Stat's on MSU's Program in the West

[Johnson85]

Looking at SEC records since A&M came into the league:

To nobody's surprise, Bama and LSU will be the cream of the crop, with Bama still outpacing LSU by a good bit:

Bama - 27-4
LSU - 19-11

Then A&M, UM, and UM are grouped together:
A&M - 16-14
MSU - 16-14
UM - 15-15

Than Auburn and Ark pull up the rear:
Auburn 13-18
Ark - 8-22

If MSU and LSU loses out, that means we'll finish the last four years 16-16, with A&M and UM finishing 2 and 1 game ahead of us, respectively. (assuming Vandy is a win for A&M). We'll still be ahead of Auburn and Arkansas. One of those is weighed down by an 0-8 SEC record under a previous coach. The other had his own 0-8 season, but will have moved from 0 wins, to 2 wins, to 6 wins in three seasons. But we'll basically look like the fifth best team in the West over that time frame.

If MSU loses out and LSU wins out, we'll finish one game behind A&M and tied with UM. We'll basically be tied with UM and just barely behind A&M for the 4th best team in the west over the past 4 years.

If we win out and LSU wins out, we'll finish a game ahead of A&M and two ahead of UM, and be the 3rd best program in the west over the past four years. If LSU loses out and we win out, then there will barely be any separation between LSU, A&M, UM and MSU over the past four years.

It all comes pretty close enough to even over the past four years that taking east opponents into consideration could change the scenario, but it just goes to show (1) how important finishing strong is for perceptions of MSU and Mullen and (2) how the SEC West really has been Bama and then everybody else lately.


Going back over Mullen's entire tenure, there is Bama then a sizeable gap, then Lsu, then a gap, and A&M (averaging their performance), then MSU, then a slight gap to Auburn and Arkansas, with UM pulling up the rear.

Bama 47-8
LSU 38-16
A&M 29-25 (averaging their previous 3 years SEC record to get a 6 year record and adding the performance so far this year to it).
MSU 25-29
Auburn 23-17
Arkansas 23-31
UM 20-34


Looking at this longer track record, it shows you that (1) a boom and bust cycle is actually better for your program's reputation than steady performance and/or (2) we've done a really poor job of marketing our program. I think it's more of #(1), and that highs just make a bigger positive impression than the lows hurt, but it's still a lot of #(2) also.

Getting to 9-3 really will make a difference for Mullen looking over the long haul, because it will give two really good bowls and potentiall two 10-win seasons to go along with having the third or fourth best performance in the SEC W over the last 7 years. Surely that would move the needle on perception.

[Bothrops]

Thanks. Cool info

[CadaverDawg]

Great breakdown. Thanks. Interesting stuff

[confucius say]

Good stuff

[QuadrupleOption]

Excellent breakdown. I'd like to see a comparison with MSU against the entirety of the SEC as well. I bet we'd be 6th or 7th at worst in those standings.

Even with the disappointing loss to Bama, I feel like we're slowly improving our stock in the conference and nationally overall. Not as fast as I'd like but still improvement.

[smootness]

It's pretty obvious that we're still on an overall upward trajectory over Mullen's tenure. When he started, we were good enough to beat the terrible OOC teams we played consistently, and we could also beat SEC teams like Kentucky, Vandy, and Ole Miss. But we would lose to decent OOC teams like Houston and GT and most SEC teams.

Then we got over the hump with the decent OOC teams and started beating some decent SEC teams consistently as well, like Tennessee, Arkansas, and somewhat down Georgia and Florida teams. We still couldn't beat the best of the best in the SEC.

Now we've gotten to a point where we can beat good SEC teams (Auburn, LSU, A&M last year, and though it doesn't count, should have beaten LSU this year as well). And while Auburn isn't good this year, we've now beaten them 3 out of the last 4. We've taken a bit of a step forward without losing the hold we have on bad and decent teams.

