The Snowflake Thread: Coaching

Submitted by LSAClassOf2000 on November 2nd, 2013 at 6:39 PM

This will be this evening's thread to discuss issues with the coaching and any issues you may have with the staff in general. 



November 2nd, 2013 at 7:49 PM ^

They also started bringing the house against our shitty OLine, and got there.  You don't know what the play calls were, and unless you were at the game you don't know what the routes were because you can't see them on tv, and Borges doesn't tell Gardner to throw it to one specific guy.  The QB needs more than half a second to throw the ball deep, because the WRs can't get very far in that time.  Borges didn't set Devin up for failure, the OL did.  You must have missed the part where the announcers talked about Devin lighting into the Oline in the 3rd quarter after getting sacked for the millionth time.  He didn't yell into the headset.


November 2nd, 2013 at 7:21 PM ^

everything you said he already knows, how many games ago? You are right, the O line is atrocious and it would be a challenge for any OC to have success here but Coach Borgess has not made enough changes in the offense KNOWING what he knows of it. He hasn't added enough plays to take advantages of Devin's strengths while in game his adjustments were poor. Cases in point the play action when there is no chance of 'faking' the defense into thinking it's a run. Also, plays needing the RB to pass protect and having Toussaint in there to do the job...he can't possibly be the best pass blocker, can he? There were more but I've said enough to support my thoughts.


November 3rd, 2013 at 1:35 PM ^

Where are all of the upperclassmen interior offensive linemen? The JRs, (RS) Jrs, SRs, and (RS) SRs who should be starting in place of freshman?

Why is your 2nd question so terrible?

When Hoke came in he looked at the upcoming depth based on the catastrophes that were our OLine recruiting classes from 09-11, and started packing classes full of guys. So I'm pretty sure he recognized the problem.

Why did you miss that?

Why don't you ask the AD that question, because Michigan rarely ever seeks out JUCO or transfer players? It seems to be a program policy type thing, because football has only accepted something like 4 or 5 transfer players in the last 20+ years.

Also, why don't you prefer that we develop our own talent?

Where have all the cowboys gone?



November 2nd, 2013 at 7:30 PM ^

"supposed to be built?" Because it is hard to say "is built to have . . . a strong OL" AND "OL has been a complete, absolute failure" without implying the conclusion that "it [M]" is a complete, absolute failure," yet you seem to shy away from assigning any responsibility to the staff for where all this lalapolooza of failure you mention is coming from.

Once upon a time, the detractors of a coach since forced out of town used to remind us over and over that a coach has to design the game plan around the players he actually has. Has this shoe grown too uncomfortable for the current generation of feet to consider wearing it?


November 2nd, 2013 at 7:37 PM ^

I say "built to have" because the players are recruited and coached to a certain philosophy. The defense is built to a certain philosophy, too, and the coaching staff has made it clear that these two units depend upon each other, particularly in areas like time of possession. 

I have not shied away from assigning responsibility to the staff. Since the PSU game, and really even before, I have been fairly consistent in my stance that Borges has made some mistakes, but that the reason his offenses have looked bad have been largely a consequence of a bad offensive line--and that the responsibility for that probably lies with Funk and also trickles up to Hoke. 

I actually posted a thread a couple weeks ago suggesting semi-seriously (because, rather than trolling, I thought it would actually be a good idea, but never expected the staff to actually do it) that Michigan hire Mike Tice as a consultant to get an outside perspective on the offensive line. 

And since I try not to repeat myself ad nauseum, I haven't felt like rehashing all of this. It's not like the board needs another person yelling "FIRE FUNK! FIRE BORGES!" Insomuch as their is rational discussion to be had, I try to keep mine to original ideas.


November 2nd, 2013 at 8:53 PM ^

that it is unlikely that personnel decisions at the AD will be settled here on this board; we can only be observers and critics and opinionaters about about the object of the passion we all have in common. I also admit that my lurking here has fallen off and I have missed much of your mentioned previous work.

The argument about youth and inexperience is mitigated for me by the examples of teams that approach M's level of performance with far humbler resources; the example of Akron comes to mind.

I understand that the D is dependent on the practices against the O. This said, wouldn't also be in the D's interest for the O to practice plays it can actually execute? For the O line to perform the way it does in the schemes it is asked to execute, what possible value can it be to the D to practice against it? Regardless of the long-term picture, I would think it mandatory to both the O and the D for the O to be practicing plays that will actually work in game situations. As happy as I was to see Fitz not asked to hit the line 27 times at 0.97 yards a pop, I still got a sinking feeling watching Devin take one long drop after the other knowing nothing was going to happen before the rush enveloped him.

Just as in the expectations-gap years of The Coach Who Shall Not Be Mentioned, I find myself asking, "Why is this happening?"

I think we should bury the "little brother" meme for a few years. I don't think it has helped us.


November 2nd, 2013 at 9:38 PM ^

"teams that approach M's level of performance with far humbler resources; the example of Akron comes to mind."

Are you seriously suggesting that Akron's season so far is comparable to Michigan's? With all due respect to what Bowden and his staff are doing there, they've won three games, against an FCS school and two of the worst teams in the MAC. They took a 40-point pasting at home against Ohio U. Is that where you think Michigan is?

