Tag:Brady Hoke
Posted on: March 9, 2011 3:26 pm
Edited on: March 10, 2011 12:13 pm
  •  
 

Brady Hoke calls Tressel 'a good man'

Posted by Tom Fornelli

It's been nearly 48 hours since Yahoo's story about Jim Tressel covering up Ohio State violations first broke, and I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed with the reaction of Michigan fans everywhere. I've found that when you have no dog in the fight, watching two fan bases go at each other, particularly ones in a rivalry as fierce as that of Ohio State and Michigan, is some of the finest entertainment on this series of tubes we call the internet.

As I scour the internet today, though, there's a surprising lack of "LOL" coming from the Michigan side of the rivalry. I mean, considering all the fun Ohio State fans had with Rich Rodriguez, who only made his players practice more than they should, and was labeled a cheater, isn't this when Michigan fans should be unleashing hell upon Buckeyes everywhere?

Making matters worse, there's this quote from new Michigan head coach Brady Hoke.

"[Jim Tressel's] a good man, and I have a lot of respect for him, and they'll fight through that situation, and it will have no effects on the rivalry," Hoke told the Detroit Free Press. "I've known Jim Tressel a long time. He's a quality guy, a doggone good football coach, and I don't know that situation," Hoke said. "I know what we're focused on at Michigan."
More on Ohio State investigation

He's a good man and a doggone good football coach? That's the best you have, Michigan? I know that Jim Tressel publicly supported Rich Rodriguez during his NCAA investigation, but I think we now know why The Sweatervest did that. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and what not.

I mean, this is supposed to be one of the greatest rivalries in college sports, if not sport itself. You guys are slipping. This love-fest is giving the rivalry more of an Iowa-Purdue "we needed a rival for both these teams, so we gave them each other" feel.

Step it up, Big Blue.
Posted on: March 7, 2011 4:16 pm
 

Eye on CFB Recruiting Review, 3/7

Posted by Jerry Hinnen

Every Monday, our weekly Recruiting Review recaps the past week's top headlines from our sister blog, Bryan Fischer's Eye on Recruiting . Enjoy:
  • A couple of high-profile teams snagged their first commitments for 2012 last week, both looking west to California. Notre Dame secured a pledge from Fresno cornerback Tee Shepard, who boasted 27 offers from a who's who of schools around the country. A little closer to the coast, Boise State has a rare early commitment in the person of Elk Grove cornerback Marcus Rios. But Rios's coach says the commitment won't keep some higher-profile Pac-12 schools from coming after him later in the year.
  • Just days later, the Irish got their second commitment , Vandalia (Ohio) tackle Taylor Decker. Decker made his decision just a week after receiving his offer, saying "It's just where I wanted to go."
  • Lorenzo Mauldin, his options narrowed after South Carolina oversigned and asked him to grayshirt, could wind up at Louisville whether he qualifies as part of the 2011 class or not. 
One more reminder: if you don't want to wait for these Monday recaps, simply read Eye on Recruiting . You'll be glad you did.
Posted on: February 24, 2011 12:34 pm
Edited on: February 24, 2011 12:59 pm
 

Carr on Hoke: 'He knows ... I'm for him'

Posted by Jerry Hinnen

The Detroit Free-Press caught up with former Michigan head coach Lloyd Carr this week for his opinions on new Wolverine head man Brady Hoke, a former Carr assistant. Not surprisingly, Carr had nothing but highly positive things to say about his protege:
"[H]e has a great recruiting background nationally, and he’s a guy who likes to recruit. He’s a gregarious, fun-loving guy and meets people extremely well. I think he’ll do a great job recruiting. If you look at his background in coaching -- he’s been a defensive coach, a defensive player, and I think, if you look at the Big Ten Conference, there aren’t any teams winning that conference that I can recollect that didn’t play outstanding defense. So I think he’s going to hang his hat there, but it looks, to me, that he’s hired a very good offensive coaching staff as well. He understands it’s a big-picture deal ...

