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. 

Comments

Reader71

November 2nd, 2013 at 10:30 PM ^

Hey, we have something in common. I love Lloyd Carr! I asked because most people on here hate him. I still wonder if the OP did or not, since he is hung up and auras of intellectualism.

uminks

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:14 PM ^

and dump Hoke if we can find a big name coach who will take our job.  I have turned less optimistic that Hoke can turn our program around. I see him losing 4 to 5 games per year for the next 3 or 4 years. He totally got out coached by MSU Today. We could go a couple more years with him but this season may be a signal that Hoke is not ready to lead a major college football program. If LSU loses a game or two more their fans will get all upset at Miles and I say we grab him. Miles would dominate the B1G.

Bando Calrissian

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:27 PM ^

Lloyd Carr pretty much turning in the best coaching job of his career to transform a team that started with two of the worst losses in program history into a 9-2 finish that included an upset bowl game win over Tim freaking Tebow no one gave us a chance to pull off? 

ND Sux

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:53 PM ^

when Lloyd left, and still looking for a reason to think we'll ever hit that level again.  Yes we sucked against the spread, but it was kinda new then...Lloyd would have adjusted but we forced him out. 

 

Yeoman

November 2nd, 2013 at 8:03 PM ^

How hard is that to understand? He wasn't forced out; in fact he was talked into coming back for an extra year when he was already ready to leave after '06 (Bo's death took a pretty heavy  toll on him).

Bando Calrissian

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:53 PM ^

Sure, after Oregon, they could have just folded up the tents and mailed it in. Instead, that team rode an injured Mike Hart and Chad Henne (who was pretty much throwing on one leg and a gimp shoulder by Week 2) and an inexperienced Ryan Mallett and finished a respectable year. There's no reason to take away what that team accomplished in the end.

goblue20111

November 3rd, 2013 at 11:42 AM ^

I love re-watching that game and I hate it too. It pains me to think of what might have been had we opened up the playbook in a similar matter at different times.

Still a great game though. Mike Hart off tackle from the gun, Arrington's one handed catch behind a corner, Trent catching Harvin in a footrace, Mario's end around run, Adams just leveling Tebow.

People forgot that was Tebow's Heisman winning season and that team won the title the year before and the year after. They were loaded with talent.

 

SDCran

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:15 PM ^

but I thought the gameplans were both about right.  Everyone said we need to throw deep against them, and we did.  We adjusted to the pop pass because it was there. We forced Dennard into some PI situations that weren't called.  They prepped Devin to throw the ball away.  In the end, they have a crappy, young middle of the offensive line, which is exactly what MSU's defense goes after...always.  The passes require tight throws and 98 couldn't hit them.  Offensively, that was mostly on execution and a young line.

 

Defensively, they held up until the last 10 minutes.  Drive after drive starting at the 50.  And a lot of the defense came down to breaks.  A fumble six inches from being recovered.  Tipped passes leading to the half ending TD.  The FB stepping on the line and no review.  A couple of those go our way, and it is 9-6 in the 4th quarter.  GMat didn't blow this one.

MSU is good this year.  They have one of those teams that plods along, focusing on not making mistakes.  Once they get momentum, it can go a long way.  Today they got it.

I want better, but this is where our young team is.  They will start making more plays, creating their own breaks, and winning against teams like this, when they get a little older.

SDCran

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:29 PM ^

that the only points in the game came after completing long passes?  We also missed Funchess a couple of times on long ones.  

Also, the 2nd half we switched it up and had more short passes.  Sure on 3rd and 30, down by 2 scores in the 4th, we didn't give up and run for 5 yards, we tried to go deep.  I'm guessing you would have bitched about a short pass there ,too

This felt a little like the clock game..with the  teams reversed.  We sacked them more the 10 times that day, but they kept throwing deep.

Reader71

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:29 PM ^

Well, yes and no.

He threw a lot of short stuff in the 2nd half. It was either thrown poorly or outright dropped. But he did it, and it was often open. Hey, will you look at that. Borges DOES make adjustments in game. If you think you can run a successful offense predicated mainly upon slants, seams, and sticks, I'd disagree with you.

And, most people on here wanted a similar game plan to the one that was called. It didn't work because passing all the time is hard. With this line, it is impossible.

Reader71

November 2nd, 2013 at 10:36 PM ^

Maybe.

I didn't say he always makes adjustments. I didn't say those adjustments are always good. I didn't even say they always work. I just said that he does them. I am right. This game provides evidence. I know it might take a while for the mgonarrative to change enough to fit that in. In fact, I'm waiting for the post-Borges-firing article that says that he was doomed by never making adjustments, just because this blog didn't recognize them.

c1s2m0466

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:16 PM ^

So no Big 10 title this year.

None next year especially because Ohio will be better than us.

Maybe in year 5? Although Morris will be a new QB with little game experience. I don't like our chances.

