The Optimist's Post

[ShotgunDawg]

I'm ticked, I'm frustrated, I'm irate, and I'm scratching my head as to what has gone so wrong with this team. I'm not an Xs and Os guy and I'm not sure I completely agree with all I'm about to post, but here are some plausible explanations and thoughts.

1. At least our head coach isn't Matt Luke.

2. Our defense is fine. Half the team is good. I'm not worried there. We are a national top 15-20 defense. Shoop has done well this far.

3. Ok, now to the meat. Contrary to what my eyes currently see, he can't be this bad. He simply can't be. His resume is too accomplished. The Peter Principle would've gotten him 10 years ago if he were this bad. When you coach at the college level for years on end and produce great offenses everywhere you go, it's almost impossible to be this bad. It makes no sense.

So, what is going on?

1. Joe Moorhead is a good football coach but was not the right coach to maximize THIS 2018 team. We could've hired Greg Knox and likely been better off in the short term. But the long term, that's an entirely different question.

2. Think about where Moorhead has coached: Fordham, Penn State, U Conn, etc. Luke Getsy - Green Bay Marcus Johnson - Duke. Point is, these guys are accustomed to coaching different types of kids. They are accustomed to coaching prep school kids, catholic school kids, northeastern educated kids, etc. I think it's plausible to say that the learning curve, football IQ, and general ability change offenses on a dime may have steeper learning curve at MSU than those other places. I love Mississippi kids and believe you can win big with them, but they simply aren't the same as northeastern kids. They come from a different culture with different educational systems and different ways of dishing out punishment. Plainly, I believe this staff hasn't had the retention and instinctual understanding of the offense that they had hoped or are used to.

3. With the above in mind, the good news is that, if what I stated above is true, things should gradually get better as the players will slowly understand the offense better and eventually the older guys will be able to teach it too younger players. However, at this time our team is so engrained for 9 years into the Mullen scheme, that we are lost running anything else and I'm not sure it completely matters what that anything else is.

Just some thoughts. Mostly, I just can't imagine that a guy that fielded an offense that scored 40 points a week in the Big 10 vs Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, etc could be this bad. I refuse to believe that. Many people want to compare Moorhead to Croom, but that lacks logic because Croom was a running backs coach. He never ran or coordinated a damn thing before being MSU's coach. Felker the same. Moorhead's background and preparation for this job far exceeds those guys. I don't have all the answers, and I'm not sure Moorhead was the right coach for THIS team's personnel, but the guy's resume and background almost guarantees that he's a hell of a lot better than this.

Lastly, we must keep in mind how rare it is for a new coach to take over a team that has had as much success and talent as this MSU team, and therefore we don't have much to compare the job Moorhead is doing to others. Pruitt, Morris, Chip Kelly are all getting passes because they coach bad teams, but UCLA was way better on offense last year than this year. So was Arkansas. Point is, we all under estimated the learning curve. I'm pissed and frustrated but it literally makes no logic sense that Moorhead will be as bad in the future as he currently is.

Now, I know some will counter my theories with "why are Mullen and Fisher having success in year 1?" Well, maybe both guys teams were way more setup to run their offenses than Moorhead's was to run his. Heck, this year's Florida team has betters WRs than Mullen ever had at MSU.

Just some food for thought. This season is gonna be rough year but maybe we click at some point because we truly have a coach in which there was no evidence would ever field an offense remotely close to this poor.

[dawgday166]

I'm usually very patient with new coaches but ... producing this offensive output when there is an 1100 yd back sitting on the bench and your QB is getting killed in pass pro ... I'm leaning towards JoMo not being the right guy for this job. And he's too soft with the team too.

[msstate7]

You just hoping and not actually looking at facts. Moorhead sucks

[Homedawg]

Disagree w the part about the defense. In that, while we've only gave up 13 points tonight, they did it wo a qb that can throw or run. And never stopped the spot screen. And never got off the field on third down. The screen part gives credit to Mullen for taking advantage of our lack of adjustment. But we have tons of talent on d. We should be great and not just ok. And ok is what I've seen the last two Weeks.

[EngDawg]

Moorhead would probably do very well as a Big 10 or Big 12 HC, but I’m not sure the SEC is the right place for him. Some of that gimmicky stuff he likes to run just isn’t going to work against SEC defenses it appears

[ShotgunDawg]

You just hoping and not actually looking at facts. Moorhead sucks

I'm doing both. Yes I'm hoping but the facts of his resume and accomplishments make no sense with what we are seeing. That's a fact.