"[H]e’s not going to ask for my counsel. The thing he knows is I’m for him. I’m for Michigan. And if I can help him or he needs me, I’ll be there for him. But I don’t think that’s going to be very often. He’s spent seven, eight years here — he knows what he’s doing."
This probably wouldn't even be worth discussing -- "Football Coach Says Nice Things About Other Coach He Worked With" isn't exactly groundbreaking stuff -- if not for the contrast between Carr's effusive praise of Hoke and the lack of such praise for Hoke predecessor Rich Rodriguez.

Rumors abounded in Ann Arbor throughout the course of Rodriguez's tenure that Carr was less-than-pleased with the direction of the program under his successor, and even as Rodriguez came under attack from any number of directions, Carr's public support amounted to what MGoBlog author Brian Cook summarized as "a single tepid statement of support" over the course of three seasons. Former Carr players like Braylon Edwards seemed particularly hostile towards Rodriguez, exacerbating the perception of a rift between the two coaches. Former Michigan quarterback Rick Leach eventually came forward to attack Carr's lack of support on multiple occasions .

None of this is to say Carr shouldn't be as candid and as positive regarding Hoke as he is. But the conventional wisdom regarding Rodriguez's failure in Ann Arbor was that part of his struggles, at least, could be chalked up to a lack of universal support within and without the program. Contrasting Carr's rapid show of support for Hoke with his lack of same for RichRod -- certainly he never said anything publicly as encouraging as " The thing he knows is I'm for him" -- and it seems clear that the days of factions within the Michigan program are at an end. Hoke will have the kind of support that Rodriguez did not.

Now he just has to win the games that Rodriguez did not, if he wants to keep it.


Posted on: February 9, 2011 4:08 pm
Edited on: February 9, 2011 5:44 pm
 

Tate Forcier is headed to Miami

Posted by Tom Fornelli

UPDATE: The university made it official in a press release, Tate Forcier is transferring to Miami.  The quarterback will sit out the 2011 season and be eligible to play in 2012.  He will have two seasons of eligibility remaining when he takes the field for the Hurricanes.

----------------------------------

While Tate Forcier may have planned on visiting five schools in the coming weeks as he tried to figure out where he'd be transferring to, it seems those plans have changed. According to a few reports on Twitter, Forcier was visiting Miami today and has committed to the Hurricanes.




The school has not officially announced it, but it seems to be a done deal at this point.

Forcier had spent the last two seasons at Michigan. After starting most of 2009, he lost his job to Denard Robinson in 2010 and only played in relief of an injured Robinson. With Rich Rodriguez leaving, and Brady Hoke bringing a new offense to Ann Arbor, Forcier obviously felt that his services would be put to better use elsewhere.
Posted on: February 8, 2011 1:48 pm
Edited on: February 8, 2011 1:50 pm
 

Hoke: If we don't win the Big Ten, we failed

Posted by Chip Patterson

New Michigan head coach Brady Hoke enters the 2011 season with expectations to pick up the pieces and rebuild the Wolverines.  It is not a new position for Hoke, who faced a similar task at Ball State and San Diego State.  Hoke was able to do that at both of his previous head coaching stops, but it does not take an expertise in college football to know there will be new levels of pressure in Ann Arbor. 

But even the pressure from the Michigan fan base does not equate to the pressure that Hoke has already put on himself.  In a recent Q and A with the Detroit News, Hoke explicitly detailed his expectations for the Wolverines in the 2011 season.

Q. You have 18 starters back next year, including the Big Ten offensive player of the year. I'm thinking an 8-4 record, minimum. What do you think?

A. If we don't win the championship, we failed, period.

Q. Have you looked at your roster closely and assessed how good you could or couldn't be?

A. No. If we don't win the championship, we failed.

Q. So I suppose it's possible then?

A. I wouldn't be here if it wasn't.
Michigan will have to adapt to yet another new system heading into 2011, this time with almost an entire roster of Rich Rodriguez recruits.  Hoke has promised to enstill a focus on defense (all the way to the ball boys, so he says), but how quickly can he change the worst defense in the conference?  Michigan gave up an average of 450.8 yards per game in 2010; worst in the Big Ten and 110th of 120 FBS schools.  I respect Hoke's optimism in his new position, but basing success/failure in 2011 on a Big Ten Championship may be a bit unrealistic.

