Mattison plans to retire here, Borges thinks he'll stick around too; and Lloyd thought last year was good & stuff
Not shocking news, but from the horse's mouth Mattison plans on retiring here.
http://annarbor.com/sports/um-football/dc-greg-mattison-says-hell-finis…
More interesting is that even though he knows he's getting up there, he hasn't lost his love (came back from his vacation early to watch film), and doesn't have a set age, just as long as his health lets him (because he can't see himself doing anything else).
Borges doesn't completely close the door on a great opportunity opening up for himself, but isn't looking and sounds like he'd be very satisfied with his career ending here.
AA.com also gives a summary of a Lloyd radio interview. Obviously thinks Hoke did a tremendous job last year in a lot of facets, and expects him to keep it up in the future. He likes his coaching staff.
http://annarbor.com/sports/um-football/ex-coach-lloyd-carr-discusses-mi…
Mostly boilerplate, but football stuff in any regard.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:01 PM ^
Mattison will never retire
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:04 PM ^
Unless my reading comprehension is terrible (which is always possible) the article said that Borges is 49. I couldn't believe it, so I looked at wikipedia (great source, I know) and it said that he was 56, which sounds more reasonable. Anyone know which one is correct?
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:08 PM ^
He's got great locks for being 56, per http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/borges_al00.html
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:09 PM ^
Is he Milli or Vanilli?
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:07 PM ^
Wikipedia is always right 90% of the time
I don't know if you're joking or not but Wiipedia has become a great resource and is usally right. They have trouble being labeled as "right" because of how wrong they were to begin with.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:08 PM ^
MGoBlue profile says he is 55, although birthday is 0ct 8, 1955
If that's the case, my dad shares a birth day and year as big al.
I was pretty startled by that as well. Glad to see it was incorrect, because my reaction was "whoa, this will not end well." Even at 56 he still needs to take a page out of Mattison's book and hit that bike.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:04 PM ^
But hearing "Mattison" and "retire" next to each other makes me feel icky.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:06 PM ^
Mattison obviously wouldn't have come back if he wasn't in it for the long haul, but it's great that it's finally "official." Borges will provide stability, though we have yet to see what he can or can't do, because he doesn't have "his personnel" yet.
Brady Hoke's best case scenario is to keep them both for as long as they want to coach. That way, he can continue to concentrate on being a great motivator and being a consummate closer in recruiting.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:12 PM ^
I like how in the second picture subtitle, they point out Borges ("Offensive coordinator Al Borges, left..."), as if anyone would mistake Denard Robinson for Al Borges.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:12 PM ^
I'm looking forward to having a ridiculous stout defense capable of multiple shutouts in a season.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:22 PM ^
forward to having a ridiculous stout too...
Yeah you can never go wrong with Expedition. Have you had their Expedition/Double Cream Stout combo named Black Note? Exceptional brew but still not as good as Founders KBS.
and I must say that it is a fantastic beer, that I think is at least in the same room as Founders...
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:21 PM ^
Beyond the reasons mentioned in the article, I also believe some of Mattison's family is within earshot of of Ann Arbor, as I recall, and that he has said in other interviews that he would like to be closer to them now as well. Still, it is great to hear that he would like to stay as long as he can physically hold out essentially, and that Borges said that he would be happy if his career ended here (without making the declaration that it would, of course). To have that sort of continuity is more difficult now in programs, it seems, so we're definitely fortunate to have / inspire that level of dedication.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:41 PM ^
His daughter lives near Ann Arbor and she just had a baby around the time that he got hired.
...his daughter encouraged him to take the U-M job for family reasons. Thank you, thank you, thank you, Greg Mattison's daughter.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:24 PM ^
The last HC position he was a real finalist for was the Portland State job in 2010. That's a FCS job that would pay him probably no more than 200,000, if he was lucky, as a first time HC.
He makes 350,000 base at Michigan doing a lot less work.
You be the judge.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:49 PM ^
Borges is now making $650,000 a year. He signed a new three-year contract earlier this year.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:23 PM ^
And thankfully Hoke's future plans don't even need to be discussed.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:23 PM ^
But once Brady Hoke builds his own brand and becomes of the nations elite coaches in the eyes of recruits then Mattison and his image become less important. Best case scenario Mattison is around for another 3-5 years and during that time Brady becomes a coach, players will go to Michigan just to play for him. Ex. Saban.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:32 PM ^
Having a guy that coached one of the most recognizable defenses in the NFL will always be a big plus. Hopefully he is able to stick around for more than 5 years.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:25 PM ^
Mattison is never retiring.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:26 PM ^
I'm pretty certain that Borges won't go anywhere. His track record and the early returns at Michigan are kind of "meh".
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:43 PM ^
I realize you are kidding, but since you brought up his track record...His track record shows that he likes being an OC. If he wanted to be a head coach somewhere, he would have done it by now.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:51 PM ^
I wasn't joking about his track record. It is very mixed. He has had some good offenses, but also some pretty bad ones. Last year, results were also very mixed. Awesome, at times. Awful, at times.
What? You realize that he engineered a UCLA offense that put up 40+ points a game and an Auburn offense that put up 30+ points a game (not to mention went undefeated), right? And that he turned Cade McNown and Jason Campbell into first round draft picks? And that our offense in 2011 actually averaged more points per game than it did in 2010, despite dropping the no-huddle? His bad offenses were at pre-Tedford Cal, Indiana (both conference bottom-dwellers), and his last year at Auburn. And as mediocre as Auburn's offense was in his final year, it fell off a cliff after he left.
