POLL Better Michigan head football coach

[Across The Field]

Iowa didn't pull their offensive starters. They played the whole way through. And on the TD pass to Hemingway to make it 35-21, both Hyde and Greenwood were still in the game. So I don't think that is accurate saying they took their starters out of the game. I get your point, it's just not accurate. Scoring a TD to make it a 7 point game with 10 minutes to go isn't scoring in garbage time(PSU game).

And I'd disagree about his style. With his players in the system they were a very good offense(2010). Even in 2011 the offense was still very good. Imagine RR with another year that season. They would have been even better than 2010 offensively.

But in all those games, they were still getting blown out and had to try and come back late in the second half. It's nice that they were able to make it competitive with PSU, but they were still getting blown out in the 2nd half, as they were in the other two vs. Iowa and Wisconsin. They still lost all three of those games by double digit points. I'd also argue that those three teams probably weren't playing their absolute hardest considering they were all comfortably ahead in the 2nd half at different points.

There's a reason why nobody else in the conference tries to run that style of offense. It'll work great against the lesser teams in the conference, but it just doesn't work against strong defenses. Honestly, it's sort of a dead offensive system. You don't see teams succeed without legitimate passers anymore, and RR's offense has never really featured one.

 

[ericd7633]

But in all those games, they were still getting blown out and had to try and come back late in the second half. It's nice that they were able to make it competitive with PSU, but they were still getting blown out in the 2nd half, as they were in the other two vs. Iowa and Wisconsin. They still lost all three of those games by double digit points. I'd also argue that those three teams probably weren't playing their absolute hardest considering they were all comfortably ahead in the 2nd half at different points.

There's a reason why nobody else in the conference tries to run that style of offense. It'll work great against the lesser teams in the conference, but it just doesn't work against strong defenses. Honestly, it's sort of a dead offensive system. You don't see teams succeed without legitimate passers anymore, and RR's offense has never really featured one.

There's a difference between getting behind early and scoring in garbage points. They avg 455 yards/game against those 3 teams, which just accounting for those games would have put them in the top 10 in ypg overall in th country, meaning offensively they were still really good in those games. I think you'd have a point if they took starters out, but they didn't. Sure they lost all 3 by double digits, but certainly not because of the offense.

RR made it work at Arizona. His avg offense efficiency during his 6 years was 27, which is really good considering the the caliber of player that they get. His last year they were top 10. Had a great offense in 2017.

 

[Across The Field]

There's a difference between getting behind early and scoring in garbage points. They avg 455 yards/game against those 3 teams, which just accounting for those games would have put them in the top 10 in ypg overall in th country, meaning offensively they were still really good in those games. I think you'd have a point if they took starters out, but they didn't. Sure they lost all 3 by double digits, but certainly not because of the offense.

RR made it work at Arizona. His avg offense efficiency during his 6 years was 27, which is really good considering the the caliber of player that they get. His last year they were top 10. Had a great offense in 2017.

They were behind big early and late in those games though. I'd love to know how many of those yards they got that you talk about came when they were already way behind. I can tell you this - they scored 87 points in those 3 games. 35 of those points came in either the final couple minutes of the 3rd quarter or in the 4th quarter. That's not the sign of a successful offense. It also isn't as if those were juggernaut defenses - Iowa was 21st in defensive efficiency, Wisconsin was 35th, and Penn State was 48th.

I know he made it work at Arizona. I even pointed out that the Pac-12 can be beaten with that type of offense because they don't have elite defenses like the Big Ten. There's a reason why he only averaged 8 points a game in three games against Ohio State.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

The operative word is "coach."

Hoke doesn't qualify.

Rich Rod was a better "coach"...Harbaugh is a better recruiter.

Rich Rod was never able to get all the talent he needed to make his offense successful. (Nor did the Mich
fans ever embrace that change of offense. Harbaugh can get players for his system, but he can't win
big in the modern era. (Against teams that have adapted.

Um. Rich rod lost because he couldn’t coach a defense.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

One guy lost to Toledo and the other guy lost to Rutgers. This poll is invalid.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

But in all those games, they were still getting blown out and had to try and come back late in the second half. It's nice that they were able to make it competitive with PSU, but they were still getting blown out in the 2nd half, as they were in the other two vs. Iowa and Wisconsin. They still lost all three of those games by double digit points. I'd also argue that those three teams probably weren't playing their absolute hardest considering they were all comfortably ahead in the 2nd half at different points.

There's a reason why nobody else in the conference tries to run that style of offense. It'll work great against the lesser teams in the conference, but it just doesn't work against strong defenses. Honestly, it's sort of a dead offensive system. You don't see teams succeed without legitimate passers anymore, and RR's offense has never really featured one.

Exactly. RR was producing decent offenses; his problem was that Michigan was ranking in the 100+ in defense. If RR had actually invested in a good defensive staff, he may have worked out. But he had the Mark Dantonio problem of being loyal to guys he brought from WV.

