Searchbits IV: Holding Pattern
ON HAVING THINGS. I don't have anything. Nobody has much. This appears to be because the Schlissel quote about how the AD search would get underway in a couple weeks was accurate, and of course the coaching search consists of "we still have a coach" and "HARBAUGH."
Have heard that Harbaugh is very interested, no foolies. Again. But you know how much that means.
ON THINGS SAID BY SAM WEBB ON THE RADIO. There have been a number of threads about what Sam's saying that are a bit panicked. This is seemingly because the panicky people tend to be the ones running to post the threads about the slight possibility something seemingly bad might happen.
I have not gotten any vibes to get panicked about from him. I've actually urged him to be more explicit about his thoughts, and Sam says "THAT'S WHAT I'M DOING!" and kind of vibrates in frustration. So. Either the situation has changed from what some were panicking about or these threads are wildly inaccurate, because we just had our WTKA roundtable and Sam asserted that:
- Hoke has no chance unless he wins out.
- Even that is no guarantee.
- Hackett is likely to be around for the coaching search in the event Michigan does, say, get beat by 20 by OSU.
If you don't like #3, okay. But at this point the chance that there's a chance Hoke returns is slim indeed. And given the timing here if your top priority is a new coach that's fine. Hackett can make a reasonable decision and then go search.
I guess I have to talk about this pipedream
ON STOOOOOOOOPS. Fresh off an emasculating blowout at the hands of Baylor comes Bob Stoops, who's an indisputably really good coach in a weird Lloyd Carr holding pattern: he wins, a lot. He frustrates his own fans more than he probably should. Carr let teams hang around and reaped the occasional whirlwind; Stoops gets blown out a shocking amount for a guy who wins 11 games a year.
Still, you're probably all like "Bob Stoops? The persistent ND fever dream? Why not just bring up ESPN goblin John Gruden?"
Hey, I'm with you. But Dan Wetzel's urging it:
The odds of San Francisco 49ers coach, and Michigan alum, Jim Harbaugh returning to college look longer each week. The perception around the NFL is that if he's let go by San Francisco, a shot with another franchise (New York Jets? Oakland? Miami? A new L.A. team?), featuring more control and money, seems far more likely.
If so, Michigan should try to convince Bob Stoops not just how he'd be great for Michigan, but how Michigan would be great for him.
There is nothing in this article resembling concrete information; it's just a "hey, do this" thing. Okay, I guess, we would look into doing that before heading down the list but a move like that is just about unprecedented in the last 20 years of college football. Oh, and Stoops just signed a contract that pushes him to around $5 million annually. Michigan would have to match that and pay a hefty buyout just for starters. Doesn't seem at all likely.
There is a little bit more substance to Travis Haney's ESPN piece:
“I think it’s very real,” one coach said when I asked him generally about OU's staleness. “Fans get spoiled. A lot of coaches move on to keep it new, keep energy high. Look at Urban [Meyer].”
Maybe it was just a contract leverage play, which worked, but I believed some coaches when they told me Stoops had genuine interest last winter in the Cleveland Browns job.
“I think he’s looking for other options,” a coach said Saturday.
Stoops is 54, FWIW. I got dollars to donuts less than nothing comes of this chatter.
ON PATTING PEOPLE ON THE HEAD AND SAYING "THAT'S NICE." Mike Shanahan could be convinced to take the Michigan or Florida jobs. Mike Shanahan, who is 62 and has not been in college since 1983. Thank you for your interest, Mike Shanahan.
But he's a young 62!
Shut up, bolded alter ego.
ON ROTE NON-DENIAL DENIALS. Brad Bates was asked the inevitable question and said this:
“It really doesn’t distract me at all,” Bates said “I love it here at Boston College, my values align with the institutional mission and we’ve really enjoyed living in New England, one of the greatest cities in the world. It hasn’t been a distraction at all.”
When asked if he knows if UM has been contacting candidates or has even contacted him, he elected not to directly comment.
“There’s no value of me commenting on other institutions and their processes,” Bates said. “I love it here at Boston College, my values align with this institution and I hope to be here a long time.”
"…unless I am offered the Michigan AD job, whereupon I will leave so quickly my clothes will hang in the air for a comical moment before collapsing in an empty heap."
The Detroit News headlines this "plans to stay as Boston College AD," which is not at all what that passage says unless you are unfamiliar with rote non-denial denials. Also in this vein:
Sources: UConn AD Warde Manuel has no plans to go anywhere. // He's been on a list of potential candidates for the Michigan AD job.
— Mark J. Burns (@markjburns88) November 7, 2014
Burns is a former Daily guy so he's probably got a good connect. But, as always, sources say things they don't 100% know or mean. I've heard he'd also leave an empty pile of laundry if offered the job.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:11 PM ^
You were right......
