Revisiting Hoke's Timeline
Toward the end of last year we heard the wiser, cooler heads here opine that Brady Hoke likely had two years to turn the football program around. What is the feeling now?
A sense of grim irony threatens to engulf the program. Every (somewhat maladroit) interview about better chemistry and every lost recruit begins to feel like added pressure--you reach a point where even news that not much can be read into begins to be interpreted as bad. . . the thing becomes harder to pull back from the brink. We have all witnessed this snowball effect only recently.
Hoke and Brandon are in many ways joined at the hip. But I still think that things have to be going pretty darned well at the end of the upcoming football season if Hoke is going to remain coach. And--reading between the lines--I don't believe that prospect is a good one.
The pressure on Brandon will be particularly intense if we improve only a little and are a sure thing to improve a little more with a veteran squad in 15-16. . . but with no clear evidence we are on our way back to championship contention. At this rate we are in some danger of falling back into a permanent second tier behind OSU, Wisconsin, and MSU. . . at least the possibility seems real. PSU may soon loom as a serious power again.
Beilein's success places a little more pressure on Hoke. What says everyone else? Does he have two years no matter what? Or will this year be decisive?
don't know how to move it.
i don't get too emo about whether we win recruiting wars or whatever, but we gotta win games that "we should win" at the very least. Other than that, I just hope for the best.
If Michigan goes 9-4 with losses to ND, MSU, NW and OSU (but with a mid-level bowl win), does Hoke come back in 2015?
That would be the absolute worst thing that could happen. 9-4 isn't great but it's acceptable. It would give Brandon a reason to give Hoke another year.
You say this as if DB has some incentive to keep Hoke other than "it's the best for the program." You know DB has as much reason for us to win as anyone, right? I don't know why people think that Dave Brandon wants the team to be bad or something.
I hear what you're saying, but people generally don't like to be wrong about their hand picked guy. So it's not so much that he has an incentive to keep him because he wants a mediocre program it's that he has a means of convincing himself that his guy really will get the job done.
An A.D., for better of for worse, is defined by his or her football coaching hire(s). Get that wrong and you're usually not long for your job. DB absolutely has an incentive to continue to think he got it right.
April 23rd, 2014 at 11:40 AM ^
that he doesn't give a flip about sports. His two instructions to the AD will be: 1. pay your own way, and 2. don't embarrass the university.
he also understands the lengthy list of problems associated with coaching changes. brandon is prob more intense fan than many on here, hes just in much different position. but i guarantee he does not take coaching changes lightly bc those transitions can be absolute nightmares as we, and he, recently witnessed. he will give hoke as much time as he possibly can without taking too much direct fire. id be shocked if brandon does not allow hoke to see his first large classes as juniors / seniors
April 24th, 2014 at 10:25 PM ^
If Dave Brandon wanted to win he wouldn't have hired a career loser to be the coach at Michigan. Not sure why so many people try to act like Hoke was this up and coming coaching star. He had one good season at Ball State and one good season at San Diego State not exactly that impressive when you consider he only had 3 winning seasons in his first 8 as a coach. Brandon wanted a puppet that is why you don't see Harbaugh here and that is why you don't see Miles here. Brandon is the Jerry Jones of college great at making money but is to involved with the Football part.
Absolutely agree. God, I do not want to be Nebraska; that blue blood that's stuck with 4 losses a year an not winning the conference. I just want an answer. I want to see a trip to Indy, or I want the team to collapse so UM can move on. The purgatory of just 'good' is lowest on my list. That said, please just win. Please.
We already are, only worse.
Sort of. I mean, we've reached depths of crappiness they haven't even touched, UM has also acheived a bit more as well. Nebraska hasn't won a conference title since 1999. The last time they lost less than 4 games in a season was 2003...when they lost 3 games. They are now perennially just 'good'. At least UM has won the conferece since then, and the 2006 season ranks up there even if it didn't result in any championships. 2011 was a stonger season as well. But yeah, I get what you're saying. UM is quickly heading there.
Nebraska has been to a Big Ten title game. Let's not flatter ourselves.
Well, 9-4 every year won't win many conference titles and no NC's, but it's a 69% winning record. Michigan is 73% all-time and Nebraska is 70%, so its hard to say its unacceptable or even below the standard.
This is discussed all the time on Nebraska boards, with fans pretty split. Guess it depends on how much you value consistency over titles. We Husker fans certainly feel like a few titles are overdue, but we've seen droughts in the past and have been in several conferance championship games in our "down" period.
