SDSU 2011 - No cupcake
The Aztecs visit the Big House to close the non-conference schedule next year, and Hoke's team is no pushover. They've lost three games this year, but they're a 3 point loss to Mizzou, a 3 point loss to a pretty good BYU team and yesterday's loss to TCU where they jumped out to an early lead and gave TCU a scare late. Next year they'll return their QB and top rusher though their top WRs graduate. They have the 41st ranked defense but only lose 4 seniors. It seems like this game will be a greater challenge than we probably anticipated when we scheduled the game.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:11 AM ^
Good. Cupcakes are for girly birthday parties. Give me a test any day of the week.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:36 AM ^
November 14th, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^
made out of BICEPS!
/powerthirst
November 14th, 2010 at 11:12 AM ^
Ann Arbor 3-0
they play Cal-Poly, Army and Washington State, if not 3-0 I'm not worried.
November 14th, 2010 at 3:59 PM ^
Cal Poly beat SDSU the last two times they've played ('06 &'08 I believe) though I don't think it will happen again next year.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:15 AM ^
You're assuming it will still be Hoke's team, which is looking like a longshot at this point
November 14th, 2010 at 11:16 AM ^
fair enough. but even if he leaves, his players won't. and those players have proved to be pretty good this year.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:47 AM ^
you'd probably have said the same thing of cincinatti coming into this season
November 14th, 2010 at 1:17 PM ^
But Brady Hoke =/= Brian Kelly.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:30 PM ^
Well we know they're not the same person. Are you saying Kelly is an amazing coach and Hoke is just good? That's why Cincy sucks so bad this year?
November 15th, 2010 at 4:30 AM ^
I'm saying that Kelly is a better coach than Hoke and using their respective records at their past stops as evidence for that. I guess the idea is that the drop-off from SDSU with Hoke to SDSU without Hoke would not be as bad as Cincinnati with Kelly to Cincinnati without Kelly.
On a related point, what's the deal with MGoPosters' assuming absolutism every time a claim is made? It doesn't have to be that way.
November 14th, 2010 at 2:24 PM ^
Generally speaking, teams that downgrade their coaching are worse on the field as well.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:31 AM ^
I can certainly see where he'd be a candidate for one of the open jobs (with Minnesota being the obvious one), but calling his return a "longshot" seems premature.
- - -
He seems to be getting it done there. I've always viewed SDSU as a sleeping (mid-major) giant. I'd think that a decent coach (like, presumably, Hoke) could do well there with the 3-star SoCal run-off that's not claimed by the Pac Ten schools.
- - -
Aside: I wonder if they exposed a TCU vulnerability (specifically, to the deep ball) yesterday.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
but I saw the last touchdown, more or less right after reading this:
http://runcodhit.blogspot.com/2009/12/4-2-5-split-field-coverage.html
Basically, against Trips, one of their standard coverages is to play man-to-man on the single receiver side. The TD was exactly that, with their corner getting burned with no help over the top.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:27 PM ^
SDSU really doesn't get very good recruiting, depsite being in CA. California is about the only Pac Ten state that has any talents, so all ten of those schools recruit heavily in CA. Also, many other teams with national recruiting bases take guys from CA such as Notre Dame, Michigan, and a lot of the Big 12 and SEC - the top player in CA last year went to UF.
Once those teams take their pick, the rest goes to the non-BCS schools in the area, of which SDSU is one, but not a big one. More guys go to Boise State, Utah, and BYU, with teams like Nevada, Fresno State, UNLV and even Wyoming on par with with SDSU.
If Hoke stayed, that would change, since a big reason is that SDSU hasn't had much for success in the recent past like many of those other schools have (save UNLV and Wyoming). Plus, who doesn't want to live in San Diego?
November 14th, 2010 at 12:53 PM ^
I would want to live in SD, but not around the SDSU campus.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:35 PM ^
But his name is popping up with several openings like Boulder and Minnesota. There will undoubtedly be more BCS openings at the end of the year and he is one of the up and coming coaches. I would be surprised if he didn't make the jump.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:21 PM ^
Assuming Minnesota or some other program doesn't snag him I feel like Colorado would be all over him. He's up and coming but not a huge name yet which means Colorado won't have to dig too deep into their wallet to hire him which is perfect since they're broke. He has a good track record, has plenty of Pacific ties which is great since Colorado is going into the PAC10.