If Hoke does believe you need to win the championship in order to succeed, I can write the Wolverines 2011 headline now:

"Michigan fails, period."

Posted on: February 4, 2011 11:47 am
 

Denard's load will be lighter in 2011

Posted by Tom Fornelli

While the 2010 season ultimately ended up being the year of Cam Newton, for the first month of the season the name that was dominating the college football landscape was Denard Robinson. Michigan had started out its season undefeated, and Robinson was tearing opposing defenses apart. Through the first three games Shoelace had racked up 1,230 yards and 8 touchdowns, including a 502-yard effort in a win against Notre Dame.

While Michigan's season would feature six losses before it was done, the Denard Robinson Show never really came to an end, as he finished the season second in the nation in total offense with 328.6 yards per game, and accounted for 32 of the team's 58 touchdowns. 

Now Robinson and the rest of the Wolverines are undergoing a coaching change, which means that a new offensive system is being put in place under Brady Hoke and Al Borges. While Borges says that Robinson will still be the focal point of Michigan's offense, things won't be the same as they were under Rich Rodriguez -- speaking of whom, our own Dennis Dodd had a nice talk with the former Michigan coach this week -- and he'd like to lighten his load a bit by spreading the ball around a bit more.

"To a degree … we're blowing a lot of [the offense] up," Borges told the Detroit News. "In our offense, I don't see Denard rushing for 1,700 yards, and I told him that. But I could see him rushing for 1,000 yards, and I could see him throwing for that 700 or 800 he didn't rush for."

"They were tattooing him. I came at him that way — we can save you a little bit. Everybody knew Denard was the show. He's tough, he's smart and he's athletic, and we have to get the most out of him."

Borges also went on to say that he was pleasantly surprised at Robinson's passing skills, as he came to Michigan thinking Denard was a runner, but after watching more film on the team, he likes what he sees from Robinson in the passing game.

The change in philosophy, while expected, is also pretty logical. The only thing more common than seeing Robinson make some fantastic play with his legs last season was seeing a play end with Robinson getting up slowly, or even leaving the game. Since Robinson is such a unique weapon for the Wolverines, you want to make sure you can keep him on the field as well.
Posted on: January 31, 2011 7:10 pm
 

How important is a coach's age to winning titles?

Posted by Adam Jacobi

The Virginia Tech-centric blog Gobbler Country posted an interested study today, examining the breakdown of championship-winning coaches' ages in the modern era of college football. The question raised is "how old is too old," and excepting some obvious outliers, the answer is "younger than you think."

For the champions, I used the BCS from 1998-present, the coaches' poll from 1982-1997 and the AP poll from 1960-1981.

Time span Avg. Age
1960-69 46.4
1970-79 51.0
1980-89 48.6
1990-99 55.6
2000-10 49.9
BCS Era 55.1
1960-2010 51.3

The ages of head coaches have fluctuated from mid 40s to mid 50s since 1960, but the average has been a little over 51 years of age. However, there has been one coach that has helped break the curve. Take away Bobby Bowden's two titles and the average in the 90's shrinks to 52.8 and the BCS era shrinks to 53.8.

What's even more unsettling to programs with older coaches is the breakdown of championships by age bracket:

Age Span Champs
< 40 5
40-44 9
45-49 9
50-54 14
55-59 9
60 + 5

Not only is there a precipitous dropoff from the early 50s to 60+, those five titles were won by just three coaches: The aforementioned Bowden with two, Bear Bryant with two, and Joe Paterno -- the three most celebrated coaches of the modern era of I-A football. What's more, Bryant had won his first title at the age of 50, while Paterno won his first at 56. Bowden didn't win his first until he was 64, but that was after six straight top-five finishes in the final poll for Florida State. In other words, each of those three coaches firmly established his national championship bona fides before his 60th birthday, while every other coach who ever hit 60 in the last 50 years was quite evidently past his prime.

It's not really surprising, then, to have seen Maryland jettison longtime head coach Ralph Friedgen, who was 63 at the end of the 2010 and who clearly wasn't about to win a title at such a mediocre football school (no offense, Terps, but let's be honest). Incoming coach Randy Edsall will have just turned 53 at the outset of the 2011 season, and while one might joke that Maryland's only got two seasons of Edsall in his prime before it all goes downhill, it's not as if he's got 15 years in front of him with the Terrapins.

