Some thoughts about our next HC

Submitted by bighouseinmate on January 9th, 2011 at 2:49 PM

There are a few qualities I'd like to have in our next head football coach at UM. Being a former player or assistant at UM isn't a set requirement.

1. The top quality is that I want someone who wants to be here, because it is UM, and wants to be UM's HC until they are fired or retired. I do not want someone who is seeing the opportunity as a stepping stone to their own "dream job".

2. Successful, even if at a smaller program or just as a successful OC/DC.

3. Understands the rivalries with tOSU and ND, and the lesser rivalry with MSU. Once they step on campus as HC, they had better make beating those schools one of their prime directives, particularly tOSU.

Nice, simple requirements for the next HC.

The candidates that I like, in no particular order:

Miles, Hoke, Venables, Patterson, and just because his name has been thrown out there and rumoured about, Gruden. 



January 9th, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^

.......the guy would run into a burning building to save UM football if asked to. Sure he isn't the "sexy" name coach like Miles or Patterson, but there is no doubt the guy knows football. He didn't just "luck" into a 12-1 season at Ball State or a 9-4 record at SDSU. He coached the heck out of those teams to get there.

Too many people want to look at his overall record and disqualify him without looking at those schools situations prior to him.


January 9th, 2011 at 3:31 PM ^

You're right; it's insulting to retarded people to compare them to Les Miles.

In all seriousness, He's a great recruiter and motivator, but he's a liability as an in-game coach. That has been demonstrated on numerous occasions. That might be tolerable given the results he gets, but I'm more concerned with his sketchy history and questionable ethics. There's just too much negative buzz surrounding his time at Michigan in the 90's, and the oversigning and NCAA scandals at LSU are really off-putting (not to mention getting Jai Eugene to decommit by claiming that Lloyd has Parkinson's). 

I would prefer that we gamble on a guy like Hoke who has a thin but promising track record, loves Michigan, and has no embarrassing baggage.

King Douche Ornery

January 9th, 2011 at 6:00 PM ^

On Hoke, but really, if Miles is a "liability" as an in-game coach--holy cow. All he does is win 11 games every year.

I like the bowl results of two recent gaes: he thrashed Gerogia Tech 38-3 the year he broght, IIRC, a 7-5 team into that game, and GTech was HOT HOT HOT with their triple option thingy.

And this year, he clobber dobbers Texas A&M when they come into the game HOT HOT HOT. I just really don't know how anyone can question his game management, other than to say he really gambles a lot, people swallow their entire beer can while watching, and more often than not, what he does WORKS. Again, I mention the fact that he seems to win 11 games every year. Not too shabby.

On Hoke--I have no doubt he'd be a fine choice and wouldn't mind seeing him here if UM takes the pipe again on Miles.


January 9th, 2011 at 3:17 PM ^

to save UM football, I would prefer it to be someone that can actually carry them out of it.

I just don't think hoke has the experience or smarts to do that based on his resume thus far.

"Sexy" doesn't have anything to do with it, we need someone that is proven at the level that we want to be at, not someone who has two decent years at a lower level and no sustained success anywhere.

Not to mentioon scheme-wise he is a complete re-write for the current roster and would take us back to the old days of outdated philosophies.


January 9th, 2011 at 4:18 PM ^

I guess I look at the sample size, that being two years amongst many and not really a trend, but your point is well taken. It isn't what I would consider a wealth of experience running those schemes succesfully against top competition like upper echelon D1 programs.

My objections are more in the vein of what I consider a resume that warrants consideration for a position at the level that M should be at. My main point being that if Hoke had never been an assistant at Michigan way back in the day, then he wouldn't even get a whiff of attention in terms of consideration based on experience alone. I think believing that any kind of historic connection to the program in any way translates to results on the field is horribly outdated. It is a nice concept to think that we can complete at the level we want and only hire people that have previously been on staff at Michigan, I just don't find it realistic and in fact I think that mentality hamstrung the program for a loooong time and was in large part how we came into our current predicament. That predicament being the hiring of a coach that would revamp the program then cutting him off halfway through the process without any good plan on who would replace him.


January 9th, 2011 at 4:01 PM ^

I can't believe I'm defending Brady Hoke, but since the alternative is Les Miles:

Hoke's two decent years are two of his last three seasons as a head coach, and the third was a 2-game improvement on a team that went 2-10 the previous season. Everyone who knows him and has seen him in action (including some people who have no connection to Michigan and aren't among Hoke's close friends) heaps an uncommon level of praise upon him. I watched the Poinsetta Bowl, and his team just seemed much better prepared and better conditioned than Navy. His offense also looked more dynamic than Lloyd Carr's did, so it seems like he's learned a thing or two since he left Michigan.