Big question for SDSU is how much of the staff leaves with him. If he's like Brian Kelly and basically moves lock, stock and barrel then SDSU is in trouble. If they just promote the OC to HC and kind of soldier on with the same system they'll likely stay good for awhile at least. Kind of like how Steward at WVU kept them decent for a few seasons by simply maintaining RR's scheme.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:28 PM ^
was with him at Ball State so not sure how much attachment is there. Rocky Long the DC was the New Mexico HC until 2008, who incidentally runs a 3-3-5. And Al Borges was the Aubirn OC before coming to SDSU.
November 14th, 2010 at 5:39 PM ^
For Zook at Illinois.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:19 PM ^
Whenever Hoke's name is mentioned I always think back to 2007 and the week or so when he was rumored to be a candidate for our HC job. Brian wrote this piece: http://mgoblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/profiles-in-cronyism-brady-hoke.html and I'm pretty sure every fan of the program agreed with him.
Since then, here's what Hoke has done:
2008. 12-2 @ Ball State
2009. 4-8 @ SDSU
2010. 7-3 @ SDSU (through 10 games)
SDSU is likely to finish the season 8-4 and go to its first bowl since 1998. To be clear, I'm not saying I wish we'd gotten him instead of RR. It's just funny how things turned out.
November 14th, 2010 at 2:30 PM ^
If you're implying that Hoke has now established himself as a candidate for an elite-level job, I still disagree. He may be worthy of a Minnesota-type job, but not at a school like Michigan. Programs like Michigan do not need to roll the dice on small-conference guys.
November 14th, 2010 at 2:46 PM ^
You mean guys like Schembechler from Miami of Ohio, Tressel from Youngstown State, Urban Meyer from BGSU and then Utah, Jim Harbaugh from San Diego?
Being a head coach in a non-BCS or small conference appears to be a step that a lot of successful and now considered elite BCS head coaches go through in their career paths.
November 14th, 2010 at 3:44 PM ^
This is akin to the "Mike Hart was a three-star, so recruiting rankings are meaningless" argument. For every one of those guys who jumps up a bunch of weight classes and has succeeded, there are many who have failed. Bo was a major gamble - his winning percentage at Miami wasn't even that great - that paid off, but that doesn't mean another MAC guy would. Also, Meyer's not a great example given that his second Utah team went 12-0 and to a BCS bowl. If Hoke takes SDSU to the BCS, that's another story.
It's true that coaching at a MAC-level school is a step along the career path; it's just not normally the step before landing a major job.
November 15th, 2010 at 10:27 AM ^
There are established guys, or people you would consider to have "credentials" at big time programs, people who went the traditional route that have struggled.
The mid-major route may not be the typical route, but it may become the trend. Cut your teeth as an assistant at a BCS program, take on a mid-major coaching job and find some success there. Then move on to greener pastures in a BCS conference.
November 14th, 2010 at 5:46 PM ^
..at this point in his career. Assistant at a very successful major program. Success as a HC in the MAC. Success as a HC in the WAC. With his strong midwestern background he is an obvious Big 10 choice. Like I said before, look for him in Champaign.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:17 AM ^
That was the same TCU whose strong win for the season came against a Utah team that got spanked by Notre Dame yesterday, 28-3.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:22 AM ^
This is what I hate about college football. "The same ___ team that only scored ___ points against ____". Or "This is the ____ team that got all they could handle from ____, who lost to ____". Yes, its a long season, teams have ups and downs. One transitive property realization doesn't make a team good or bad. Utah is a decent team, and TCU is one of the best teams in the country. Top 5, maybe, Top 10 probably, Top 25 definitely.
