Why Coaching Is Concerning
1) Starting a True Freshman at LT.
This is so telling on so many levels. We have not developed players and a true freshman has better technical skills than any other player at our most or second most important position on the line. We've recruited a boat load of talent here as well with minimal results.
2) Defense is confused and has the same issues that are starting to become exploited.
Two big issues here.
We cannot stop the inside seam route. OSU, Kansas St, SC, ND have all unloaded on the seam route and we have no chance at defended it.
We cannot stop the inside run. Our defensive line does not maintain assignments and our LBs do not read the lineman and are often out of postition.
3) Devin Gardner has Major Technical Flaws
Almost every throw was off his back foot.
He does not have any routes (besides bubbles and screens) that get the ball out of his hands quickly.
He stares down every WR he's throwing too
He picks 1 guy to throw to and will throw it too him or take a sack. It's very seldom he goes to his check down WR unless he has plenty of ample time (which may never happen).
4) WE CANNOT WIN ON THE ROAD
This is all about prepartion and gameplan and I have yet to see a solid gameplan against a worthy opponent. Every big away game the team comes out extremely FLAT as if they were all sick. No drive, no intensity, no focus.
5) The lack of Information given to Media is Lack of Confidence in Coaching.
Almost every coach hands out information about injuries and depth chart but Hoke has a say nothing or stretch/cover up the truth attitude. This does not equate to a good gameplan strategy and only forces the media and fans to become distant to the program.
The lack in confidence shows up in recruiting too. The no visit policy is an obvious lack in confidence that we can be the best school despite kids wanting to see other schools.
I'm sure there are others and I remain in support of Brady until he is no longer the coach here, but I am very concerned with the direction of the program to say the least.
September 8th, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:11 AM ^
I'm curious if there's a correlation between experience and road game performance. I would expect it would play a much bigger factor in dealing with an unfamiliar environment.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:14 AM ^
Or perhaps they need to bring Campus Inn clam chowder with them when they go on the road.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:36 AM ^
How would this excuse the defense? Our big problem Saturday was we were down 21-0 and our defense - our strength - was being beaten straight up by their offense. No short fields, no turnovers.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:54 AM ^
Folks should realize that great defense doesn't mean that other team doesn't score. That would be a perfect defense and a perfect defense we do not have. However, take note that our defense didn't give up 400+ yards.
Do you think we are supposed to shutout everyteam we play? How many points should a great defense give up? What's the expectation here?
September 8th, 2014 at 10:08 AM ^
They gave up three TDs on three long drives. A great defense should not be down 21-0 to start the second half.
I'm not sure of the specifications, but it wasn't whatever we saw on Saturday.
The yardage is misleading. Notre Dame did what they needed to do to win and we couldn't stop them when it counted, just like last year when we couldn't stop Iowa, Penn State, Michigan State, Ohio State and Nebraska. Last year this was chalked up to being tired and ground down by the offensive ineptitude (Or just Ohio State being great). This year....that doesn't work when you're already being torn up in the first half.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:18 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 10:40 AM ^
So great defenses should be on pace to be down 46-0 when the offense has no turnovers ... based on the halftime score?
This defense is not great.
September 8th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
I never said the defense was great. Never ever. But let's imagine for one second that it is...what happens when a great defense goes against a great offense, let's imagine there are some schematic advantages (spread offense vs. beefy Big 10 defense). If that great defense gives up 21 points in the first half, is that defense bad?
Was the problem that the defense gave up 21 points or the offense didn't score or a combination of the two? It's all about perspective. Maybe the issue is that everyone is under-selling how good Golson and ND's offense really are.
My problem is that some of us act as if Michigan is the only university in the world that fields a football team.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:13 AM ^
He said correlation. You implied causation.
It's not an excuse. Not every thing that doesn't fit your POV is an excuse. It's just a thing.
If there is a correlation (if there isn't, I'll eat a lemon), that doesn't mean much to us as fans other than to maybe adjust our expectations. But any one team can be an outlier, and any one game is even easier.
September 8th, 2014 at 11:28 AM ^
I'm assuming - given that this is a Michigan blog and Michigan just played and we're talking about Michigan in this thread, I know big assumptions - that he's wondering if inexperience on the road somehow played into Saturday's beat down.
I'm sure that there is a correlation as well. I don't even think you need an expansive study to know this is true.
More than anything, once this correlation is found, how would Michigan fit into it? We'd probably be a negative outlier: A veteran team that performs poorly on the road and has done so consistently over time. This would point to coaching being an issue for our road struggles.
See, what I did was tie in his off topic post to the topic at hand. Fun!
September 8th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^
Ooh, fiesty. No need.
I don't think he was saying, "Winning on the road is hard, therefore our coaches are not responsible."
I think he's asking your question: how much worse are we on the road than a similar hypothetical team?
