-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
So, 1932 on? To me that's an awfully wide range. I would go with 1980 at the earliest and for us I think 1991 would be a more accurate representation of our average.
Your history is your history. A selective narrow range that just includes the bulk of your best or worse years, is slanting the stat horribly. You can't be arbitrary in the stat to fit an outcome. Especially when doing a comparison.
But to satisfy your curiosity you do understand that doing our history just from 1991 until 2008 the percentage is lower than our overall history, .455. Mullen is at .606 today. That is a huge range above our norm prior to his arrival just from 1991 to today.
-
Originally Posted by
Coach
no no. You used the term underachieving to make a point with Mullen.
Alright, then pull up South Alabama and UMass’s classes for the past 20 years and tell me if we are underachieving based on that or not?
Maybe then you will see my point, but I doubt it.
-
Originally Posted by
Random Poster
modern football started in about 1972. Southern teams really started signing Blacks at that point
Agree with that but historians consider 1932-35 as the start of the modern era of football. Which is when around the time of the start of the SEC. That's why most consider that as your modern history.
-
Originally Posted by
Really Clark?
Your history is your history. A selective narrow range that just includes the bulk of your best or worse years, is slanting the stat horribly. You can't be arbitrary in the stat to fit an outcome. Especially when doing a comparison.
But to satisfy your curiosity you do understand that doing our history just from 1991 until 2008 the percentage is lower than our overall history, .455. Mullen is at .606 today. That is a huge range above our norm prior to his arrival just from 1991 to today.
No, I still stand by it being more accurate because sometimes too big of a sample size can be just as bad as too small of a sample size.
My reasoning in this instance is because things have changed so much for us over the years and the game has changed so much in that time.
-
3. I'm pretty sure if Saban had not gone to the NFL he would have won at pretty much the same rate at LSU and might have/probably would have elevated LSU past Alabama.
No way to know that for sure. His 5 years there tells us he won at about .100 higher than their historic average. His last year he was 9-3. I think he would have won another title at LSU but I don't think he matches his Bama record. That has been the perfect fit and perfect storm.
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
No, I still stand by it being more accurate because sometimes too big of a sample size can be just as bad as too small of a sample size.
My reasoning in this instance is because things have changed so much for us over the years and the game has changed so much in that time.
But you choose two weird arbitrary time periods that didn't match which includes a fairly successful run for JWS and some of LSU's worse runs in their history leaving off McClendon's years altogether. And in actuality using our entire history since joining the SEC would be a higher winning percentage than just an arbitrary 1991 til today time that has no rhyme or reason. I guess you thought it would be a better number to make your case but it is really a weaker number. There has to be a significant historic reference to do a comparison. Those two dates you used have no historic reasoning behind them.
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
Alright, then pull up South Alabama and UMass’s classes for the past 20 years and tell me if we are underachieving based on that or not?
Maybe then you will see my point, but I doubt it.
Considering we beat Umass, why are we talking about them? As to USA, get over it. We lost our first game in a new era without Dak, Bear, Brown, Brown, Redmond, Jones, etc etc... We are 1-1 in the SEC and improving. The future is bright.
Whistleblower exposes: (FISA), Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, 156 other judges, members of Congress, and Donald J. Trump were targeted by the HAMMER.
-
Originally Posted by
Really Clark?
But you choose two weird arbitrary time periods that didn't match which includes a fairly successful run for JWS and some of LSU's worse runs in their history leaving off McClendon's years altogether. And in actuality using our entire history since joining the SEC would be a higher winning percentage than just an arbitrary 1991 til today time that has no rhyme or reason. I guess you thought it would be a better number to make your case but it is really a weaker number. There has to be a significant historic reference to do a comparison. Those two dates you used have no historic reasoning behind them.
1991 is significant for us because that's when Jackie became our coach and at that point things began to change for us on a local and national level.
-
Originally Posted by
Coach
Considering we beat Umass, why are we talking about them? As to USA, get over it. We lost our first game in a new era without Dak, Bear, Brown, Brown, Redmond, Jones, etc etc... We are 1-1 in the SEC and improving. The future is bright.
Again losing to South Alabama is unacceptable and never has been acceptable at any point in time in our schools history. It is a black eye on this season and forever more will be. Especially if we end up going 5-7 and that loss costs us the bowl streak we are currently on. Even the Tech and 10 team managed to beat Louisiana Tech.
