February 1st, 2013 at 6:20 PM ^

He can coach the track team on how to run straight ahead. Gymnasts won't have any trouble on the high-beam. Tennis may have issues playing in the forehand court, however.


February 1st, 2013 at 6:43 PM ^

Nick Baumgardner has a full write-up on this here (LINK)

In his own words:

"I am really excited to return to the University of Michigan in a role where I can work with our coaches and student-athletes as they work to achieve their goals and aspirations"

I am curious to see what zone blocking schemes look like in field hockey. Does the striker have to read the blocks and simply try to get the ball through the first available seem created by the midfielders?


February 1st, 2013 at 7:35 PM ^

I'll be surprised if he doesn't end up on the football staff in a year or so. If it's as ST coach, I'm not going to have a fit. Just so long as he doesn't end up as Borges' replacement.

But a bit of perspective: this isn't like Greg Robinson is back on the athletic campus.


February 1st, 2013 at 11:02 PM ^

Enh.  The fact that you have some sinecure job waiting for you in the Athletic Department also breeds loyalty.  For example during the Carr years we actually had an incredible level of talent in our assistant coaches considering the miserly scale we paid.  That was because the agreement was you didn't really need to fear being fired.  We might move you to some Assistant AD in Charge of Mowing the Grass on the Practice Baseball Field type of job, but there would be a job.  

It's not a bad system when used properly.  Ideally if we continue that tradition and couple it with the Brandon payscale, it can work well.  If you're a hot young assistant coach who is up and coming you can go to Alabama and if for some reason you fail, Saban stakes you out in the desert for the vultures to eat.  Whereas at Michigan you just end up running the Club Sports program.  I'd take the Michigan job and potential to end up supervising broomball over the risk of vultures (which were specially trained by Saban of course)  pecking at my liver.  


February 2nd, 2013 at 8:28 AM ^

How is it a good system if a coach's only fear would be a pay cut for a less stressful position? I know there is a Michigan family, but I think any organization would be better off hiring the best person available for the job, whether that is bringing in somebody from the outside or hiring from within.


February 2nd, 2013 at 8:33 AM ^


actually had an incredible level of talent in our assistant coaches considering the miserly scale we paid .  .  .   "".  Without question that was true during the Bo years, but I can't name any coaches, off-hand, that went on to greatness after leaving Carr's staff, including Hoke, who still has some proving to do.






February 2nd, 2013 at 1:36 PM ^

Since you don't consider "coaching the University of Michigan" as obtaining greatness. So you must mean winning National Championships, which limits Bo's assistants to what, McCartney and Miles? (And, of course, would exclude Bo himself) And the latter didn't do it till after Bo was dead. So we'll see what happens 18 years after Lloyd has retired. With half as many coaching slots since Bo was a head coach more than twice the years Lloyd was.


February 2nd, 2013 at 3:30 PM ^

Miles & McCartney are only two of the many coaches who worked under Bo and went on to be successful head coaches.  A few more, off the top of my head, were Nehlen at WVA, Mo & Lloyd at UofM, Young at Purdue, Cam Cameron at Indiana &  the Miami Dolphins, and Larry Smith at Arizona.  Of LC's assistants, who are you thinking of as being sucessful? 


February 2nd, 2013 at 4:27 PM ^

Hoke isn't successful for coaching Michigan in your eyes, but Mo and Lloyd who only (successfully) coached Michigan are. Either coaching Michigan makes you a success or you're not. (And Hoke has already accomplished more as a head coach than Cameron ever did). So you're skewing the data. (And I think Larry Smith's high point was USC....)

But head coaches - Mike DeBord (hell, if you're going to include Cameron as a head coach), Stan Parrish, Ron English

Coordinators- Vance Bedford, Greg Mattison (ND, Florida, Ravens, Michigan), Stan Parrish, Scott Loeffler, Teryl Austin, Bill Sheridan (Giants, Bucs)

National Championship rings- Vance Bedford, Greg Mattison

Super Bowl rings- Terry Malone, Bill Sheridan, Stan Parrish (maybe Andy Moeller, Teryl Austin)

And that's not counting guys who have been highly regarded position coaches like Jackson, Campbell, or Herrmann. Or been in the NFL. They don't all get jobs in successful places by luck, and are then carried by the other coaches not contributing to the team success.

