One thing about Dan's offense I never understood

[Todd4State]

Is why it seemed like he got a lot less creative over the years.

His first year we had a lot of interesting and creative concepts and things like even going to the wishbone at times. It seemed like that started to decline around 2011-2012 and things got pretty bland.

Even other coaches in the SEC noticed- remember the anonymous coach that talked about how you pretty much knew what Dan was going to do?

So, why did this happen?

[gravedigger]

Is why it seemed like he got a lot less creative over the years.

His first year we had a lot of interesting and creative concepts and things like even going to the wishbone at times. It seemed like that started to decline around 2011-2012 and things got pretty bland.

Even other coaches in the SEC noticed- remember the anonymous coach that talked about how you pretty much knew what Dan was going to do?

So, why did this happen?

My opinion on that is that when Dixon and Ballard left, he lost part of his power running game threat. Of course Dak was able to make up for some of that, but not all.

The running backs he did follow up with were not quite as tough after contact as those two. I think that caused defenses to key on us differently.

[Cary Hudson's little bro]

Using the spread to open the run game became predictable. Our lack of All-SEC WR's made it difficult to spread a D thin the last 3 seasons.

Rarely did we throw 50/50 balls...JoeMo throws 50/50 balls down the field nearly every possession. It will be fun to watch. Guidry may go one-and-done if he explodes on the scene.

[TrapGame]

Is why it seemed like he got a lot less creative over the years.

His first year we had a lot of interesting and creative concepts and things like even going to the wishbone at times. It seemed like that started to decline around 2011-2012 and things got pretty bland.

Even other coaches in the SEC noticed- remember the anonymous coach that talked about how you pretty much knew what Dan was going to do?

So, why did this happen?

He thought he would be at another school by 2011 so he didn't give a shit after that (until 2014 with Dak). When he didn't get the Miami job on the first go around and Diaz left for Texas he started sulking like a thirteen year old girl.

[5049]

Players, is my guess. Our offense was great and unpredictable in 2014 when we had all the pieces.

Most coaches are going to lean conservative, the more comfortable they get, whether that is in tenure length or talent level. It cuts down on turnovers. So to answer your question, maybe a little bit of both.

Had we signed A.J. Brown, I doubt our offense would have been too predictable this past fall, but as it stands, it was. Thankfully we had Fitzgerald to out-talent people. Which makes me wonder why he did not place a higher value on recruiting. Well, we all know the reason why, I suppose.

[Coach34]

You have to be more creative when Tyson Lee and Chris Relf are your QB's. When you have Dak and Fitz- you can be more "normal" and just do your thing.

I agree that is his lack of creativity hurt us at times. But we were very good and well-coached on the read option offense

[SallyStansbury]

Is why it seemed like he got a lot less creative over the years.

His first year we had a lot of interesting and creative concepts and things like even going to the wishbone at times. It seemed like that started to decline around 2011-2012 and things got pretty bland.

Even other coaches in the SEC noticed- remember the anonymous coach that talked about how you pretty much knew what Dan was going to do?

So, why did this happen?

Dan was big about control. He loved to control a process and was likely convinced that his system was so great if he could just get players to execute his superior plan the rest would take care of itself. What he didn't account for were his tendencies....by that I mean stuff like:
1. Him allowing Hevesy to be asleep at the wheel recruiting, poor O line talent most years resulting in inability to blow decent D-linemen off the ball. Running game suffers.
2. "Trusting" older, less talented, (think Holloway) players who are undoubtably better than younger players because of their time to sufficiently master his superior coaching.
3. Swag-aversion, Dan was the only one allowed to psuedo-swag around with his shoes, think J-Rob...& 88, and spare me, I know they were retards, but the point remains.
4. Soft D, think CB's playing well off the ball waiting for the other team to make mistakes. Cleveland still did it. Wasn't 13 refreshing in the bowl game? It was for me. Control freaks often hate being wrong, ever....so if teams like La Tech or USA dink us down the field because we are soft and happen to kick our ass, not Dan's fault because they were just great that day? Right?
5. Return game. Making folks fair catch it or only allowing us to return it straight ahead, no swagging around! No deviation from superior plan. Special teams isn't that important right?
6. Speaking of special teams, messing with our field goal kickers. Control freak tinkering. Finally got out of the way with Boniol.....seems to have helped.
7. Echo chamber.....Country Club Yes Men! I was happier with him screaming at Hud back in his first year, offense was more creative with different blocking schemes and lots more misdirection back that first year, maybe because of Gabe Jackson, Saulsberry and other talented players? Maybe because Hud helped with variation in offense play selection?? I don't know, but the longer Dan was here, the less we had any misdirection in running game, it was very predictable. Straight ahead, whichever way we snapped it that was where we were going.
8. Always putting head down and rapidly quick snapping and rushing up the middle with a crap run following a big play. Always. This takes a toll on Offensive productivity over the course of a season, because at least 4-5 times per game we would be in 2-10, 2-9 following a miserable stuffed 1st down run up the gut for no good reason. He always did this, very predictably.
9. Because he knows everything about football and is never wrong, there is never any need to second guess things or self assess, thereby leading to more predictability.