November 13th, 2014 at 7:05 PM ^
but it's a nice, cuddly Darth Vader who didn't go to the dark side.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^
be at least somewhat interested in the job. I reckon he'll do what most of us do when we're contemplating new opportunities--list them, then do a sort. Whether we come up Roses (wink) or not, sure seems like "going where I am really wanted and getting money" would end up being one of the bits in Michigan's plus column.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
"going where I am really wanted"
This precisely. Jim, I will stroke your ego so hard. I know I can satisfy you.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 13th, 2014 at 1:29 PM ^
November 13th, 2014 at 1:41 PM ^
I love that. Makes me feel special in the universe, likes it's all just a simulation, and I'm the star.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:06 PM ^
may be here for, like, a while. Maybe even next summer. It might be a bad idea, but if he lands the right coach it could be good.
November 13th, 2014 at 9:43 PM ^
Does it seem odd that an interim AD would hire the highest profile coach at the university? Also wouldn't the prospective coach want to know who his boss is going to be? What are the pro's for doing it this way?
November 13th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
Should I be expecting anymore UFR's this season? I know it has been busy with the whole AD change and upcoming coaching switch, so I was just curious.
Thanks in advance
November 13th, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^
They are usually published on Thursdays and Fridays during bye weeks.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:52 PM ^
I'm stupid, rabble rabble rabble.
The UFRs have been late (gripe gripe grip) and we even missed a Indiana preview (whine whine whine).
Like a little boy showing up at the Ice Cream truck and finding out they only have those sherbert push-ups left, I am
November 13th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
November 13th, 2014 at 1:21 PM ^
You wouldn't mind Stoops? I'd argue he's had one of the best records in modern football second to Saban.
He mocks and beats the SEC.
I'd probably pick him over Harbuagh if he actually wanted the job but that is of course just me and I have absolutely no power.
November 13th, 2014 at 1:57 PM ^
"At this point, I wouldn't mind Stoops."
This cracks me up. Do people not understand that getting Stoops would be an unbelievable coup of a hire? It's the kind of knockout home run that almost never happens. Name the last coach with a resume even close to his to leave one Power 5 school for another.
November 13th, 2014 at 4:12 PM ^
It's not a perfect match, but a pretty successful Power 5 coach leaving for another Power 5 school. Stoops would be more of surprise, but not exponentially so.
November 13th, 2014 at 9:55 PM ^
November 14th, 2014 at 9:53 AM ^
I agree. Bielema was an extremely rare hire, and a great one for Arkansas. RR is another example. That's two in the last 7 years. These sorts of things almost never happen, and Stoops is another clear step up on resume from both of those guys.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:16 PM ^
to not consider Stoops if he were available. At 54, with his track record, he is obviously qualified. I'd actually rate them 1) Harbaugh 2) Stoops 3) Miles and happy with any of the choices.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:35 PM ^
First, I'm in on your ranking. I literally was thinking that this morning (with the caveat I have both Harbaughs at #1, though I think both are unlikely).
Second, Stoops is more like Bo than Carr, as he has many more Top 10 finishes than Carr. Stoops' problem over the last decade was his 0-5 run in BCS bowls (similar to Bo's tough run in Rose Bowls). Stoops really didn't break it until last year (I'm not counting his win over an 8-3 UConn team in the 2011 Fiesta) when he beat Alabama -- a huge win which must be seen as a fluke or something, b/c it seems to be forgotten when Stoops and Saban/SEC West is brought up.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:58 PM ^
That'd be my exact list too. Id be ecstatic with any of those 3 guys being hired as the next head coach. Cant wait until Hoke is fired.
November 13th, 2014 at 3:00 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 13th, 2014 at 12:17 PM ^
There was a window of couple of days when Hackett considered letting Hoke go but what saved him was data gathered observing practices and talking to players.There was ZERO indication that Hoke has lost the team. He strongly feels that if a coach has not lost his team, there is value in keeping him around (till the end of the season).
What I have heard is that his mind is absolutely made up to make a run at Jim H (regardless of outcomes of any games). If we swing and miss on JH, Hoke would have small chance of staying if we win out, because Hackett absolutely believes that we could hire a new guy and make things worse. He will 100% not let Hoke go *before* having something else in place so do not be surprised to see Hoke hang around till January (or even later if SF makes the playoff).
In summary, he believes Jim is a homerun that we should make a run at, there are worse coaches than Hoke we could end up with, and if there is a change it should be for the *better* or a holding pattern is preferred.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:22 PM ^
Hackett won't fire Hoke unless he has a better coach who has already signed a doc?
and hackett believes JH to be the best coach avail?