The only knock against him is that he's not a recruiter, but we have so many crack recruiters on our staff that it doesn't matter. If you give him good talent, he'll maximize its potential. His track record proves that.
August 2nd, 2012 at 12:43 PM ^
Michigan's starting quarterback against Ohio State in 2008 was redshirt freshman Nick Seridan. NICK. SHERIDAN.
Michigan's starting quarterback against Ohio State in 2011 was junior Denard Robinson. DENARD. ROBINSON.
That's not just a difference in scheme, or conforming an offensive plan to certain players. That's the difference between losing 42-7 and winning 40-34.
Your response - how was it relevant to the article?
That's part of why he has such great appreciation for what Brady Hoke accomplished in his first year as Michigan's coach: 11-2 record, beat Ohio State and won a Sugar Bowl championship.
And he did it with players who were chewed up their previous three seasons.
"In my judgment, what he did last year was really special because he came in and he took a group of kids that he hadn't recruited and he earned their trust and their respect, and you could see the way they played," Carr said Tuesday during an interview on the Huge Show.
"I mean, that team played hard from start to finish, and I think that's a mark of a coach. Do your players play hard all the time?"
Part of what stunted former coach Rich Rodriguez's tenure was the team's slow start in 2008, when it went a program-worst 3-9.
Rodriguez insisted on running his spread-option offense, even though he had players -- and especially quarterbacks -- better equipped for a more traditional pro-style offense. He said it would help expedite Michigan's move to the new offense -- and it proved to be true, as the Wolverines put up big offensive numbers in 2009 and 2010.
But 2008 was a black mark.
Carr said he believes Michigan was so successful in Hoke's first season because he didn't ask players to operate a system that wasn't fit for their skill sets -- particularly dual-threat quarterback Denard Robinson.
"I think they did a tremendous job offensively, utilizing Denard (and) what he can do, as opposed to trying to force him to try to do things they'd like to do," Carr said in the interview.
http://annarbor.com/sports/um-football/ex-coach-lloyd-carr-discusses-mi…
Second link posted by M-Wolverine in the original post.
qualifies as "fair use."
Sue me. Better yet, have Kyle Meinke sue me.
You think it answered Keith's question?
RR delusionaly went with Sheridan when everybody with a pulse new Threet was sweet. Personally I'd of gone with Feagins; did you see his run against Minnesota.
idiotic fucking question.
Hey! I'm not the one who ran Mallet out of town with a pitchfork and recruited Feagins. See, Hoke is much more intelligent because he didn't decide to run Denard out of town and go with Jack (God bless him) Kennedy. Horse sense: Hoke got it in spades.
look good by comparison.
Actually, I don't think you are really so stupid; I think you are trying to bait me. But there are lots of Michigan fans who I think really are that stupid.
Because you know if someone used such language against him he'd be the first one to run crying to the mods about how dare someone talk to him like that like a hypocritical little bitch.
You'd have a 3 part diary on how they're criminals and Brian should sue them out of existence. Kyle Meinke probably cares about you as much as Dave Brandon or anyone else involved in Michigan Athletics does...which is not a lick.
Surely you love the quality of journalism you can get in the free news market, unrestricted by the Fairness Doctrine!
(Go on and delete this, mods, but you know Section 1 loves it.)
Denard Robinson, who would have been Sheridanesque if they had tried to shoe horn him into their preferred offense that didn't suit him. Flexibility, the new boys have it.
Just when I think you've given up your obsession and become the valuable poster you can be out comes the hobby horse, the rusty sword, and you tilt at windmills that have long fallen to dust.
Your equating Denard Robinson and Nick Sheridan. You did it, and so did Kyle Meinke, in reverse. I didn't raise the subject of any former coach; Meinke did. I didn't criticize Brady Hoke either.
I'm not sorry; I am just calling out bullshit whenever I see it.
The point I think you missed it. Denard Robinson, as a first year qb in the West Coast system that Brady and Borges want to employ, would have been an unmitigated disaster.
I love Denard and I think he's going to be fantastic in the hybrid system that will be used this year. You know, that system that was adapted to the players abilities.
has two sides. The presumption that Nick Sheridan is a near-equal to Denard Robinson, if only for the right system, is nuts. The presumption that 2008 would have been "fine" as opposed to "terrible" if only for a different set of offensive plays, is nuts. The presumption that 2008 wasn't worth it, to put together the fine '09 and '10 offenses, is nuts.
Of course Sheridan isn't comparable to Denard. I'm saying that inflexibility doomed RR. Nick Sheridan was chosen because he was the closest thing on the roster to a dual threat qb which tells you right there what offense we shouldn't have been running. 2008 was not worth going 5 wins and 7 wins in the following two years and getting embarrassed by a middle of the road SEC team. RR sacrificed everything on the altar of his offense. He's a one trick pony.
seems pretty silly. I don't think it was that side of the ball that was his problem. He put together a ferrari of an offense in 3 years. That's impressive. He created a defense in 3 years that was so bad high school coaches couldn't match it's level of incompetence. That's not impressive.
Arguing over which offense he should've run is like making a decision about what girl to take home based on how their hair looks, when one weighs 300 pounds and the other has the body of a Colombian.