You can point to Bo, but that's a straw man. Bo was a better coach, coached twice as long, and it's been almost 25 years since he's stopped coaching, so that's almost 4 decades head start for them to achieve with twice as big a pool. Bo was exceptional. Compare the coaching trees of contemporaries like Tressel, or Cooper, or Phil Fulmer. Probably not going to be particularly better or worse.


February 2nd, 2013 at 5:13 PM ^

I did not say Hoke was not successful.  I said he is still unproven.   He was a 0.500 coach prior to the last two years.  You said coaching Michigan meant you had achieved greatness.  Does that include RR?  I'm glad you agree Lloyd's coaching tree pales in comparison to Bo's, especially when measured by the success of their assistants as head coaches.  DeBord, Parrish, and English have had less than stellar records as head coaches. 


February 2nd, 2013 at 7:28 PM ^

Tells me where you're coming from.

You said Lloyd didn't have good coaches because they weren't as good as Bo's; that's just stupid. Neither does Saban's coaching tree, or Urban Meyer's. I'm guessing their coaching staffs have been pretty good.

And no, I don't think Don't Nehlen has anything to be embarrassed about that Rich comes from his tree. The fact that he failed here doesn't mean he's hasn't achieved, being good enough to get the Michigan job.

Still waiting for you to compare trees with someone other than Bo...


February 1st, 2013 at 10:50 PM ^

We give him crap for his unimaginitive offenses and I didn't want him for a head coach. That's a far cry from DeBord being someone we ought to still be jackaling. I'm okay if you want to crack 2 yards and a cloud of 3rd and 6 jokes all night, but let's remember he's a good guy who stayed loyal to Michigan when we were all laughing at him.

Head of Olympic Sports? Fine. I'll take my good men where I can afford them, thank you.


February 1st, 2013 at 11:10 PM ^

Yup.  I hated the DeBoring offense, but it did a fair job of handling the job assignment: "Hey go out there and chew some time off the clock so Woodley and Branch can get a gatorade break and psych themselves up to kill the second string QB".  It could have been a lot worse.

Beside the general concept of the DeBoring offense worked well enough that when Navarre had to come in, the system didn't automatically shit the bed.  I know DeBord was CMU, but I still count that time as DeBoring offense due to the style of play and fact he was around when the foundation was laid for it.

Plus the new DeBord has 5 years of NFL exprience as a posistion coach.  That actually makes me somewhat receptive to the idea of him as a posistion coach if a spot opens.  The players always did develop well under him, they were just used in the most predictable ways possible.  He can develop players for us, just no play calling duties.  


February 2nd, 2013 at 12:08 PM ^

Since I was the last man standing DeBord apologist on the early Mgo commenting system (even Magnus gave up before I did), I must agree with this.

DeBord was infuriating at times and I utterly opposed a promotion to head coach but his record as the OC speaks for itself. As we learned in the RichRod Era, Michigan wasn't immune from failure as many believed and things could get very much worse.

I see absolutely no reason to be even remotely concerned that he has hired on as an administrator.


February 1st, 2013 at 11:04 PM ^

After running 'off tackle left' on their first offensive possession EVERY SINGLE GAME, what do these different squads plan to do under DeBord's watch? My guess? Have more talent than every other team to work with, still lose about 25% of the time but then show each team's true potential in their last game before he leaves, making you hate him THAT MUCH MORE. Just a guess.


February 2nd, 2013 at 1:53 PM ^

Good to see that we take care of our own and DeBoard coming back at least means we have someone who knows the university, its culture, and how we do things the Michigan way.....Relax, this is a good thing!