I agree this a prudent move - but it also opens up (very wide) the possibility of Hoke being the HC in 2015
November 13th, 2014 at 1:54 PM ^
Only if you think Jim Harbaugh is the only coach that is better than Hoke. Last I checked, it looks like there are 78 coaches out there, or more, that could do a better job.
November 13th, 2014 at 2:21 PM ^
That is not what I am saying. I think the thinking is that Jim is a homerun, barring him everybody else needs careful vetting.
November 13th, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^
Hoke might be the best available
we would be looking for a HC long after everyone else has already moved or started to prepare for the next season
November 13th, 2014 at 6:55 PM ^
I think I would be better than Hoke. Not really, but this is the internet so I can say that I'm pretty sure.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:22 PM ^
No idea what your sources are but reading it makes me happen, so have a +1.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:24 PM ^
I honestly wouldn't bet a dollar on it.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
At least it's logical.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:44 PM ^
I don't know how logical it is to say you won't fire your current coach until you have a replacement lined up. The coaching world is a fraternity and most won't go the Bobby Petrino route of completely undermining a sitting head coach. Yes, a search committee can talk to agents for coaches and guage some interest, but nothing definitive will be done until the current coach is fired.
November 13th, 2014 at 1:00 PM ^
That's a good point. To come to an official agreement before the current coach is out does seem a pretty sleazy thing to do, and I'm not sure it would work when everyone in this little circle sort of knows each other.
It is logical to "first do no harm" though, and I've got to believe there exists some non-offensive way to find out whether or not our 1, 2, and 3 options have enough interest before letting Hoke go. If there are no photons peeking out from the end of the tunnel, maybe keeping Hoke is safer than going through another upheaval.
November 13th, 2014 at 1:09 PM ^
November 13th, 2014 at 1:15 PM ^
Thank you. It is my favorite book. I looked into getting an avatar that would complement it, but frankly I think whatever I came up with would have been a bit too strange.
November 13th, 2014 at 2:54 PM ^
the whole conscience killing murder thing. . . .that would be a bit strange
November 13th, 2014 at 12:28 PM ^
That sounds very credible and I have no reason to doubt that this is Hackett's thinking but where did you hear this from?
Also, if you'll forgive me taking a moment to whack at straw men - if anyone actually is frothing at the mouth over why Hoke isn't getting axed ASAP, cool your jets. There was a window to do that after the Minnesota game but it didn't happen and here we are. No actual person agrees that he's a good choice going forward but it's absolute and complete follow to fire him without having a plan and replacement in hand. You know what's worse than attracting recruits to a program with a lame duck coach? Attracting them to a program with no coach at all.
November 13th, 2014 at 12:43 PM ^
November 13th, 2014 at 5:26 PM ^
("follow" should be "folly", gah. I fail at words)
November 13th, 2014 at 12:47 PM ^
If you actually have a source you can reliably trace back to Hackett, and who is willing to divulge this much, then congrats.
Alternatively, if Hackett is talking this much about his thinking to people who eventually lead to the MGoBoard then shame on him.
November 13th, 2014 at 1:22 PM ^
I know you are just passing along information. But of all the coaches that we have discussed as being potential replacements (including Schiano) name the ones that could be worse than Hoke.
We will have to search harder to find a worse coach than a better coach.
November 13th, 2014 at 1:27 PM ^
Schiano
November 13th, 2014 at 2:38 PM ^
At least Schiano took a historically awful Rutgers and made them decent. All Hoke has done is amass talent and somehow make it awful.
November 13th, 2014 at 11:20 PM ^
like this?
It took Schiano 5 years to get a winning record (oh, and the 2 previous years were a downward trajectory.)
In his 11 years at Rutgers his record was 68-67.
This seems awfully similar to Hoke's record before he was hired at Michigan.
And Hoke's record at Michigan is 31-18, which is deemed fireable by the MGOBLOG community.
November 13th, 2014 at 1:38 PM ^
I wouldn't include Schiano but I do agree with your oerall idea that there are definitely possibilites among the candidates proposed on this board and many of them would be a clear upgrade over Hoke. The question would be would any of them be willing to come and there is one that would almost certainly jump at the offer. He is not a clear upgrade and there is a boom or bust option since he hasn't been a head coach but Tom Herman would certainly come if offered. It would be a risk but at this point the chances of him being worse than Hoke are slim simply because I don't think Hoke is that good of a coach at this level.
If Hoke were a DLine coach at this level fine. If he were a head coach at a lower level program fine. However, he is just not a head coach at this level and I am confident he wouldn't land at a Power Five program as a head coach were he to be let go soon.
November 13th, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^
What s being described as "being worse than Hoke" is not the person but rather the situation one can get into. For example, Rich Rod is a *much* better coach than Hoke, but the situation was far worse (due to whatever reason).
Comments