[Bryan Fuller]

Quarterback is not the only difference.

Brian,

Something you may not wish to address in season but in watching this team I had this thought:

Solid run defense, inconsistent pass defense, an offensive line with talent struggling to gel, solid backs, receivers and tight ends.  Hmmm, sounds like 9 or 10 wins from Carr again. What is missing is a solid, low turnover, accurate, quarterback. Completely unfair?

Thanks

Dunder

Cumong man, that's completely unfair. You're comparing this offensive line to those featuring Jake Long or a half-dozen other NFL players, with zero freshmen of any variety on them unless they're Hutchinson-level talents. The backs don't make the right cuts and almost never make yards on their own. The tight ends are not good right now except for Butt, and Butt is still working his way back from an ACL tear.

There's no part of this team not subject to mental breakdowns that are hard to accept four years in. This includes quarterback, but since it seems like any QB under Hoke goes backwards it all ends in the same place.

BUT IS HE BETTER THAN A WISTFUL ORANGUTAN?

Brian,

In the wake of the ND game i have found my anger directed more at Dave Brandon than anything for whatever various and stupid reasons. The conventional wisdom seems to be, "hey, but revenues are increasing so, even though football is terrible and the stadium experience is horrible, Dave Brandon is great at growing the business." I think that is non-sense. I looked at revenues from 2002 through 2013 (graphs and numbers in attached spreadsheet) and the trendline attached to the revenue data shows Brandon has not out performed Bill Martin. Growth in revenue looks very on trend from Martin's tenure.

If you look at Michigan's AD revenue from 2005 versus some other athletic departments (texas, OSU, florida, Alabama, Oklahoma) our athletic department hasnt outperformed them either. Those five ADs revenue increased 84% from 2005 til 2013, Michigan's increased...83%.

Look, the data i gathered isn't perfect, I don't love the way USA today presented the 2005-2013 data. I've sort of cobbled together the 2002-2004 data from U-M budgets. The way i have presented the data is somewhat problematic (i should index 2005 to 100 then see the changes from there), but I don't think it changes the overall picture.

The point is I am really bothered with the conventional wisdom saying Brandon is doing really well increasing revenue. He is merely riding a wave that started long before here was hired and affects all of college football. Raising ticket prices doesn't make you a business genius. He gets zero credit for increased television revenues, which are the two overwhelming drivers of the whole enterprise.

These are things I am sure you are aware of but i have not seem them articulated on the blog.

Go Blue!

Nate

It should also be noted that the portion of the surge from 2009 to 2011 not due to increased BTN payouts was largely the luxury boxes coming online. Michigan offered them for cheap the first year and then increased the price to the regular level in year two.

So even if you are measuring Michigan athletic department success by revenue—a completely bonkers thing to do—Brandon is completely average in this department while being literally the worst AD in the country at public relations. A wistful orangutan could have been Michigan's athletic director since 2010 and revenue would still be way up. And students would love him!

[After the JUMP: Manning plausible as a CB coach over time? Mysterious red clad team-thing. Where to go in the event of an apocalypse. (The real apocalypse, not bad football.)]

Hi Brian,

There's been lots of talk about coaching issues, from the head coach to individual position coaches. Do coaches get better over time? Do they adapt to new concepts, become better playcallers, become better blitzers, etc.? For example, is Roy Manning a great coach who is new to cornerbacks and needs reps in his new gig to become competent and then good? Or will Roy Manning never be a good CBs coach because he hasn’t played the position and there are things you can only learn by playing the position?

Best,

Stephen Bowie

Manning certainly could become a good CBs coach in time. You see guys flip from one position to others plenty early in their career. Some guys even go from defensive coaches to the other side of the ball—Rich Rodriguez was a defensive back. So it's not out of the question.

Making him a CB coach right before a drastic shift in your defensive philosophy is going to get a cocked eyebrow when it really, really does not work out, as it hasn't. But at least Jourdan Lewis is playing well?