[ShotgunDawg]

Moorhead would probably do very well as a Big 10 or Big 12 HC, but I’m not sure the SEC is the right place for him. Some of that gimmicky stuff he likes to run just isn’t going to work against SEC defenses it appears

Perhaps you're right. It's just way too early to say that.

[msstate7]

I'm doing both. Yes I'm hoping but the facts of his resume and accomplishments make no sense with what we are seeing. That's a fact.

Charlie weis

[Quaoarsking]

If Shrader is good right away, Moorhead will do fine here. If he's not, Moorhead probably doesn't last to 2021, or maybe not even 2020.

[ShotgunDawg]

Disagree w the part about the defense. In that, while we've only gave up 13 points tonight, they did it wo a qb that can throw or run. And never stopped the spot screen. And never got off the field on third down. The screen part gives credit to Mullen for taking advantage of our lack of adjustment. But we have tons of talent on d. We should be great and not just ok. And ok is what I've seen the last two Weeks.

I just can't bring myself to complain about a defense that's on the field all night long and mostly keeps the other team from scoring. The best recipe for the defense to improve is for the offense to improve and keep them off the field. I think they're fine.

[Liverpooldawg]

I'm ticked, I'm frustrated, I'm irate, and I'm scratching my head as to what has gone so wrong with this team. I'm not an Xs and Os guy and I'm not sure I completely agree with all I'm about to post, but here are some plausible explanations and thoughts.

1. At least our head coach isn't Matt Luke.

2. Our defense is fine. Half the team is good. I'm not worried there. We are a national top 15-20 defense. Shoop has done well this far.

3. Ok, now to the meat. Contrary to what my eyes currently see, he can't be this bad. He simply can't be. His resume is too accomplished. The Peter Principle would've gotten him 10 years ago if he were this bad. When you coach at the college level for years on end and produce great offenses everywhere you go, it's almost impossible to be this bad. It makes no sense.

So, what is going on?

1. Joe Moorhead is a good football coach but was not the right coach to maximize THIS 2018 team. We could've hired Greg Knox and likely been better off in the short term. But the long term, that's an entirely different question.

2. Think about where Moorhead has coached: Fordham, Penn State, U Conn, etc. Luke Getsy - Green Bay Marcus Johnson - Duke. Point is, these guys are accustomed to coaching different types of kids. They are accustomed to coaching prep school kids, catholic school kids, northeastern educated kids, etc. I think it's plausible to say that the learning curve, football IQ, and general ability change offenses on a dime may have steeper learning curve at MSU than those other places. I love Mississippi kids and believe you can win big with them, but they simply aren't the same as northeastern kids. They come from a different culture with different educational systems and different ways of dishing out punishment. Plainly, I believe this staff hasn't had the retention and instinctual understands of the offense that they had hoped or are used to.

3. With the above in mind, the good news is that, if what I stated above is true, things should gradually get better as the players will slowly understand the offense better and eventually the older guys will be able to teach it too younger players. However, at this time our team is so engrained for 9 years into the Mullen scheme, that we are lost running anything else and I'm not sure it completely matters what that anything else is.

Just some thoughts. Mostly, I just can't imagine that a guy that fielded an offense that scored 40 points a week in the Big 10 vs Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, etc could be this bad. I refuse to believe that. Many people want to compare Moorhead to Croom, but that lacks logic because Croom was a running backs coach. He never ran or coordinated a damn thing before being MSU's coach. Felker the same. Moorhead's background and preparation for this job far exceeds those guys. I don't have all the answers, and I'm not sure Moorhead was the right coach for THIS team's personnel, but the guy's resume and background almost guarantees that he's a hell of a lot better than this.

Lastly, we must keep in mind how rare it is for a new coach to take over a team that has had as much success and talent as this MSU team, and therefore we don't have much to compare the job Moorhead is doing to others. Pruitt, Morris, Chip Kelly are all getting passes because they coach bad teams, but UCLA was way better on offense last year than this year. So was Arkansas. Point is, we all under estimated the learning curve. I'm pissed and frustrated but it literally makes no logic sense that Moorhead will be as bad in the future as he currently is.

Now, I know some will counter my theories with "why are Mullen and Fisher having success in year 1?" Well, maybe both guys teams were way more setup to run their offenses than Moorhead's was to run his. Heck, this year's Florida team has betters WRs than Mullen ever had at MSU.