I appreciate what he did for our University and town, but I am glad to have a breath of fresh air. I wish him and his family well at FLA, and hope we beat his ass into the ground next year.

[bulldawg28]

He thought he would be at another school by 2011 so he didn't give a shit after that (until 2014 with Dak). When he didn't get the Miami job on the first go around and Diaz left for Texas he started sulking like a thirteen year old girl.

Wrong

[bulldawg28]

You have to be more creative when Tyson Lee and Chris Relf are your QB's. When you have Dak and Fitz- you can be more "normal" and just do your thing.

I agree that is his lack of creativity hurt us at times. But we were very good and well-coached on the read option offense

This all day long

[Cooterpoot]

Our lack of relentless effort in recruiting limited us on the OL and WR several years.

[SallyStansbury]

Is why it seemed like he got a lot less creative over the years.

His first year we had a lot of interesting and creative concepts and things like even going to the wishbone at times. It seemed like that started to decline around 2011-2012 and things got pretty bland.

Even other coaches in the SEC noticed- remember the anonymous coach that talked about how you pretty much knew what Dan was going to do?

So, why did this happen?

Dan was big about control. He loved to control a process and was likely convinced that his system was so great if he could just get players to execute his superior plan the rest would take care of itself. What he didn't account for were his tendencies....by that I mean stuff like:
1. Him allowing Hevesy to be asleep at the wheel recruiting, poor O line talent most years resulting in inability to blow decent D-linemen off the ball. Running game suffers.
2. "Trusting" older, less talented, (think Holloway) players who are undoubtably better than younger players because of their time to sufficiently master his superior coaching.
3. Swag-aversion, Dan was the only one allowed to psuedo-swag around with his shoes, think J-Rob...& 88, and spare me, I know they were retards, but the point remains.
4. Soft D, think CB's playing well off the ball waiting for the other team to make mistakes. Cleveland still did it. Wasn't 13 refreshing in the bowl game? It was for me. Control freaks often hate being wrong, ever....so if teams like La Tech or USA dink us down the field because we are soft and happen to kick our ass, not Dan's fault because they were just great that day? Right?
5. Return game. Making folks fair catch it or only allowing us to return it straight ahead, no swagging around! No deviation from superior plan. Special teams isn't that important right?
6. Speaking of special teams, messing with our field goal kickers. Control freak tinkering. Finally got out of the way with Boniol.....seems to have helped.
7. Echo chamber.....Country Club Yes Men! I was happier with him screaming at Hud back in his first year, offense was more creative with different blocking schemes and lots more misdirection back that first year, maybe because of Gabe Jackson, Saulsberry and other talented players? Maybe because Hud helped with variation in offense play selection?? I don't know, but the longer Dan was here, the less we had any misdirection in running game, it was very predictable. Straight ahead, whichever way we snapped it that was where we were going.
8. Always putting head down and rapidly quick snapping and rushing up the middle with a crap run following a big play. Always. This takes a toll on Offensive productivity over the course of a season, because at least 4-5 times per game we would be in 2-10, 2-9 following a miserable stuffed 1st down run up the gut for no good reason. He always did this, very predictably.
9. Because he knows everything about football and is never wrong, there is never any need to second guess things or self assess, thereby leading to more predictability.

I appreciate what he did for our University and town, but I am glad to have a breath of fresh air. I wish him and his family well at FLA, and hope we beat his ass into the ground next year.

[Cary Hudson's little bro]

I remember reading a quote from a coach a year or two ago that said prep week for State/Mullen was similar to preparing for GA Tech.

The blame is not totally on the WR's tho...Fitz is not accurate with the deep throws.

[Prediction? Pain.]

Like Coach34 and others, I've always chalked up the wishbone and unique power-run looks in '09 and '10 to the hand he was dealt -- Lee/Relf, Dixon/Ballard, a solid OL, and relatively few playmakers at WR. A great (and indeed creative) use of the talent we had on the roster when he walked in the door.