Hi Brian et al,

Not that it's really relevant to anything, but I was wondering if you noticed that blotch of fans adorned in red in the southwest corner of the stadium, about halfway up. There must have been 30-40 of them all uniformly wearing red. It seemed like they sat there as statues do, and then left in unison with about 10 minutes left in the game.

Any idea what that was all about?

Thought you might know.

Best, 
Ryan

That was the Fairfield lacrosse team, which was in town to play Michigan and stuck around to watch the football game.

Brian,

Longtime read and great blog.  I like UM's tradition uniforms and not a big fan of Oregon or Maryland craziness, but a recent "conversation" offered a different view.

My son (8) and nephews (8 and 11) are really into sports. I asked one of them (who's really into football) who his favorite team is?  Answer:  Oregon.  Why?  They have the coolest uniforms - it's all "swag" (the kids term for bright colored tees, shorts, socks - and they HAVE to be UnderArmour or Nike, no Adidas or Reebok) color.  I saw some link on your blog mentioned the disadvantage of being Adidas, but didn't have to read.  Anyway, hooking kids early like this surely can't hurt a program.  BTW - we're in the Chicago area, where ND and B1G alum rein supreme.  Didn't matter to these kids.

When I flipped on the Boiler/Sparty game on I thought it was some sort of Oregon/MSU rematch when I saw their unis.

Chris

Oregon's marketing works for Oregon. They should do what they do; they had no identity before they became the truck-bed digital-clock-with-wings swagmasters. It makes sense for Oregon.

But if you look at most places that have an identity, they don't do this stuff. The NFL outright prohibits frequent uniform changes and their throwback uniforms actually have to be throwbacks. Meanwhile, alternate uniforms for the college football old guard are either nonexistent or rare and subtle: Texas, USC, Oklahoma, Alabama, Penn State… IIRC these teams have almost never deployed alternates. It is a viable alternative to be you as hard as you can be you.

Michigan's got a thing. Hit up a poll about the best uniforms in college football—hell, in sports—and Michigan's home blues will be high up the list, often #1. They should emphasize their thing, because I've yet to see an alternate uniform that looks as good as the real McCoy.

I asked this question on a thread on the board but I thought I'd asked you directly.  Maybe you could shed some light for me.

I know he's been around UofM since Mo, and I'm sure he understands the whole "Michigan Man" thing and what Bo meant to this program, but I'm just sitting here watching the weekend highlights of the different Michigan schools and I see Thomas Rawls. I know he's playing MAC schools and what not but why all of a sudden is Rawls breaking off 121...155...220...229 and 270 now that he is at CMU? When he was even given the chance to be on the field, this guy couldn't find a hole to run through for Michigan. 

Another guy, Mike Cox, couldn't make his way on the field either.  Then he played his last year for UMASS, put together a good enough season to get a look from the pros and now has been playing for the Giants, off and on the practice squad, since he graduated.

Put that with how we haven't had a great running back here since Mike Hart and I wonder if Coach Jackson is really not what he used to be or was he ever that good of a coach? Don't get me wrong I love the quotes over the years you've had had fun with (Jackson talking up recruits), but what keeps him here? Is he that good of a recruiter?

Do you want to see him retained assuming Hoke is canned?  Thanks for any insight you can shed on this.

-RuebenRileyonRye

I don't know what it is about Fred Jackson that makes him unkillable but I do know that when the zombie apocalypse happens I'm driving to his house and pledging my fealty to to him.

As far as your question, yeah it's looking like he's hung around long past the point at which he's an asset. Tailback performance has been general dismal since Hart's departure and development just about impossible to see in anyone aside from Chris Perry. Meanwhile, the guys Michigan has gone out and recruited have been disappointments since Hart. Drake Johnson can't see the field at all even after Green got knocked out; he was a total flier with an EMU offer before Michigan stepped in for some reason. That Rawls and Cox have performed after leaving is another strike.

There would appear to be no reason to retain him in the event of a changeover, especially with Ty Wheatley and Mike Hart waiting in the wings. But keep him in the athletic department so it survives nuclear war.