Personally, I'll take 9-4 every year as the standard and titles when we get them without falling on my sword....as long as its not too long in between. GBR!
April 22nd, 2014 at 11:03 PM ^
mark you down as one hoping for a losing season?
but I'll give my opinion here anyway. Personally, hoping my team loses would never be my first choice. I also want to be upfront and say that I didn't like the Hoke hire when it happened, but I did get onside rather quickly. I would never wish for my team to lose to prove that I was right. I am secure enough with myself that I can admit when I'm wrong and I would much rather be forced to do that in this case than the alternative (which is me being right that BH was a poor hired and will put us even farther behind).
As for this season my first hope is that this team comes out and wins every game and ultimately a NC. I could also handle a season where we finish 11-2 like BH's first year so long as we beat OSU or MSU and win a bowl game. I would put a season like that as second on my list.
If I'm being honest though, if we finish any worse than that I think it's time for a change for the benefit of our program and the only way to make sure that happens is a terrible season. It pains me to say it but that would be my third choice. If we can't get 1 or 2 than I want a season that forces change, not a season just good enough to fool people into thinking we're on the right track if we're ultimately not.
April 23rd, 2014 at 10:25 AM ^
at your word, that 9-4 is the worst thing that could happen because it would give Brandon an excuse to keep Hoke. I can only infer that you would welcome losses as it would give Brandon greater reason to fire Hoke. More losses = greater leverage for Brandon. Ergo, you do hope for a losing season. You stated as much.
Without apology, I don't for a minute buy your assertion that you would welcome a championship season, it would be evidence contrary to the position you've staked out about Hoke, and in your eyes, prolong the agony that can only be relieved by Hoke leaving.
April 23rd, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^
who was probably doing the same thing when Rich Rod was coach
April 23rd, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^
about me nor anything about my opinions with regards to Rich Rodriquez, I've not discussed them. Nor for that matter have I discussed my opinions with regards to any other that has been HC during my lifetime. This isn't about what happened from 2008-2010, this is about the here and now. Perhaps instead of presuming to know what others may or may not think, you should concentrate on what others have actually said.
April 23rd, 2014 at 12:44 PM ^
I didn't neg you so I'll get that out of the way to start, but how in the hell did you get that from what I wrote? Either you have difficulty with reading comprehension or I did a lowsy job conveying my point.
I'll try one last time and leave it at that:
I don't have a problem with admitting when I'm wrong and would absolutely welcome doing so if it meant UM was on the right path with BH as our coach. I would love for him to go 11-2 or better this year and never look back, thus propelling our program back to the top where it belongs.
My fear is that a season like 9-4 will be just enough for some epople to think that we're on the right track when in my opinion, that wouldn't be the case. 9-4 in a coaches 4th year with all "his guys" in place tells me we're not on the right track.
What you don't seem to grasp is that for me personally, I would much rather be proven wrong about something and have my favorite team win than be proven right and have them lose. Some people may not feel that way and ultimately being proven right might outweigh everytihgn else (my Wife can be like that sometimes) but I'm just not that type of person. What I want is for my favorite team to win and if doing so makes me look stupid, bring it on.
I don't give two hoots whether it's BH, Urban Meyer, Lloyd Carr, Kate Upton......I don't give a flying f$%# who it is coaching, so long as we're winning. Honestly, I couldn't care less whether I like the HC of UM or not because it's the players and the university I root for, and so long as they win I'm happy.
I hope I was clearer in this post because you either intentionally ignored my previous one completely or I was very unclear as to my point.
April 23rd, 2014 at 12:41 PM ^
Exactly. I'm done with this mediocre and terrible bullshit. 8-4 and 9-3 is not good enough here. It might be good enough for Nebraska (If I was a Nebraka fan and had to put up with 4 losses EVERY YEAR I would flip). Plus the fact that they were blown out 70-21 in the freaking B1G championship game. How do you even let that happen?
It's time to stop pussyfooting around and go toe to toe with OSU. We have the money and resources to do it.
If you think 9-4 is so awful you've forgotten where this program was three years ago.
So if we see vast improvement but come up short of 10-2 he should be fired? Recall if you will, certain Akron and UCONN games last year. Point is, it would be very easy for this team to vastly improve from last year and still come up short of 10-2.