Bo had just come off a good-but-not-great stint as coach of Miami when he was hired at Michigan (and he was also Don Canham's second choice, after Joe Paterno turned him down), and that worked out well. I would rather take a younger, hungry coach who loves Michigan than a guy with such baggage.


January 9th, 2011 at 3:19 PM ^

2003 Ball State 4–8 3–5 T–4th (West)      
2004 Ball State 2–9 2–6 6th (West)      
2005 Ball State 4–7 4–4 5th (West)      
2006 Ball State 5–7 5–3 T–3rd (West)      
2007 Ball State 7–6 5–2 2nd (West) L International    
2008 Ball State 12–1 8–0 1st (West) Invited to GMAC*

If we're going to look at the 12-1 season, we should keep in mind he had six (!) years to get there. Keep in mind this is the same coach that Minnesota and Indiana passed on. 2 good seasons in 8 years doesn't impress me. Nor would it do much good to unify a divided fanbase. You can't even justify that firing RR to get Hoke makes sense, especially considering that the majority of RRs recruits would be hitting their prime in the next 2-3 years.


January 9th, 2011 at 3:32 PM ^

......kept RR than be in another coaching search, but that is where UM football stands.

My like for Hoke, and the points I make about him, are simply to convince this board that he wouldn't be the disaster everyone is making him out to be. If he is named our HC, I'd be very satisfied, even though I might have wanted someone else.

Also, you'd need to look at the preceding years prior to Hoke becoming their HC to decide whether Hoke is good or not. BSU football was terrible for a long time before he got there, just like SDSU was. The SDSU turnaround was in just two years.


January 9th, 2011 at 3:39 PM ^

It boggles the mind that someone would prefer Brady Hoke to Jon Gruden as the coach. Gruden is probably a 1B to Harbaugh's 1A as the best possible option for Michigan. What Michigan needs aside from a great coach is someone who will get the fanbase and recruits excited about the future of Michigan football. jim Harbaugh would have done that and Gruden absolutely would as well. Hoke...not so much.


January 9th, 2011 at 4:37 PM ^

It boggles the mind that someone would prefer Brady Hoke to Jon Gruden as the coach. Gruden is probably a 1B to Harbaugh's 1A as the best possible option for Michigan. What Michigan needs aside from a great coach is someone who will get the fanbase and recruits excited about the future of Michigan football. jim Harbaugh would have done that and Gruden absolutely would as well. Hoke...not so much.


January 9th, 2011 at 3:05 PM ^

Those are all good qualities and I am sure once we have a coach he will meet all of your criteria. I worry about our fan base never being pleased because "their" guy didn't get hired. I am still pissed RR was fired 3 years in but would be willing to forget about it if we all get behind our new coach.


January 9th, 2011 at 4:27 PM ^

...just because I have been having drilled into to me over the last three years by RR detractors that blind loyalty is a terrible thing and that the program is bigger than just the coach (FWIW -not you).

So, if i feel like we make a terrible hire for the future of the program, should i stifle that and go all polly-anna on them?

Now, I would never boo, or show the players or program any disrepect in that sense, never, however the coach that replaces RR has a pretty difficult task ahead of him and bad decisions, missteps, failings are going to get criticized and, if current criteria reamin consistent, he will have 3 years to produce with no excuses.

Hoken's Heroes

January 9th, 2011 at 3:11 PM ^

or be prepared to endure another 2-3 seasons of mediocre football unless there is a Michigan Miracle in the works with who ever takes this dysfunctional program over.

OSUMC Wolverine

January 9th, 2011 at 3:16 PM ^

When I am announced as the new HC, I will be humble, hire top rate assistants even at the expense of the amount of my compensation.  I will kiss all the booster's asses. I will put everyone in the local and national media of significant exposure on my holiday card recipient list.  I will be a politician and a business exec first, a coach second.  I will restore the luster of old.  I will kiss all the HS football coaches asses in the Midwest.  I will not allow my players to get discounted tatoos or sell their sportsmanship awards.  I will not pay players' fathers for them to play at my school.  I WILL BE

Now, where do I sign?


January 9th, 2011 at 3:21 PM ^

a higher priority than ND.   MSU has taken a strong foothold in recruiting in Michigan and the midwest.  ND is a rivalry that will probably lose more luster over the following few years and I hate having to answer to Sparty.