches is right in line with other universities.

As to Corwin and Tyrone:

Corwin - not only is he generally regarded as an average DB coach, but he negatively recruited against M by saying that had he gotten into ND, he would have gone there over us. 

Tyrone - loved him as a RB.  He has been coaching all of 2 seasons.  At EMU.  With limited success.  And we have a RB coach.  Who is also black.  Not sure why this is even an issue.

As to Hoke not returning calls, he was a tab busy in January, you know with trying to cram an entire recruiting period into 20 days and all.

Taylor needs to go away.

ken725

February 16th, 2011 at 5:06 PM ^

I think the Rooney Rule has done great things for the NFL.  At the same time it must also feel insulting to the candidates that are never really considered.

For example, this year the Cowboys hired Jason Garrett to be the head coach.  Even before he was hired everyone knew that he was getting the job, and sources were leaking this information before it became official.  The only reason why they couldn't announce his hiring earlier is that they had not interviews an African American candidate.  It must be insulting to know that you were interviewed just to satisfy the rule and never really had a shot at the job.

dennisblundon

February 16th, 2011 at 5:22 PM ^

I think I am going to save all the Hoke saved the world talk until I see some results next season. He has my full support but I am not going to give him a tug until we get that 9th or 10th win next year.

lexus larry

February 16th, 2011 at 5:40 PM ^

All I could gather from "the process" and the attendant trumpeting of the arrival of BH was, the fractured fanbase = annoyed/annoying former players and head coaches. 

Those who, while proclaiming no one is above "The team,"  preferred to put themselves above "The team."

During the process, DB went out of his way to make sure the unwashed masses knew our places.  If we weren't former head coaches or players, our opinion was best left unstated.  Keep paying dollah dollah bills for a 2012 home slate of tomato cans, but shut up while doing so.

Was there disappointment with the results of the 2010 season?   Sure.  Was there optimism that 18 year-olds who'd been torched crispy on D would become better in 2011?  I thought so.  Was there more optimism that in our QB, BT OPOTY, we finally would have a guy starting that position who'd started most of the games the year before?  Again, I thought so.

Who knows the kinds of BS that goes on, day-to-day, in Schembechler?  I don't, and neither does anyone else, really.  Except those on the inside.  But there's plenty of smoke to indicate that there were quite a few people who were "family members" and wouldn't stop crying until "cousin Brady" got a chance...

Family united, indeed.  Spin, DB. Spin.  Sell that pizza, I mean, family unity!

BlueVoix

February 16th, 2011 at 6:13 PM ^

"Was there optimism that 18 year-olds who'd been torched crispy on D would become better in 2011?  I thought so."

You may have thought so.  A few alums I knew may have thought so too.  But the vast majority of our fanbase, the Big Ten, and the country didn't.

"But there's plenty of smoke to indicate that there were quite a few people who were "family members" and wouldn't stop crying until "cousin Brady" got a chance..."

I highly doubt that is the case.  Former players like Brady because he appears to be a good coach and motivator, as well as a good recruiter.  There is a difference between saying, we like this guy, and pulling a Michael Taylor or Ron English type of deal.

Wolfman

February 16th, 2011 at 6:58 PM ^

So many factors and/or factions became public during LC's last few years and his immediate successor's tenure.

There were too many that believed that RR should have won immediately and, still to date, fail to realize he didn't have a remodeling job on his hands; he had a fricking full scale renovation project.  To exacerbate the problem, that faction thought he should have stuck with LC's philosophy instead of implementing his immediately.  I thought the time was perfect for a wholesale change inasmuch as we had what amounted to a jv offense anyway.

But Brandon, judging by his decisions, i.e. firing and then hiring someone that will probably get us back to .750 and out of the NC hunt by late Sep early Oct., will be satisfied whereas those that saw the need for implementation of 21st century fb and a possible chance at stepping away from the safety and into greatness will be left wondering what might have been. And tha'ts the simple truth. 

The only thing all factions have in common, imo, is they want BH to be successful. That may be a stretch because as strange as it sounds, I think it's absolutely true that many were hoping for RR's failure, somehow believing they could claim to be a Michigan fan and wish for losses at the same time. That's a fucking ridiculous notion, but it's all too true.

It's my belief that things are set up well for BH, especially the schedule for next year. He'll inherit the fastest team UM has ever fielded, on both sides of the ball and, finally, a  somewhat overall experienced offense, whose qb just touched the surface of his potential greatness last season, his first.