Just some food for thought. This season is gonna be rough but maybe we click at some point because we truly have a coach in which there was no evidence would ever field an offense remotely close to this poor.

I agree with some of that....but there is plenty of evidence he can field an offense this bad now. I'll throw something out there. He ain't never had to field a offense against SEC level defensive size and speed and depth. A lot of what we are doing seems a step slow developting. I know some of you hate the sport but the best analogy here is from soccer. Some of the big European leagues play beautiful football. They have exquisite passing and slow buildups in offense that work methodically toward the goal. In England, you don't get enough time on the ball to do that. You can beat an English team doing it ina Cup tie, but you ain't winning an English league doing it. That's about speed, pressure on the ball, and depth. Now what's really working in England the last few years is a meld of the two. Maybe Joe can pull it off, eventually.

[ShotgunDawg]

Charlie weis

Charlie was never a good college OC and had never been a head coach. Good example but Moorhead's resume is more complete and versatile than Charlie's was.

[ShotgunDawg]

I agree with some of that....but there is plenty of evidence he can field an offense this bad now. I'll throw something out there. He ain't never had to field a offense against SEC level defensive size and speed and depth. A lot of what we are doing seems a step slow developting. I know some of you hate the sport but the best analogy here is from soccer. Some of the big European leagues play beautiful football. They have exquisite passing and slow buildups in offense that work methodically two red the goal. In England, you don't get enough time in the ball to do that. You can beat an English team doing it ina Cup tie, but you ain't winning an English league doing it. That's about speed, pressure on the ball, and depth. Now what's really working in England the last few years is a meld of the two. Maybe Joe can pull it off, eventually.

He has fielded an offense against SEC size and speed. Dude put up 24 and 38 on Ohio State who has every bit of an SEC roster and then some. Hell of lot better than Kentucky or Florida's

What looks like slow developing plays could be players being very slow at reading the defense. The play itself may not be designed to be slow.

[msstate7]

Charlie was never a good college OC and had never been a head coach. Good example but Moorhead's resume is more complete and versatile than Charlie's was.

Sarkasian and McE

[Liverpooldawg]

He has fielded an offense against SEC size and speed. Dude put up 24 and 38 on Ohio State who has every bit of an SEC roster and then some. Hell of lot better than Kentucky or Florida's

What looks like slow developing plays could be players being very slow at reading the defense. The play itself may not be designed to be slow.

Ohio State is the ONLY team in the BIG that approaches SEC size and speed. You can do anything for one big game. He is used to the Kentuckies and (current) Floridias of the BIG being big but slow. It's a cliche, but it's still VERY true. In the SEC even the defensive tackles are fast.

[Liverpooldawg]

He has fielded an offense against SEC size and speed. Dude put up 24 and 38 on Ohio State who has every bit of an SEC roster and then some. Hell of lot better than Kentucky or Florida's

What looks like slow developing plays could be players being very slow at reading the defense. The play itself may not be designed to be slow.

Well, if that's what you got, you have to adapt to it. I see no signs of that.

[Pit Bull]

Actually heard some fans saying they'd take back Croom & McCorvey over this......now that is depression setting in right there I tell ya!

[Todd4State]

I think in hindsight that a Jeremy Pruitt or even a Hud would have been a better choice in the short term but I agree that Moorhead may be better in the long term. I'm just not sure if the fans and alumni are going to give him time to do bring in his types of players because our fans seem to have decided that he just isn't a fit.

[dawgday166]

I think in hindsight that a Jeremy Pruitt or even a Hud would have been a better choice in the short term but I agree that Moorhead may be better in the long term. I'm just not sure if the fans and alumni are going to give him time to do bring in his types of players because our fans seem to have decided that he just isn't a fit.

Well he better start cracking the whip then.

I think everyone of our problems are walk-through non-physical practices, after practice efforts by players aren't there (staying longer to work on passing/timing of routes, film study, etc.). They just ain't working hard and they ain't tough. All of this is also why we look so disorganized on offense and our pass pro keeps breaking down.

This ain't the Ivy League.

[Todd4State]

Well he better start cracking the whip then.

I think everyone of our problems are walk-through non-physical practices, after practice efforts by players aren't there (staying longer to work on passing/timing of routes, film study, etc.). They just ain't working hard and they ain't tough. All of this is also why we look so disorganized on offense and our pass pro keeps breaking down.

This ain't the Ivy League.

We don't look disorganized to me. It just looks to me like our o-line is getting their ass beat.