We played South Carolina well for one half and then we were outscored the second half by South Carolina 14-3. That win is getting worse by the week seeing as how KENTUCKY held them to fewer points than we did and the fact that they barely beat Vanderbilt. I guess I should be happy that we might be top 10 in the SEC. Stress on the word might.
LSU dominated us for four quarters and the only reason we got back into the game and made it close was because we took advantage of their prevent defense, recovered an onside kick and got some momentum. When the rubber met the road, LSU turned up the pressure on defense and got us three and out easily.
Why are we talking about UMass? They are the worst team in division I or at the very least in the discussion. They run an archaic old school offense and have very little talent, size, speed, you name it and yet we allowed the most points to them on the season and were in a dog fight until Graham was able to get a pick six to give us some separation. They made our offensive line look silly in the first half as well. What's going to happen when we play Texas A&M? Hell, Kentucky?
That's what's scary right now- we haven't even really played anyone that good. And we haven't looked good against any of them aside from one half against South Carolina and maybe the frantic end of the LSU game against their prevent defense.
Now- I will say this. I do think we have some talent. I agree with you on that even though I sure won't predict SEC contention from it. But watching our team play and seeing how the act off the field doing stuff like getting into twitter fights with former players who are currently in the NFL who criticize them I think we definitely need some new blood to kick their ass into gear to get them to tap into their potential. And I think we need someone that is willing to use our players better to get the most out of them instead of holding ongoing grudges against them because they broke a team rule in the offseason like Dear. And yes, I know Dear played Saturday but normally that wouldn't have happened if we were 2-1 instead of 1-2 going into UMass with people questioning the hell out of Dan about it.
That's what I'm talking about with underachieving.
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
1991 is significant for us because that's when Jackie became our coach and at that point things began to change for us on a local and national level.
But that is not a point of time that you would you use for a historic significance accross the board for schools. That has no meaning for any other school, which you originally questioned the time frame when we are discussing LSU historic average as well. What does JWS arriving here have to do with anything? No historic significance in looking at a schools historic win percentage across the college football land scape.
-
Originally Posted by
Coach
Just fact. When a coach takes a team full of 2 stars and 3 stars and is ranked #1, that's over achieving. There is zero way to paint that differently.
And we have done a damn good job identifying. Due to Mullen, Dak is an nfl qb. Due to that, we will bring in qbs. See lsu for talent losing due to not having a qb.
All you are doing is trying to cut your own nose off in spite of your own face.
Part of a college coach's responsibility is to recruit. Recruit better and there is less reliance on finding diamonds in the rough, developing players (which generally when you are recruiting the guys we are is much more of a development curve than higher rated classes, which means a lot more potential for development to breakdown), and having to outcoach/outsmart your opposing coach. A talent problem in year 8 is the HC's problem, even if he's overachieving relative the talent. Go out and find better talent and coach them up the same way you coach up the lesser talent.
-
Originally Posted by
Coach
So many wrongs in this.... LMAO!
1- LSU underachieving VS MSU.
LSU has an AVERAGE recruiting class of about #7 in the country.
2016 3
2015 6
2014 2
2013 6
2012 14
2011 7
2010(*) 10
2009 2
2008 11
2007 4
2006 7
2005 22
2004 2
2003 1
2002 15
MSU:
2016 27
2015 18
2014 35
2013 25
2012 22
2011 34
2010(*) 34
2009 25
2008 44
2007 39
2006 46
2005 33
2004 63
2003 9
2002 17
To even COMPARE the 2 in this way is totally nuts! 100% certifiable! Nuts! We have Overachieved. There is no comparison!
LSU has every right to demand more based on talent of a recruiting class.
Sorry, logical thought has been apparently banished from this board. Please try again later....or try another board.
-
Originally Posted by
Coach
Considering we beat Umass, why are we talking about them? As to USA, get over it. We lost our first game in a new era without Dak, Bear, Brown, Brown, Redmond, Jones, etc etc... We are 1-1 in the SEC and improving. The future is bright.
While I appreciate your optimism you need to take off the maroon glasses. Yes we lost some playmakers but whose fault is it we don't have decent replacements. One Daniel Mullen. The future is not bright and I don't know how you think that. In year 8 our OL is shit, we continue to run a 150 RB up the middle with no real back up. We lose Ross, three OL shump, Holloway and could lose Gray. That's about 70% of our offense. You have no argument cause we are not playing "young" guys. And you don't lose to USA in year 8!!!