Graduation of  lbers will force what should have happened last season and the best defenders will finally take their place in the middle of UM's defense.  The idiot that claimed "BH should be successful and win 6 games" apparently didn't look at the schedule.  Judging by offense alone and what has to be an improved defense, a perusual of that schedule indicates a realistic expectation of 9 wins and that would make most very happy.

A reunification, especially when so many are pissed that Brandon didn't let RR finish his project, is still a ways off imo.

But unlike others, I could never conceive of hoping a Michigan coach fails.  Sadly though, a return to .750 football  will be seen as where Michigan should be by so many easily satisfied, whereas so many others believe winning 33 games in a three year span would have become what leaders and best should actually aspire to.  And being among that group, I can't be satisfied with a return to the past.  That's almost a guarantee to be out of the BCS NC picture simply because other conferences, most notably the SEC, play by rules that those with a modicum of ethical standards just won't be able to compete with unless they dare to try to win using a proven, atthough not universally shared offensive philosophy.

M-Wolverine

February 16th, 2011 at 7:33 PM ^

Because it's what they believe, so it must be true.
<br>
<br>And if you've REALLY paid attention to these boards, there's a faction who are hoping Hoke fails. Because they'd rather say "I told you so" than be wrong. I'd name names, but it's just disingenuous to say you haven't seen it.
<br>
<br>And I'd love to see you quote some 40 times, to match how we'll be fielding "the fastest Michigan team, ever". Because other than at QB, I'm not sure we're historically faster at any position. Maybe O-Line (yippee!!). One of our failings was that we were supposed to be speed speed speed...and have receivers and running backs who get caught from behind. And DBs who don't close. Check out all the "Hello" posts...they're not being listed with world class speed.
<br>
<br>Don't get me wrong, it's not the slowest team ever. But we've had faster RBs, WRs, DBs, even LBs. It seems you're believing more than reporting.

Monocle Smile

February 16th, 2011 at 9:58 PM ^

this Michigan offense (NOT defense...no one besides Wolfman has ever said that) doesn't have a considerably higher average speed than any other Michigan offense in the past 50 years, you should probably get your eyes checked.

"speed" doesn't mean "never get caught from behind." Barry Sanders got caught from behind. Stonum and Odoms don't get caught from behind. Full-speed Fitz and Shaw don't get caught from behind. Denard absolutely does not get caught from behind at full speed.

Yeah, we've had faster receivers and running backs...like twice a decade.

BlueVoix

February 16th, 2011 at 8:00 PM ^

"Sadly though, a return to .750 football  will be seen as where Michigan should be by so many easily satisfied, whereas so many others believe winning 33 games in a three year span would have become what leaders and best should actually aspire to"

So under Rodriguez, we'd be going 11-2 or 11-3 every year?  I thought you said we were going to be winning national titles.

"But unlike others, I could never conceive of hoping a Michigan coach fails...And being among that group, I can't be satisfied with a return to the past."

So, what are you going to do?

"That's almost a guarantee to be out of the BCS NC picture simply because other conferences, most notably the SEC, play by rules that those with a modicum of ethical standards just won't be able to compete with unless they dare to try to win using a proven, atthough not universally shared offensive philosophy."

lolwut.  We're never going to win the national championship because we aren't running Rodriguez's offense?  Rodriguez never won a national championship with his offense, so I must be missing something here.  Malzahn just won a NC, but his offense does not equal Rod's offense.  Nor does Bama's.  Or LSU's.  Or Florida's.

Tater

February 16th, 2011 at 7:13 PM ^

Here is the best-case scenario:

MIchigan has a very good season, winning ten games including a bowl.  Michigan then has a top five recruiting class.  DB practices his smug looks in the mirror, thumps his chest, takes credit for everything, and then leaves to pursue his political ambitions.  Hoke is then able to do his job without having to carry a giant remora around.

Everybody wins.

VaUMWolverine

February 17th, 2011 at 8:53 AM ^

of what you think of or how you feel about DB, we all want Hoke to succeed, yes??? I cant believe I even have to ask that....

If/when he does, there will be no stopping DB. You think he's hard to take now...

But that being said, I can live with his arrogance if the football team is winning. Winning cures everything. Thats what I've always heard and thats what I believe.