Obviously the next step we have to take as a program is to start picking off the elite teams at least here and there. That's probably the hardest step to take, but we've gotten to this point. I just hate when people look only at overall record or take record against a couple cherry-picked teams and try to paint a slightly different picture. Yes, we have to start figuring out a way to beat Bama at all and a program like LSU more consistently. But we're not far away from that.

[Johnson85]

Excellent breakdown. I'd like to see a comparison with MSU against the entirety of the SEC as well. I bet we'd be 6th or 7th at worst in those standings.

Even with the disappointing loss to Bama, I feel like we're slowly improving our stock in the conference and nationally overall. Not as fast as I'd like but still improvement.

Not sure the right way to do the entire SEC because of the disparity between the divisions. Realistically, we've clearly been better than UK, UT, and Vandy since Mizzou and A&M have joined the league. I'd say we've been better than Mizzou but their record would be as good or better because of their east opponents.

[Beaver]

Looking at this longer track record, it shows you that (1) a boom and bust cycle is actually better for your program's reputation than steady performance and/or (2) we've done a really poor job of marketing our program. I think it's more of #(1), and that highs just make a bigger positive impression than the lows hurt, but it's still a lot of #(2) also.

Auburn agrees...

[LC Dawg]

Getting to 9-3 really will make a difference for Mullen looking over the long haul, because it will give two really good bowls and potentiall two 10-win seasons to go along with having the third or fourth best performance in the SEC W over the last 7 years. Surely that would move the needle on perception.

These last two games are huge for our program in my opinion. The 2013 Arkansas and Ole Miss games pretty much started our ascension to some heights we had never seen and I don't want the same 2015 games starting us on a downward trajectory. If we win the last two we will prove that we can sustain a little success and will have something to keep building off after we lose one of the best players in our history.

[Beaver]

These last two games are huge for our program in my opinion. The 2013 Arkansas and Ole Miss games pretty much started our ascension to some heights we had never seen and I don't want the same 2015 games starting us on a downward trajectory. If we win the last two we will prove that we can sustain a little success and will have something to keep building off after we lose one of the best players in our history.

Now that you mention it, this is a very similar situation to post-Alabama 2013. Many people were questioning Mullen's abilities. Others were wondering if he'd hit his ceiling. At the same time people were upset with playcalling by Koenning, and that some of our defensive players were not playing in their true positions. Then we get a huge win on the road at Arky, Dak become a hero and our bowl game set us up for 2014.

[LC Dawg]

Now that you mention it, this is a very similar situation to post-Alabama 2013. Many people were questioning Mullen's abilities. Others were wondering if he'd hit his ceiling. At the same time people were upset with playcalling by Koenning, and that some of our defensive players were not playing in their true positions. Then we get a huge win on the road at Arky, Dak become a hero and our bowl game set us up for 2014.

There are also similarities to 2000. We were 7-2 and lost our last two to Arkansas and Ole Miss (we did win the snow bowl). The next three seasons we won three SEC games on the way to Jackie being fired. I'm not saying we are close to that happening but I will feel a lot better about our program if we win our last two games. We have to at least win the Egg Bowl to have something to build on.

[Johnson85]

There are also similarities to 2000. We were 7-2 and lost our last two to Arkansas and Ole Miss (we did win the snow bowl). The next three seasons we won three SEC games on the way to Jackie being fired. I'm not saying we are close to that happening but I will feel a lot better about our program if we win our last two games. We have to at least win the Egg Bowl to have something to build on.

I don't think the character of the team is anything like it was in 2000. This is most likely going to be like 2012 or 2013. Either we are going to crater to end the year, in which case we will be establishing a disturbing pattern with Dan, or we will rally like 2013 and figure out how to make this a spring board into 2016. The only difference is that if we rally, we will rally to a really good record rather than getting to 7-6 and even with the additional momentum, we'll still take a step back next year. If we fall apart, we will be lucky to be bowl eligible next year, just like we were in 2013.