I'm making assumptions, too. I assume that no one liked Saturday's loss, we are all freaking out, and we are all trying to figure out what kind of freak out is appropriate.
I want to give Hoke an extension and put it in the University bylaws that only a Michigan Man as defined by me will coach Michigan. You want to fire Hoke. Someone else wants to kill him and eat his hands so that he never claps on the sideline again. We're all freaking out. Which of us is most reasonable and why, I think, is the discussion that the blog is trying to have. And I don't think we should shout a guy down for asking for some more data.
September 8th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^
Ooo, condescending old douche. Probably can't be helped.
I didn't shoot him down. I tied in what he was asking to the conversation. Its obvious to those who don't think they are much smarter than they actually happen to be.
Anyway, done responding to you for the day. You were fine for a while, but your personality always shines through in the end.
September 8th, 2014 at 12:27 PM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:11 AM ^
1) You start the best player period. If a freshman is best at that position, so be it. Ties should always go to the guy with the most experience.
2) Two of our best three CBs were hurt and a starting linebacker. With that kind of attrition, you have to back off press coverage, especially when you get back to back pass interference calls that hand ND their first touchdown.
3) I agree, but don't think Morris was better prepared to handle the pressure Gardner was getting.
4) Yep, and that is frustrating.
5) When has a Michigan coach EVER talked about injuries. Why should they? How do you equate talking about injuries with a lack of confidence?
This is just a weak, rehashed list of gripes.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:37 AM ^
2) Why? Wasn't the whole point of our new "aggressive" approach that referees won't call 10 PI calls, so you don't back off?
September 8th, 2014 at 10:02 AM ^
In response to #2...Blake Countess is WAY OVERRATED!!!
September 8th, 2014 at 10:18 AM ^
As a man corner, you have half a point. He wasn't very good on Saturday. But I don't know that he was ever rated very high as a man-cover guy. He's been pretty good in zone. He's a lot like Marlin Jackson in that respect.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:40 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^
I think you're missing his point a little here. He was intending to point out not just our weaknesses, but in a context of how these are things coaching should have prevented.
Agreed, you start the best player, but how is it possible that high-profile players who this coaching staff recruited and had 1-2 years of their coaching and training are worse than players who just got here? Especially on the O-line, they should be out-playing Cole on muscle strength and knowing the playbook alone. They're right to start Cole, but something went wrong to end up in this position.
Same with Gardner. He's a smart guy who sounds like he really wants to work on his game, but he still plays like a wildly-talented Freshman. Neither he nor Denard showed any substantial improvement in their years here. Isn't that at least in part a coaching problem?
September 8th, 2014 at 9:12 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:29 AM ^
Jeebus people.
Texas lost 44-7 at him to unranked BYU. Welp, cancel the season. Strong clearly has no idea what he's doing.
OSU lost at home to an unranked Va Tech. I guess Urban Meyer is as shitty coach too.
Repeat after me people. It. Was. One. Game.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:33 AM ^
But that's the point...It wasn't just one game. did you not watch the team last year?
September 8th, 2014 at 9:37 AM ^
Except it's not one game.
It's 10.
6-10 on the road for Hoke. That's a 37% win rate on the road.
That averages 2-3 road losses per year.
Our last Rose Bowl was 7 years ago.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^
I wrote a diary about this issue yesterday. I can't get into all the detail here but here's one figure I made that shows the downward trend of the program the last 10 games:
September 8th, 2014 at 10:01 AM ^
The last ten games? I see a downward trend starting with the 2011 @MSU game the slope has only gotten worse over the last 10 games. I'd love to see a similar graph for Bo, Moeller, Carr, RROD, and other B1G coaches.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:46 AM ^
I'll add to your stats, 3-7 in his last 10. that's, um, not good.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:48 AM ^
I share the concerns about how Hoke's past road record and recent 3-7 record...but it is simply unfair at this point to lump this team in with last year's. They're 1-1, and 0-1 on the road. Since Hoke isn't going anywhere this year, I'm only focusing on this year's record.
And yeah, Hoke doesn't get all the blame for our last Rose Bowl being 7 years ago.
I say that it was only one game because Hoke can only do things one game at a time.
Also you say average 2-3 road losses a year...what's the norm? How does that compare to other coaches?
September 8th, 2014 at 10:26 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 8:43 PM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:40 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:51 AM ^
I mean, yeah, it's obviously concerning. It would be idiotic to think that it's not. But I've said it before...was that game an extreme outlier, or a sign of things to come for this Michigan team this year? An argument can be made for both...we just do not know yet.There's a lot fo football to be played, and the coaches are not nearly as useless as so many seem to think they are. Nussmeier is clearly a good coach given past success at Bama and Washington...his offense scored 0 points last week. Is he suddenly a bad coach now?