Just want people to wake up. Borges is a huge impediment. His future offense involves a statue QB, lumbering RB's, and a spotty passim game. College football is not played this way anymore. Spread offenses with dual threat QB's are here to stay. Like it or not. And dot bring up Bama because we are nowhere near ten talent and coaching-wise.

ndscott50

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:16 PM ^

On Hoke and the entire coaching staff? A change in the OC is probably needed but hopefully we can turn things around next year. A disaster next year will unfortunately mean the end of Hoke. That means another 2 to 3 years of rebuilding along with the long term recruiting damage. All the while OSU will continue to dominate. I know we're angry with Hoke but a coaching change means no real hope of a big ten championship until 2017 or later.

uminks

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:25 PM ^

He just doesn't have the coaching pedigree of Urban. OSU will only get better and we may never catch up. I was hoping Hoke would be like Bo and turn this program around fast but it is already year 3 and we are digressing as a team through the season. I don't know what it is, yeah you can blame the OC but it all comes down to the HQ. I know Brandon will stick with Hoke, since Hoke was his guy from the start. But may be Brandon would like to have a LC type team minus the few good years. I think we are in store for another long losing streak against OSU. I hope I'm wrong but I don't think Hoke will be that big program coach that we need to get the program to the next level. But may be Brandon is happy with a 4 loss per season team?

ndscott50

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:39 PM ^

I am coming around to the idea that Hoke is not the guy but if we pull the trigger too quick we create the impression among potential coaches that we have unreasonable expectations. A top coach knows it takes time to get players in to fit what you want to do. We also know that coaching changes result in holes in your recruiting classes. Meyer was able to avoid this because he is Urban Meyer. What coach is out there with the same level of clout as Meyer? Can we get that coach? If we don't we guarantee several more years of mediocrity. There is also the issue the both USC and perhaps Texas are in the coaching market this year. I know this is negative but if Hoke can't get it done we are most likely screwed for some time

cbs650

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:16 PM ^

All the Borges apologist are hilarious. What has he done to warrant this defending? He cost is a loss against OSU, He didn't have a compotent back up last against Nebraska last year which cost us another loss. Hes never ahead of the chains against teams with good defenses. And all those who say u have to execute; you also have to be put in position to execute and good play calling does that and he calls a bad game more often than he does a good game.

Reader71

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:21 PM ^

Its not about Borges. Never has been. It is about defending a coach who has to build an offense around this line. Always has been.

Real question: what kind of offense can be successful against a good defense with this line? I don't think there is one. This is the worst line we've ever had, full stop. How does one create a game plan that does not rely on the line? Quick passes and the like, right? That went to shit in this very game. We ran all sorts of slants, seams, sticks, etc. They were often open. We got rolled.

uminks

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:36 PM ^

The line should not be this awful. We have 2 NFL caliber tackles and we have yong 4 and 5 star guards. Yes, the inteirior line is young but the lack of good coaching may not allow them to improve. In fact, they may developing bad habits with Funk.  But you can go ahead and blame Funk and Borges all you want. The real buck stops with Brady Hoke and he is not improving this team!

Pibby Scott

November 2nd, 2013 at 7:38 PM ^

Wait until we get competent olinemen to run what....

I see no unity or coherence in the play calling. Maybe here and there, he makes a good call, but it's like finding a lovely sentence in a language poet's prose poem. There's so much nonsense between the gems I find myself wondering whether it's worth the hassle, and whether Borges is looking at the big picture or is just calling a play to that specific situation. Seriously. 

 

Again, I'm not "straw grasping." There was a ton of PA and five step droppings today that had no chance of working bc of the line and what had happened previously. 1st down runs that put us behind the ball on 2nd and 3rd down. Entire sequences squandered. And I didn't see a single play that looked like it was responding to something that they identified was killing them on the field. 

When we ran that pistol PA and got a quick hit to Funch on a seam up the olb everyone and their uncle knew that that was the play the next time we got into pistol and it was, and that second time, guess what, it was covered by the lineback and incomplete. A small but telling example of the kind of ham fisted way Borges calls a game. No variables, no twists. Just the same exact thing hoping for the exact same result.

 

But if what you're saying then is that there could not have been a response, that is, nothing would work esp. with our oline, then the coaches are redundant anyway, and should take the blame anew. Because it's not like THEY HAVENT HAD THE ENTIRE SEASON TO THINK OF SOMETHING TO DO WITH OUR TERRIBLE OLINE! IT'S NOT LIKE THEY"RE PAID SIX FIGURES TO COME UP WITH ZERO ANSWERS.

If they're out of answers. Get them out of here.

How this debacle isn't on them I am stunned.

I don't even know what point you're trying to make. We shouldn't be coming up with a hypothetical in which our coaches fail with this oline 100% of the time to excuse their play calling. That's idiotic. 

Reader71

November 2nd, 2013 at 10:49 PM ^

The result is on them. That is the nature of being a coach. That is why I've never said don't fire Funk or Borges. I just think that firing Borges will not result in better results. The next coach will struggle to have a good offense with this line. Its the nature of offensive football. Every single play and possible play relies on the offensive line.

Funk can go. I'd give him one more year just because he has 2 seniors, 0 juniors, and only 2 scholarship sophomores (neither of which had ever started before this year). But he can go. I've been saying this is the worst line in Michigan history since spring ball, and he's the coach.

Borges too. I'd give him one more year too, because of the line. As I said, it's damn hard to call a good game when no one is ever blocked. Also, i feel kind of bad for Al, as he has still never been able to run his offense. The past 2 seasons, he's been running the spread almost exclusively. I'd feel bad about firing a guy who I hired to install a particular offense before hebcould ever fully install it. But he can be fired and it wouldn't bother me. I'd defend the next guy against stupid criticisms just as much.

Hoke should never have to sweat his job. He has been great for us in a time that we needed him to be great very badly. 2011 was a tonic that was sorely needed. He has been equally good on the recruiting trail, in the press, and as a figurehead. The program is strong, clean, and we can be proud to have him as coach. He has not lost enough to merit any job insecurity. Criticism is fine, but his seat should be cold, and it is.