So with all this in mind, here are a few more notable coaches and their ages as of the start of the 2011 season. It would be incorrect to say there's a "new generation" of coaches on the move (seven years or so doesn't really constitute a generational gap) but it's pretty clear that a few of these guys aren't lasting much more than five years -- especially if they're not winning 10 games a year anymore.

Frank Beamer, Virginia Tech, 64
Mack Brown, Texas, 60
Gene Chizik, Auburn, 49
Kirk Ferentz, Iowa, 56
Al Golden, Miami, 42
Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State, a man, 44
Brady Hoke, Michigan, 52
Brian Kelly, Notre Dame, 49
Chip Kelly, Oregon, 47
Lane Kiffin, USC, 36
Mike Leach, free agent, 50
Les Miles, LSU, 57
Dan Mullen, Mississippi St., 39
Will Muschamp, Florida, 40
Joe Paterno, Penn State, 84
Gary Patterson, TCU, 51
Bo Pelini, Nebraska, 43
Chris Petersen, Boise State, 46
Bobby Petrino, Arkansas, 50
Mark Richt, Georgia, 51
Nick Saban, Alabama, 59
Bob Stoops, Oklahoma, 50
Jim Tressel, Ohio State, 58
Kyle Whittingham, Utah, 51

Now obviously, not all of these schools are going to win national championships in the next 5-10 years. But by and large, most of these schools do pay their coaches a gigantic salary -- to the point that the expectation of competing on a national level is inevitable. If a coach is struggling in his fourth or fifth year with a program, is an athletic director going to be more apt to fire the coach if he's 57 instead of 47? Is that age discrimination, or common sense?

Posted on: January 26, 2011 5:43 pm
 

2011 returning starters: a first glance

Posted by Jerry Hinnen

It's never too early to start thinking about the next college football season, and that means it's never too early to ask the inevitable first question of any team going forward: How many starters do they have returning?

Fortunately, preview magazine maven Phil Steele has worked to provide a convenient answer to that query, releasing today a chart ranking all 120 FBS teams according to their offensive, defensive, and specialist starters returning.

There's plenty of time to delve far more deeply into college football's 2011 outlook, but a few immediate impressions after looking over the Steele chart:
  • SEC teams finish at both the top and bottom of the chart, with Vanderbilt leading the way behind all 11 2010 offensive starters remaining on the roster. But more notable is that after losing eight offensive starters, seven defensive, and both kickers, defending national champion Auburn comes in dead last, 120th out of 120. Gene Chizik will have his work cut out for him.

  • A couple of new head coaches in the Midwest step into very favorable situations. Brady Hoke will be able to draw upon nine returning starters on either side of the ball at Michigan and will only have to generate any kind of defensive pulse to be hailed as an improvement on Rich Rodriguez. But even he won't have it as cushy as Don Treadwell, who takes over the defending MAC champions at Miami (Ohio) and has 18 starters back to work with, good for 10th on the list.

  • A lot of early talk in the SEC West has focused on what LSU returns at the skill positions and what Alabama has lost, but behind nine returning defensive starters and both specialists, the Tide still boasts two more starters back than their Bayou Bengal rivals.

  • 2010 was almost certainly the high-water mark for the crumbling WAC. Not only is bellwether Boise State moving on to the Mountain West, but Nevada and Hawaii return just eight offensive starters between them.

  • Actually, it might have been the high-water mark for non-AQ teams in general. Gary Patterson's TCU seems as bulletproof as programs come these days, but having just four starters back on either side of the ball (placing them 119th on the chart, one spot ahead of Auburn) will be quite the challenge all the same.

  • You should go ahead and steel yourself against the Notre Dame hype flood now; the Irish ended the season on a four-game win streak, you'll recall, and have eight starters back on both offense and defense including surprise draft dodger Michael Floyd (pictured). 

  • Likewise, the offseason storyline for the ACC is already written: Florida State, with 18 starters back, will be expected to wrest the league overlord role away from Virginia Tech, with just 13.

 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com