Blue Mike

November 2nd, 2013 at 9:36 PM ^

The problem is that they are not built to be a prostyle, power offense.  Borges might like to think so, and he is most comfortable with that kind of offense, but they are definitely not built that way.  They will be eventually, but Borges might not be around to see it at this point.

We can't blame Borges for today when he had two weeks to prepare, 7 games worth of data to identify how poorly his offensive line is playing, full knowledge of the hyper-aggressive defense MSU plays, and they came away with no gameplan to attempt to attack it?  Sure, the offensive line is bad, but Borges doesn't seem to have any ideas about what to do to minimize the damage they call.

Look at today.  The first drive was somewhat successful.  MSU adjusted to what we wanted to do, and we never adjusted to what they did.  That is definitely on Borges.


November 2nd, 2013 at 10:16 PM ^

You are full of shit.  So if you are "building" your team to do things it can't, it isn't your fault.  It's not Borges' fault that Devin has so little time to throw?  A lot of the sacks were because Michigan again tried to throw downfield and again Devin has to eat it.  Almost a non-existent intermediate to short passing game other than the few screens and the running game is a tire fire, but I guess player execution has nothing to do with coaches.  After all, like Borges says, he doesn't hit anybody or throw passes or catch passes or run the ball.  The players have to execute.  It's just a shame the four and five star lineman can't learn right.  What a joke.


November 2nd, 2013 at 7:01 PM ^

Borges has the option of dropping play action.


The run isnt a threat anyway, so why run PA passes most of the damn time, when all it does is force DG to take the extra time and attention to devote to the fake?  The last drive, they moved the ball, with no PA passes and pressure wasnt as bad.


November 2nd, 2013 at 7:07 PM ^

Are you kidding? They ran play action at least three times on that last drive, when running really wasn't reasonable at all. The plays worked, too.

That's why these discussions are so pointless. People see what they want to see and fail to see anything else. Yes, the play-action pass on second down after the interception was a poor call, but the way MSU was blitzing (would have happened regardless of the offensive playcall) there was nothing Borges could have called on that drive that would have worked. 

Borges did have a lot of short passes in the plan, particularly that reasonably good pistol-play-action-stick route that was designed to get 7 yards. Sometimes it worked, sometimes the receivers dropped the ball. Sometimes MSU made a play. There were inventive plays, plays that worked with the system that took advantage of MSU's aggressiveness, and counters for misdirection.

But there was never, ever any room to move. Because the OL is historically bad. 



November 2nd, 2013 at 7:25 PM ^

Play-action fakes frequently do not affect secondaries because they aren't necessarily supposed to; they are, particularly in the case of the pistol fakes, designed to freeze the linebackers.

And Gardner had windows to make short passes to receivers. They were open pretty much every time they ran the play; unfortunately, it wasn't always executed and it was only worth 5-7 yards anyway, so it wasn't something Michigan could use to control the entire game.


November 2nd, 2013 at 7:24 PM ^

Welp, devin has no time, nothings working anyway... let's pick slow plays!

Yes the short throws did start to appear... AT THE END OF THE THIRD QUARTER predominately. It takes a while for the light bulb to go on for Al. Sometimes its even worse and the light bulb doesn't go on at all during the game... see OSU '12 and PSU '13

the bee train

November 2nd, 2013 at 10:30 PM ^

How about not running a play action pass or deep route as the only two passing options? Or working with your QB to look at receivers not named Gallon. Or work in some quick hitters in the passing game. He's close to the worst offensive coach I've ever seen and the fact that he's been here three years makes me seriously question Hoke's judgement.

Webber's Pimp

November 2nd, 2013 at 6:43 PM ^

Our problems in the trenches are very disturbing. I might add that Hoke is now 4 and 4 in rivarly games. I love our coach but things need to improve or he should be out just like Rrod.


November 2nd, 2013 at 6:43 PM ^

no quality games and no quality coaching.  This team has not been prepared to play in any game since ND.  They are soft.  I decided to give up my season tickets after ND.


November 2nd, 2013 at 6:59 PM ^

To you but he has s legit beef. That was about the worst coaching performance from a collective staff that I have ever witnessed. Season tickets are a big investment and that was a perception changing loss on national TV. That game may have a lasting effect on how much people are going to be willing to invest, both financially and emotionally. Hoke had a little bit of time but not much. He owes the fans some serious answers after that pile of shit. I am about as die hard ad you can get and I am thinking about going Michigan free for a while.


November 2nd, 2013 at 7:05 PM ^

App State, the Oregon debacle, 3-9, GERG's defenses...there have been several coaching performances worse than this one.

Hell, most of this I put on the offensive line. They were just terrible. No amount of scheming or play calling will save you from that sort of performance from the O-Line against that defense. 



November 2nd, 2013 at 9:42 PM ^

Great, he'll take blame on himself.  "We didn't have our guys ready" or "We need to prepare better." And that's just it.  Not prepared or ready after a bye week.  And I usually don't buy into "emotion" and "swagger," but this team has looked passive the whole year.  


November 2nd, 2013 at 6:43 PM ^

Time to let Funk and Borges go. Hoke has another year to get to the B1G Championship Game. At this point we are regressing. The stubbornness from the coaching staff kills me. They stick with Fitz and give the other backs ZERO carries. Lloyd, Mo, and Bo ALL used other backs and fullbacks.