RR made it work at smaller schools because the expectations were lower; winning 7/8 games at Arizona was good. And the Pac or Big East weren't known for being defensive powerhouses, shootouts are somewhat common. He came to the B10 and got destroyed because he basically ignored one side of the ball.

 

[ericd7633]

They were behind big early and late in those games though. I'd love to know how many of those yards they got that you talk about came when they were already way behind. I can tell you this - they scored 87 points in those 3 games. 35 of those points came in either the final couple minutes of the 3rd quarter or in the 4th quarter. That's not the sign of a successful offense. It also isn't as if those were juggernaut defenses - Iowa was 21st in defensive efficiency, Wisconsin was 35th, and Penn State was 48th.

I know he made it work at Arizona. I even pointed out that the Pac-12 can be beaten with that type of offense because they don't have elite defenses like the Big Ten. There's a reason why he only averaged 8 points a game in three games against Ohio State.

I never said those teams were defensive juggernauts. You were the one that brought those games up. I don't think it really matters when those points were scored. It's not as if those teams pulled their starters. Maybe in the Wisconsin game, I didn't really look into that game as much. Also, they managed to avg 37.5 ppg in regulation against ND and Illinois who were both in the top 25 of defensive efficiency. I don't think there will be any metric out there that doesn't have them as a top 15 offense. They were #11 in offensive efficiency that season.

If you're going to just base it off the OSU game, then yeah, it doesn't look good.

And actually on average the defenses were better in RR's last year at AZ then they were in his last year in the B1G. According to defensive efficiency numbers. And that was the year his offense finished #7.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

I never said those teams were defensive juggernauts. You were the one that brought those games up. I don't think it really matters when those points were scored. It's not as if those teams pulled their starters. Maybe in the Wisconsin game, I didn't really look into that game as much. Also, they managed to avg 37.5 ppg in regulation against ND and Illinois who were both in the top 25 of defensive efficiency. I don't think there will be any metric out there that doesn't have them as a top 15 offense. They were #11 in offensive efficiency that season.

If you're going to just base it off the OSU game, then yeah, it doesn't look good.

And actually on average the defenses were better in RR's last year at AZ then they were in his last year in the B1G. According to defensive efficiency numbers. And that was the year his offense finished #7.

The ultimate issue is that RR had a massive defense problem, Hoke had a massive offense problem and Harbaugh has produced some pretty good, to elite, defenses and usually has an above average offense nationally.

(Scoring offense/Scoring defense)

---------------------------------------RR
2008
SO: 99
SD: 85

2009
SO: 36
SD: 76

2010
SO: 25
SD: 107
---------------------------------------HOKE
2011
SO: 26
SD: 6

2012
SO: 57
SD: 19

2013
SO: 46
SD: 66

2014
SO: 111
SD: 27
---------------------------------------HARBAUGH
2015
SO: 50
SD: 6

2016
SO: 11
SD: 2

2017
SO: 91
SD: 13

2018
SO: 21
SD: 16

2019
SO: 44
SD: 25

You can see the offensive stats improve under RR every single year he was here. While the defense remained pretty horrid, and finished the worst, under RR. Hoke had similarly regressive stats. Defense got worse through most years, and the offenses also trended down, until they hit rock bottom in 2014.

You can see a clear difference since Harbaugh got here. Other than 2017, his teams have been pretty equally balanced, with the emphasis on defense.

 

[ericd7633]

The ultimate issue is that RR had a massive defense problem, Hoke had a massive offense problem and Harbaugh has produced some pretty good, to elite, defenses and usually has an above average offense nationally.

(Scoring offense/Scoring defense)

---------------------------------------RR
2008
SO: 99
SD: 85

2009
SO: 36
SD: 76

2010
SO: 25
SD: 107
---------------------------------------HOKE
2011
SO: 26
SD: 6

2012
SO: 57
SD: 19

2013
SO: 46
SD: 66

2014
SO: 111
SD: 27
---------------------------------------HARBAUGH
2015
SO: 50
SD: 6

2016
SO: 11
SD: 2

2017
SO: 91
SD: 13

2018
SO: 21
SD: 16

2019
SO: 44
SD: 25

You can see the offensive stats improve under RR every single year he was here. While the defense remained pretty horrid, and finished the worst, under RR. Hoke had similarly regressive stats. Defense got worse through most years, and the offenses also trended down, until they hit rock bottom in 2014.

You can see a clear difference since Harbaugh got here. Other than 2017, his teams have been pretty equally balanced, with the emphasis on defense.

Oh yeah no doubt RR's biggest concern was his defense. And yeah I agree with regards to Harbaugh. He's most definitely been the best of the 3 coaches. If he was as bad as Hoke and RR were he would have been fired by now. His only glaring weakness is he can't beat OSU. Which has prevented them from winning the division outright, winning the conference, and making the CFP. I don't hold his bowl record against because bowls are practically meaningless these days.