As for whether that same creativity persisted, I guess it depends on who you ask and what year you're talking about. That coach's quote from the summer of 2017 has been bandied about several times on the board, and each time I've felt compelled to post the same thing in response. Here's the quote you're thinking of:

"They're kind of boring schematically when you really watch them and break them down. They don't do a whole lot that concerns you. Mullen does a good job -- it's just not particularly creative. You'd play (Steve) Spurrier back in the day and he'd see something he'd like in the NFL on Sunday and you'd see it with him the following weekend. With Mullen, he kind of has his things he likes and that's what he does. There's no newness there."

The quote is from an Athlon article over the summer that contains multiple quotes about each SEC team that were supposedly made by other SEC coaches. (The quotes are posted anonymously.) As I've said before, I can see how a coach could say that Mullen's first few years' worth of offenses weren't "schematically creative" enough to cause much "concern" among opponents. From '09 to '13, our scoring offense in SEC games was ranked in the bottom half of the conference every year (7th, 11th, 9th, 8th, 10th), and we ranked in the top half of the league in yards per play in the same span only once (5th in 2012, 8th or lower in every other year). And it was no better according to advanced stats -- from '09 to '13, the offense's national FEI and S&P+ rankings were between 50th and 73rd every year but one.

But then in the last half of Mullen's time at State ('14, '15, '16, '17), the offense, "boring" or not, had to "concern" at least most of our opponents. We were in the top half of SEC scoring offenses in SEC play all four years (4th, 6th, 5th, 7th), and were in the top 4 in the SEC in yards-per-play in two of those four years, too. Further, between the rankings for both the FEI and S&P+ advanced-stats systems, our offense ranked below 37th nationally only once in the past four years, and even that was a split decision -- the S&P+ rankings put the offense at 64th in 2017, but the FEI rankings have the offense at 34th nationally this year.

More to the point, though, there's this:

"Schematically, though, they're one of the teams that you really admire. They have some good stuff in the playbook. Dan Mullen, some of the stuff he does on offense is just really well-respected from the standpoint of figuring out what defense you're going to be in and figuring out how they can beat you. They do some stuff to attack you and put your weak link in conflict on the edge."

That's an anonymous coach's quote from the August 2016 version of the exact same Athlon series that yielded the "boring" quote from 2017.

Note also this other quote about Mullen from an SEC coach from the 2017 Athlon piece:

"You talk about good coaches -- I know Dan Mullen rubs some people the wrong way, but those guys can flat out get the job done."

[Coach34]

Wrong

Mullen was ready to move in 2015. When his current agent failed- he then hired Sexton. It was pretty easy to see for any objective person at that point. Sexton couldnt sell him after the 2016 team went 5-7 but Mullen became an easy sell when all these other programs opened up and so few established candidates.

I think it was a combo of just being ready to move on plus the OM factor. I know for a fact Mullen, Hev, and Gonzo hated dealing with OM in recruiting.

[TrapGame]

Wrong

Mullen wanted to bail on us in 2010. He ****ed up his interview royally.

If you couldn't tell the difference in his coaching acumen after that then I can't help you.

Intense bastard quickly became complacent bastard.

[5049]

Wrong

I do not think there is any question he felt he would get a call after the 2010 season. His demeanor changed and our recruiting fell apart. He did not get another chance until after 2015, which he felt was his peak. Those were our two worst off-seasons, and it is easy to see why.

This does not make him a bad guy or a bad coach. He is just human.

[fccee1]

...Fitz is not accurate with the deep throws.

And this will be a problem in Moorhead's offense correct?

[PassInterference]

How quickly Florida fan forgets they were ready to punt Mullen (under Urban) for lack of creativity. Games were the Tebow & Harvin show. It was great when it worked, but boring & predictable when not.

[Cary Hudson's little bro]

And this will be a problem in Moorhead's offense correct?

He will throw much more of them in JoeMo's O and will have true burners at WR in Guidry, Whop and Heath. Also the TE. Can't help but improve.

[fishwater99]

Is why it seemed like he got a lot less creative over the years.

His first year we had a lot of interesting and creative concepts and things like even going to the wishbone at times. It seemed like that started to decline around 2011-2012 and things got pretty bland.

Even other coaches in the SEC noticed- remember the anonymous coach that talked about how you pretty much knew what Dan was going to do?

So, why did this happen?

Urban wasn't there to teach him anymore.
Dan didn't create anything, just did what he had already learned from his former boss. He's not a great offensive mind, just works well developing QB's..
I was over Mullen years ago, glad everyone else is finally catching up..