As terrible of a season as that is, it is probably more than enough for Brandon to bring Hoke back. All you need to do is look at Brandon's misleading and defensive press release about Hoke last year to know that it will take at least 2 more 5 loss seasons for Hoke to be fired.
Yay!
Absolutely. I know people around here sometimes forget/aren't old enough to remember, but 3-4 losses are kind of the norm for Michigan football in recent decades. And to be frank, winning 9 games with one senior on offense would be a damn miracle.
good sense of perspective bronxblue. I am actually kind of glad Lindsay chose Ohio _if_ that means Kugler gets more playing time. The x factor is whether and how much Lindsay would have helped younger players develop. We have all the pieces already, but they need time to mature. Only way Hoke should get fired is if we don't see growth/development over the course of the year. This team will be championship caliber in 2015 and probably above average in 2014. Only way we are great this year is if our defense is top 5 in the country. Those who hold an "Indy or Bust" attitude for 2014 are just plain unrealistic.
"Those who hold an Indy or bust attitude are unrealistic"...
Umm you do realize our own coach...errr...cheer leader set that goal 4 years ago?
There's a difference between having a goal and a minimum for keeping your job. I've my boss goals for my own performance. Those goals would have been different if I knew I needed to hit them or I'd be fired.
But there is a wide chasm between missing Indy and being horrible. If this team wins 8 games, I'm fine with that. That won't get them a conference title, but it will likely point toward a brighter future.
I know people around here sometimes forget/aren't old enough to remember, but 3-4 losses are kind of the norm for Michigan football in recent decades.
This is true but ultimately misleading. Two of those coaches had no real resume to speak of and were hired because they were Michigan Men. The other had a resume but was fighting factions trying to destroy his chances at success from Day 1.
I don't know what an objectively good Michigan football coach who had the requisite support from his school looks like. But something tells me it would look better than 3-4 losses every year.
"Two of those coaches had no real resume to speak of and were hired because they were Michigan Men."
69 - 3 losses (Bo)
79 - 4 losses (Bo)
81 - 3 losses (Bo)
82 - 4 losses (Bo)
83 - 3 losses (Bo)
84 - 6 losses (Bo)
87 - 4 losses (Bo)
90 - 3 losses (Mo)
92 - 3 ties* believe me, they felt like losses (Mo)
93 - 4 losses (Mo)
94 - 4 losses (Mo)
95 - 4 losses (LC)
96 - 4 losses (LC)
98 - 3 losses (LC)
00 - 3 losses (LC)
01 - 4 losses (LC)
02 - 3 losses (LC)
03 - 3 losses (LC)
04 - 3 losses (LC)
05 - 5 losses (LC)
07 - 4 losses (LC)
April 22nd, 2014 at 10:42 PM ^
The three coaches I was speaking of were obviously our last three (Hoke, RR, LC). Not sure how that could have been clearer, especially with the obvious RR reference.
Link reductions were made from 105 in 1978 (95) and again in 1992 which brought the limit to its present number of 85. The shift to 95 essentially drove Bo to a four year cycle - two progressive rebuilding years, a solid year and then the year. (Or at least this is how we felt in the 80's.) He was either caught by the change or intentionally stacked one or two consecutive recruiting classes. The shift to 85 just made it worse.
Interestingly along the way, some teams figured out how to stack the decks (tats and Dodge Challengers, apartments in LA, bag men, agent trips to Miami, oversigning, etc.). Those teams are the ones who have avoid the cycle of several 3-4 loss years with the occasional championship run.
Looking at our roster, this is should be the second rebuilding year or the solid year.
A loss to Northwestern would be devestating if it happened in conjunction with losses to MSU, OSU, and ND.
If we're bowl eligible he should and will be back.
That's a pretty low bar considering this is Michigan, the nonconference schedule has been set to make 6 wins very attainable, and making a bowl game has no longer been established as a reason to bring a coach back at large schools.
Les Miles is slimy as hell. I don't want that guy. We can win without having to resort to his tactics.
+1 for restaurant bowls
same
for +1ing restaurant bowls.
So you have no problem with an abysmal APR, multiple NCAA violations at both schools he's been at, and yanking the scholarships of guys who have already moved into their dorms as freshmen?
Miles is a jackass. Brandon is far from the only guy at Michigan who doesn't like him. (He wasn't even the AD back when Miles wanted this job.) We can be a winning program and still have a shred of integrity. It doesn't have to be an either/or.