[smootness]

There are also similarities to 2000. We were 7-2 and lost our last two to Arkansas and Ole Miss (we did win the snow bowl). The next three seasons we won three SEC games on the way to Jackie being fired. I'm not saying we are close to that happening but I will feel a lot better about our program if we win our last two games. We have to at least win the Egg Bowl to have something to build on.

The post-2000 stretch had absolutely nothing to do with our last 2 games in 2000.

[BrunswickDawg]

To really put it in perspective - we were 11-45 in the 7 years prior to Dan. That is some shitastic football.

[smootness]

Next year will be a huge year for this program and for Mullen. If we can avoid taking a big step back after losing Dak and guys like Chris Jones, Redmond, Wilson, etc., then I think it will prove that we really have elevated the program to another level and that it is not dependent on one player. I'm talking about going something like 8-4 or better. Honestly, even 7-5 would show that we're capable of maintaining.

And it would also show Mullen that he can keep things going in the right direction. I'm sure he already believes this, but it would be a great sign for his ability to keep things moving in the right direction.

And it would also set us up to have a potentially monster 2017 season, with the QB back and last year's class all into year 3 in the program.

[Just the Facts]

If we are going to look at SECW teams (which was the point of your post) let's look at records against the SECW. The records aren't as kind to us...

SEC Records since A&M came into the league (2012) - last Saturday:

Bama - 19-4 (Auburn left this year)
LSU - 13-9 (Bears and A&M left this year)
A&M - 12-11 (LSU left this year)
Miss - 11-11 (LSU and us left this year)
MSU - 9-13 (Ark and Bears left this year)
AU 9-14 (Bama left)
Ark - 6-17 (Us left this year)

Basically - your premise is correct. It's Bama and everyone else. But depending on how the last two weeks shake out - we could have a 3 way tie for second between LSU, OM and A&M. It's doubtful - but they are basically the next tier and you could arguably put us in that group because a 11-13 4 year record isn't out of the question. AU and Arkansas are pulling up the rear with a dismal 4 year average (one that includes a national championship game?)

Now - I'm a MSU fan that has been banned from posting here before - hence my first post under this username. Ban me again - but the facts won't change. I'll remain a reader....
I'm done with Dan and I'm done with mediocrity. Even if we win out and the Bears lose out - we've got the exact same record against SEC W opponents since A&M joined the league. That's unacceptable. Especially when you consider we are about to graduate the best QB in school history. Dan has done less with more (most exposure, best facilities, biggest budget, most football friendly Athletic Admin etc.) than any coach in MSU history.

Overall SEC Record is important - but it's not apples to apples. It's probably fair to compare us against the Bears since we get UK and they get Vandy every year - but measuring our record against SECW opponents is a better measure for your premise.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

If we are going to look at SECW teams (which was the point of your post) let's look at records against the SECW. The records aren't as kind to us...

SEC Records since A&M came into the league (2012) - last Saturday:

Bama - 19-4 (Auburn left this year)
LSU - 13-9 (Bears and A&M left this year)
A&M - 12-11 (LSU left this year)
Miss - 11-11 (LSU and us left this year)
MSU - 9-13 (Ark and Bears left this year)
AU 9-14 (Bama left)
Ark - 6-17 (Us left this year)

Basically - your premise is correct. It's Bama and everyone else. But depending on how the last two weeks shake out - we could have a 3 way tie for second between LSU, OM and A&M. It's doubtful - but they are basically the next tier and you could arguably put us in that group because a 11-13 4 year record isn't out of the question. AU and Arkansas are pulling up the rear with a dismal 4 year average (one that includes a national championship game?)

Now - I'm a MSU fan that has been banned from posting here before - hence my first post under this username. Ban me again - but the facts won't change. I'll remain a reader....
I'm done with Dan and I'm done with mediocrity. Even if we win out and the Bears lose out - we've got the exact same record against SEC W opponents since A&M joined the league. That's unacceptable. Especially when you consider we are about to graduate the best QB in school history. Dan has done less with more (most exposure, best facilities, biggest budget, most football friendly Athletic Admin etc.) than any coach in MSU history.