I don't think we're in a position to judge how SDSU will be next year based on Utah's performance against ND yesterday, which is what you're doing.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:37 AM ^
This is why Slippery Rock should be the national champion.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:16 PM ^
I agree that this is a poor way to judge TCU, but it's a fair assesment of Utah. Utah's 2 big wins are against Pitt in OT and by 5 against Air Force. Neither of those teams have beaten anyone good, so they're Utah's top wins because they're the only teams (wait, and Iowa State) who are over .500, and barely so in the case of Pitt and ISU.
Utah has gotten obliterated in their two losses to admittedly good TCU and perrenially bad Notre Dame. Why were they in the top 5? No idea. They better not be in the top 25 after this week.
EDIT: Nevermind, Iowa State is also under .500, they are 5-6 after losing to Colorado (!).
November 14th, 2010 at 3:02 PM ^
Utah is #25 in the AP and #24 in the Coaches.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:28 PM ^
Hence my subject, "Well, maybe." That implies doubt. I didn't use the transitive property to attempt to prove that San Diego State will be an awful team. I didn't say that they would be a cupcake. We don't know either way.
TCU is undefeated, yes. They have beaten up on a lot of slop teams. They beat a mediocre Oregon State team in a close game. They beat a Baylor team that's doing well in a down year in the Big 12. Their signature win this season is Utah, who was undefeated and ranked #5 at the time. Those three games are what we have to judge TCU this year, with Utah the best of them. Without a decent conference schedule to give perspective on TCU's quality, that's what we have to go on. So, now that we have some more context about Utah (namely, that they may not be as good as previously thought), it's fair to assess the opinion that TCU deserves. Our understanding of their win against Utah should change based on Utah's loss.
I'm saying that we don't really know much about TCU, which means that their close win against SDSU doesn't really tell us much about the latter. If we don't know much about SDSU this year, we don't know much about how they will be next year. Whether or not they will be a cupcake is in doubt. Ergo my "maybe."
November 14th, 2010 at 11:28 AM ^
I spent most of August reading threads about UConn. Oh no! Scary!
November 14th, 2010 at 11:29 AM ^
they've beaten a 2-8 (UNLV), 3-8 ( Co. St.), and 2-9 (Wyo) team. Big wins vs. 3-6 Washington and SDSU. SDSU's wins are against teams that are a combined -29 in the win column with Air Force being the only team they beat with a .500 or better record.
I'll give them credit because they have played Mizzou and TCU tough. I'm pretty sure TCU had a letdown after beating a highly overated Utah team last week.
November 14th, 2010 at 1:40 PM ^
SDSU is pretty damn good. They had the BYU game stolen from them by an awful call and the Missouri game they lost by a blatant no call at the end of the game. Both of these were away games. I'll be at the SDSU - Utah game this weekend and will give everyone a scouting report.
November 14th, 2010 at 11:34 AM ^
Michigan wasn't looking for a cupcake. They were just looking for a school that would play them once in AA, and not demand a return game. SDSU was one of only a few schools that would agree to that.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^
playing San Diego State at home. 2011 is a year when the return of Michigan football is there for all to see. We should expect to be on a different level than the San Diego State's of the world. If we have to worry about SDSU then we are not there yet. I expect to no problems.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:21 PM ^
I expected SDSU to come in and give us a game all along. They will be a well coached team and they will play hard. I think Hoke proved that a few years ago when he brought Ball State into Ann Arbor and gave us a scare.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:31 PM ^
will take the Minnesota job. You heard it here first.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:36 PM ^
SDSU is tough. I must say that I am impressed with what Brady Hoke has done. He's certainly showing himself to be at least a pretty decent coach. Well done, sir.
November 14th, 2010 at 12:42 PM ^
Thanks for bringing this up, I was just about to post about how Wisconson, Ohio State, and a Bowl game were such cupcakes that we should start looking at games in the middle of next season that won't be.
November 14th, 2010 at 4:26 PM ^
and we will roll SDSU.
November 14th, 2010 at 6:24 PM ^
Sorry, but I just have to use this one:
Respect all opponents; fear none.
In this era, it is hard for any team to beat any other team on autopilot. You have to show up and play hard, or you are going to lose. I'm sure Iowa and Illinois are going to hear a lot about that during the week.