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Oh yeah no doubt RR's biggest concern was his defense. And yeah I agree with regards to Harbaugh. He's most definitely been the best of the 3 coaches. If he was as bad as Hoke and RR were he would have been fired by now. His only glaring weakness is he can't beat OSU. Which has prevented them from winning the division outright, winning the conference, and making the CFP. I don't hold his bowl record against because bowls are practically meaningless these days.

We've also had a couple of heart breaking bowl losses under Harbaugh. Should have beat both South Carolina and FSU.

 

[GoldRusher]

All 3 aren't/weren't very good considering the resources michigan has to offer. RR was never going to be successful in the B1G with that offense. It can work in the Pac-12 or in the old Big East, but not year in/year out against the defenses in the Big Ten. I went with Hoke because he's the only one who could manage to beat Ohio State. He also won a major bowl.

Meyer and Day run nearly the same offense as RR so.. not true imo.

Now the defense argument I agree 100%.

That defense is not a big boy defense at all, particularly against good/decent run teams with a TE that can walk and chew bubble gum.

 

[Tin Man]

Going with our current coach ...

Ever forward...

Suburban Meyer

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

All 3 aren't/weren't very good considering the resources michigan has to offer. RR was never going to be successful in the B1G with that offense. It can work in the Pac-12 or in the old Big East, but not year in/year out against the defenses in the Big Ten. I went with Hoke because he's the only one who could manage to beat Ohio State. He also won a major bowl.

Oh come on. Hoke BARELY beat one of the worst OSU teams in the last 3 decades and then went on and probably won a game against VT that we shouldn't have won (the called back VT TD).

 

[wingsauce7]

Who ya got?

Why do you give a shit?

 

[ericd7633]

Oh come on. Hoke BARELY beat one of the worst OSU teams in the last 3 decades and then went on and probably won a game against VT that we shouldn't have won (the called back VT TD).

Also that VT team was one of the worst BCS/NY6 teams in history. Harbaugh's 2015 win against Florida is actually rated as a better team than that VT team was according to Sagarin. The discrepancy isn't big or anything, but it's certainly reasonable to suggest beating VT in 2011 and beating UF in 2015 is essentially the same. Also, 4 of Harbaugh's teams rate better according to Sagarin than the 2011 team does. And the 2011 team went into the OSU game with nothing to play for as far as division/conference ramifications. The 2016 and 2018 teams did, so I'd argue those seasons were probably more enjoyable seasons up until the OSU game than the 2011 season was. And then Michigan lost meaningless bowl games those seasons with numerous players sitting out.

All in all I think it dumb to suggest taking Hoke because he beat an awful OSU team, and won a bowl game against a team that is rated worse than a team Harbaugh beat in his one bowl win. Not to mention he ran that shit into the ground.

 

[HammerDown]

Rich Rod, without a doubt.

I felt dirty voting for him. Would have preferred to vote for tater salad or Bo Schembechler.

 

[PhilSimms11]

Brady Hoke with 3 votes is 4 too many. That dumb, clueless bastard couldn't coach a little league team.

 

[Across The Field]

Oh come on. Hoke BARELY beat one of the worst OSU teams in the last 3 decades and then went on and probably won a game against VT that we shouldn't have won (the called back VT TD).

Haha I know, he was awful. Honestly OSU should've won that game too but Braxton overthrew a wide open Philly Brown in the final minute for a go-ahead TD.

 

[Across The Field]

Meyer and Day run nearly the same offense as RR so.. not true imo.

Now the defense argument I agree 100%.

That defense is not a big boy defense at all, particularly against good/decent run teams with a TE that can walk and chew bubble gum.

Not really. In his three years at michigan, RR never had a RB run for more than 601 yards, while Urban/Day never had their top RB rush for fewer than 970 yards. Urban and Day put much more of an emphasis on utilizing their RBs. On the flipside, in two of his three years, RR's QB led the team in carries and by a sizable margin, and the passing game was never close to being high-powered. The only season it looked even similar to that at OSU under Urban was in 2012 with Braxton, and that was Urban's worst offense in terms of both YPG and PPG.

 

[GoldRusher]

Not really. In his three years at michigan, RR never had a RB run for more than 601 yards, while Urban/Day never had their top RB rush for fewer than 970 yards. Urban and Day put much more of an emphasis on utilizing their RBs. On the flipside, in two of his three years, RR's QB led the team in carries and by a sizable margin, and the passing game was never close to being high-powered. The only season it looked even similar to that at OSU under Urban was in 2012 with Braxton, and that was Urban's worst offense in terms of both YPG and PPG.

He was still transitioning though, very similar thing happened at WVU. It took a few years for that offense to get everything and even then there was an argument that he needed better OL players. The thought was Pryor was pretty much a lock for WVU had RR stayed but... didn't happen and that was on WVU.