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
So, 1932 on? To me that's an awfully wide range. I would go with 1980 at the earliest and for us I think 1991 would be a more accurate representation of our average.
Ok, let's use 1991 as the starting point. And let's not include Mullen's tenure because that's who we're evaluating.
You've just jumped our average # of wins all the way up to 5.33. And that's with a few 12-game seasons added as well.
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
Alright, then pull up South Alabama and UMass’s classes for the past 20 years and tell me if we are underachieving based on that or not?
Maybe then you will see my point, but I doubt it.
So fire every coach as soon as he loses to a team he shouldn't?
-
Originally Posted by
Really Clark?
Your history is your history. A selective narrow range that just includes the bulk of your best or worse years, is slanting the stat horribly. You can't be arbitrary in the stat to fit an outcome. Especially when doing a comparison.
But to satisfy your curiosity you do understand that doing our history just from 1991 until 2008 the percentage is lower than our overall history, .455. Mullen is at .606 today. That is a huge range above our norm prior to his arrival just from 1991 to today.
THIS. When you force out a guy like that it almost never turns out well, no matter who you are. if you force him out without giving him a chance to right the ship, you get a Rick Ray, or worse.
-
Originally Posted by
SDDawg
I am legit worried about keeping Keytaon if LSU hires a great coach. LSU and Auburn coaching changes will hurt us even more.
SDDawg, that's why Dan having developed two starting NFL QBs (Alex Smith & Dak) plus having a hand in developing Cam is appealing to QB recruits. There's only 30 other starting QB slots in the League and Dan has arguably more success in filling these slots than any other coach. For QBs wanting the best shot at successfully starting in the NFL, hopefully MSU will become the destination of choice.
-
Originally Posted by
Todd4State
LSU was having success with Les Miles including 10 win seasons but I think most would agree that they were underachieving for the talent that they have.
So, LSU gives Les the benefit of the doubt and they let him come back and see if he can turn it around. He doesn?t and it also appears as if they were going to go on even more of a decline.
Now because they didn?t make the appropriate move in the offseason like they should have they have wasted Fournette?s last year (likely) not to mention the rest of the season. Now they have Ed Orgeron as their head coach.
For all the Frank Beamer?s, THIS is why you don?t give coaches multiple opportunities to turn it around only to fail over and over again.
See the warning signs, be proactive, and make the change.
If we allow Dan to come back there is a good chance we are going to be in the same spot as LSU except worse since we don?t have their talent.
What we can learn from LSU is that when a governor gets involved and makes threats to keep a coach from being fired, he may not be able to make it stick for an entire season. It was always likely that Miles was going to be fired after this year. I'm guessing the pulled the trigger now to make sure he didn't get the chance to be saved again. Firing Miles right now doesn't cost them any more money than keeping him until the end of the season does, unless they are bumping up Orgeron's pay to be interim head coach. If they wait until the end of the season, he might end up with a so-so record and people might start looking at the money that could be saved by letting him coach into 2017.
-
Originally Posted by
Johnson85
What we can learn from LSU is that when a governor gets involved and makes threats to keep a coach from being fired, he may not be able to make it stick for an entire season. It was always likely that Miles was going to be fired after this year. I'm guessing the pulled the trigger now to make sure he didn't get the chance to be saved again. Firing Miles right now doesn't cost them any more money than keeping him until the end of the season does, unless they are bumping up Orgeron's pay to be interim head coach. If they wait until the end of the season, he might end up with a so-so record and people might start looking at the money that could be saved by letting him coach into 2017.
You talking about Edwards or Jindal? Both of them had Miles bromances. Mainly curious but wouldn't mind seeing the detail on what you're referencing.
-
Originally Posted by
dawgs
Part of a college coach's responsibility is to recruit. Recruit better and there is less reliance on finding diamonds in the rough, developing players (which generally when you are recruiting the guys we are is much more of a development curve than higher rated classes, which means a lot more potential for development to breakdown), and having to outcoach/outsmart your opposing coach. A talent problem in year 8 is the HC's problem, even if he's overachieving relative the talent. Go out and find better talent and coach them up the same way you coach up the lesser talent.
And all teams, save Saban at the TOP FOOTBALL COLLEGE in the nation, has drop offs even with great Talent when they suffer this many loses. Our recruiting has improved a lot under Mullen, and will continue to. For point of reference, FSU and their young QB situation.
Whistleblower exposes: (FISA), Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, 156 other judges, members of Congress, and Donald J. Trump were targeted by the HAMMER.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.