September 8th, 2014 at 9:52 AM ^
You could argue it was just one game, but you could also argue that it was the worst game in a string of games that have showed little improvement, and the same mistakes over and over again. You could argue it either way.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:06 AM ^
It's not just one game...3-7 in their last 10, the general sense of the direction the program is currently heading, not being able to keep anyone out of the end zone, an offense (except for 1 game) looking completely inept...etc.
I'd feel a lot better if It. Was. One. Game.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:45 AM ^
That was Charlie Strong's 2nd game at Texas. His starting OL had a combined 5 starts between them.
If Hoke got bombed in his 2nd game of his career no one would be say fire Hoke. They'd say give him 3-4 years and let's see what happens. This is year 4. There is now a pattern the past 3 years.
So we've given Hoke the 3-4 years Strong and any other coach should be afforded. The team looks no better yesterday than the one that showed up for KSU in the bowl...desite having our 5th year senior back. It looked barely better than the outfit destroyed by Miss State in RR's last game. We have wasted 4 years.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 10:23 AM ^
This is the most truthful thing that has ever been said on the internet.
I suspect you and I disagree on our opinions of the coaches, but you have given the best, most informed reason that anyone has given for hating any coaches in any sport ever.
99% of us do not know a thing about the inside of a football program. We concern ourselves with all sorts of tangential things, but the only thing we care about is results. People were calling for Hoke to be fired because they don't like his answers in a presser. As if that was the issue, not the 0-31 drubbing that immediately preceeded it. Or guys that just fucking hate the guy because he had the audactiy to clap after an opponent score. As if they would give a shit if we were up 31-7.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:14 AM ^
if you've got comparable talent and you fail to win at some point you have to accept that your coaches are not succeeding.
I would add that keeping Gardner in the game late was poor judgement. And there has often been late-game uncertainty, including against PSU last year. Why did we not go for the field goal that could have saved our 365-game no shutout streak in the penultimate series, but then go balls out, risking Gardner, in the last series?
We've lost seven of our last ten. There is fairly good evidence that this thing isn't working.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^
Yes. Playing Gardener at the end seemed like so very little payoff, vis a vis experience, as opposed to the risk of injury. This seemed like the worst coaching decision of the night.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:50 AM ^
Honest question: Who makes the call whether Gardner stays in the game, Hoke or Nussmeier?
September 8th, 2014 at 10:49 AM ^
Gardner not only has not advanced - the ND team people are nwo saying might be great was missing 6 players (5 suspensions + an injury). It played 19 FR or RS FR per Kelly. Against might Michigan, not Akron.
So what does that say about the ability of Brian Kelly? And why are you accepting we should not have a coach who if he lost 6 players AND was forced to play 19 FR or RS FR would not roll ND 31-0.
Stop the denial. It hasnt been 1 game. It has been game after game versus quality opponents that UM is outcoached. Bill Snyder made us look like crap. Dantonio makes us look like crap. Even Bo Pelini and his cat rolled in here and got a win.
You don't feel this outmatched EVER with Beilein on the sideline. We need a football coach who you have the same confidence in. Hoke is not that guy. Full stop.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:14 AM ^
Lloyd Carr held the media in utter contempt and never told them shit. "Lack of confidence" was not among his shortcomings.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:16 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:19 AM ^
September 8th, 2014 at 9:33 AM ^
Sit this one out, champ.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:16 AM ^
What the deal is with the substitutions? It seems like Mone and others were getting a lot of snaps and some of the UFRs from last year raised questions about some inexperienced guys getting major snaps late in close games.
The other thing I keep noticing is the inability to land a blitz. There is sometimes pressure, but LBs don't usually make it into the backfield and I wonder how much of that is just not being used to it (need reps) and how much of it is coaching.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:19 AM ^
I didn't say anything b/c I am not a qb coach, but some of those passes in the App State game just looked awkward.
At the end of the day against App State his numbers were good, so it is what it is.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:20 AM ^
Every QB has some awkward throws.
Gardner looked sharp until he started trying to win the game himself. That's who he is...he's excellent when he has help, but when he plays heroball, things go awry.
Of course, people who wanted Gardner benched for their own bad reasons anyway are just looking for things to bitch about, so they ignore how he looked before the game was out of reach.
September 8th, 2014 at 9:30 AM ^
but mechanics can be improved through coaching and practice.
September 8th, 2014 at 10:05 AM ^
You are correct that those things can be corrected with coaching, but Nuss truly has only had about a little over 2 months of hands on contact with Gardner. He gets about a month in the spring and a month in fall camp. Hard to change bad mechanics in a short amount of time especially when you have 50 other players to work with and teach your new system. I know what you are saying, but it's hard to put it on all on Gardner when you o-line is crappy, you had 3 different systems and 3 different OC/QB coaches, and you were a WR for 3/4th of a year during your career.