Overall SEC Record is important - but it's not apples to apples. It's probably fair to compare us against the Bears since we get UK and they get Vandy every year - but measuring our record against SECW opponents is a better measure for your premise.

Just in cast you're a bear in sheep's clothing, shouldn't the bears be performing at a much higher level than MSU given the recruiting championships? I can't wait to see Elston pay for his cheap shot on Dak last year.

[SDDawg]

If we are going to look at SECW teams (which was the point of your post) let's look at records against the SECW. The records aren't as kind to us...

SEC Records since A&M came into the league (2012) - last Saturday:

Bama - 19-4 (Auburn left this year)
LSU - 13-9 (Bears and A&M left this year)
A&M - 12-11 (LSU left this year)
Miss - 11-11 (LSU and us left this year)
MSU - 9-13 (Ark and Bears left this year)
AU 9-14 (Bama left)
Ark - 6-17 (Us left this year)

Basically - your premise is correct. It's Bama and everyone else. But depending on how the last two weeks shake out - we could have a 3 way tie for second between LSU, OM and A&M. It's doubtful - but they are basically the next tier and you could arguably put us in that group because a 11-13 4 year record isn't out of the question. AU and Arkansas are pulling up the rear with a dismal 4 year average (one that includes a national championship game?)

Now - I'm a MSU fan that has been banned from posting here before - hence my first post under this username. Ban me again - but the facts won't change. I'll remain a reader....
I'm done with Dan and I'm done with mediocrity. Even if we win out and the Bears lose out - we've got the exact same record against SEC W opponents since A&M joined the league. That's unacceptable. Especially when you consider we are about to graduate the best QB in school history. Dan has done less with more (most exposure, best facilities, biggest budget, most football friendly Athletic Admin etc.) than any coach in MSU history.

Overall SEC Record is important - but it's not apples to apples. It's probably fair to compare us against the Bears since we get UK and they get Vandy every year - but measuring our record against SECW opponents is a better measure for your premise.

When your first post exposes you as a fvckboy for Freeze...

[Taog Redloh]

Next year will be a huge year for this program and for Mullen. If we can avoid taking a big step back after losing Dak and guys like Chris Jones, Redmond, Wilson, etc., then I think it will prove that we really have elevated the program to another level and that it is not dependent on one player. I'm talking about going something like 8-4 or better. Honestly, even 7-5 would show that we're capable of maintaining.

And it would also show Mullen that he can keep things going in the right direction. I'm sure he already believes this, but it would be a great sign for his ability to keep things moving in the right direction.

And it would also set us up to have a potentially monster 2017 season, with the QB back and last year's class all into year 3 in the program.

Goal next year should be 6-6 and another bowl game. That's not bad at all when you consider we only have 6 home games and we are upping our OOC schedule with BYU. A W in Oxford would be nice, and should be attainable since they are losing so much.

For me, the goal this year was always 8-4. Dak or not, it's extremely hard to follow up a season like last year, with the same effort.

Like you say, it's extremely critical that we don't fall off the map next year, so we can build to another peak in 2017 when we have LSU, Alabama and Ole Miss at home again.

[sleepy dawg]

Goal next year should be 6-6 and another bowl game. That's not bad at all when you consider we only have 6 home games and we are upping our OOC schedule with BYU. A W in Oxford would be nice, and should be attainable since they are losing so much.

For me, the goal this year was always 8-4. Dak or not, it's extremely hard to follow up a season like last year, with the same effort.

Like you say, it's extremely critical that we don't fall off the map next year, so we can build to another peak in 2017 when we have LSU, Alabama and Ole Miss at home again.

I don't know if I would say 6-6 is the goal, but it is certainly a real possibility. Looking ahead, I would definitely say 2017 is a big jump over a low floor 2016.