Is Mullen/MSU football taking another step?

[lamont]

Just gonna respond to everything from this thread in 1 post:

1) We don't average 8 wins/year. We average 7 regular season wins per season in the Mullen-Era. Which is still good by old State standards. The elevation our program received from Jackie plus the conglomerate the SEC has become has helped elevate what's possible for our university. The time has passed for us to compare present day MSU football to the 50's-90's State football. The SEC has elevated us past the La Tech's and Tulane's of the world- schools that we were completely on par with until the new millennium.

2) John Hevesy is a dick and he cusses even more than I do. That turns some coaches off. To each his own. But Hevesy is a good OL coach. Our guys may not have the talent they need- but they are coached up

3) John Hevesy is not a good recruiter. That's why we hired a new TE coach. We want him to close some deals moving forward that we have lost in past seasons.

4) Getting another top notch QB is great for the program. However- you have to give them the pieces around them to be successful or its wasted. Ask Kevin Fant.

5) Good teams are able to run vs other good teams. We have less than 100 yards total vs LSU the last 2 seasons- yet they gave up 117 yards per game last year. Auburn gave up 132 yards per game- we only had 103 vs them on 33 carries. We have lacked talent on the OL.

[Dawg61]

If the reason we average more wins now than 10 years ago is thanks to the SEC what's Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Missouri, USCe, Arkansas's problem? Shouldn't they be averaging more wins too? They aren't.

[lamont]

If the reason we average more wins now than 10 years ago is thanks to the SEC what's Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, LSU, Auburn, Missouri, USCe, Arkansas's problem? Shouldn't they be averaging more wins too? They aren't.

They do

It's much more rare an SEC team loses to a non-P5 these days. However, a by-product of elevating the lower programs of the SEC has caused more losses to the old upper-tier big 6. Has also made recruiting tougher for them as well.

[lamont]

Who said Mullen doesn't get any credit? He absolutely gets some credit for stabilizing the program- something Jackie couldn't do

[Liverpooldawg]

Who said Mullen doesn't get any credit? He absolutely gets some credit for stabilizing the program- something Jackie couldn't do

I think he MIGHT have elevated it just a BIT. Stabilizing it makes it sound like he managed to keep it at the level he found it. Croom might have done that. Come on Random.

[lamont]

I think he MIGHT have elevated it just a BIT. Stabilizing it makes it sound like he managed to keep it at the level he found it. Croom might have done that. Come on Random.

In addition to being a shitty poster- your vocabulary isn't very good either.

Stabilizing means he has avoided the up and down seasons in his tenure. Jackie would get on a run and then fall back for a couple of seasons. Mullen has avoided that for the most part until last season.

[lamont]

Our stats are fine- except vs good teams

We cant run the ball vs the top West teams every year and are out of the games by halftime. Happens every year

[Liverpooldawg]

Just gonna respond to everything from this thread in 1 post:

1) We don't average 8 wins/year. We average 7 regular season wins per season in the Mullen-Era. Which is still good by old State standards. The elevation our program received from Jackie plus the conglomerate the SEC has become has helped elevate what's possible for our university. The time has passed for us to compare present day MSU football to the 50's-90's State football. The SEC has elevated us past the La Tech's and Tulane's of the world- schools that we were completely on par with until the new millennium.

2) John Hevesy is a dick and he cusses even more than I do. That turns some coaches off. To each his own. But Hevesy is a good OL coach. Our guys may not have the talent they need- but they are coached up

3) John Hevesy is not a good recruiter. That's why we hired a new TE coach. We want him to close some deals moving forward that we have lost in past seasons.

4) Getting another top notch QB is great for the program. However- you have to give them the pieces around them to be successful or its wasted. Ask Kevin Fant.

5) Good teams are able to run vs other good teams. We have less than 100 yards total vs LSU the last 2 seasons- yet they gave up 117 yards per game last year. Auburn gave up 132 yards per game- we only had 103 vs them on 33 carries. We have lacked talent on the OL.

Come on Random, Mullen deserves a TON of credit. As you said given our history, 7 wins a year is stellar. Most of our history we were begging for just ONE 7 win season. We may leap from that to expecting more every year pretty quick, but national and regional perception changes much more slowly. When it comes to program building that is what matters. We ain't there yet, but for the first time in my lifetime it's starting to actually change.

[Bubb Rubb]

Just gonna respond to everything from this thread in 1 post:


5) Good teams are able to run vs other good teams. We have less than 100 yards total vs LSU the last 2 seasons- yet they gave up 117 yards per game last year. Auburn gave up 132 yards per game- we only had 103 vs them on 33 carries. We have lacked talent on the OL.

You are a coach. Um, sorry, your buddy coach34 is a coach, so surely he's taught you enough that you know it isn't this simple. At the time we played LSU and Auburn, we were extremely one dimensional on offense. Fitz was shaky and hadn't settled in. We weren't throwing the ball especially well. Yes, our OL talent was lacking....but you don't just line up and run the ball against those teams, you have to do other things to open up the run...especially with our OL struggling the way it was. Those are things were weren't able to do against LSU and Auburn. Especially Auburn. It's just not as simple as to say, we couldn't run the ball because the OL sucked. If teams have a solid defense and load the box, it really doesn't matter how good your OL is. You gotta be able to do some other things to open it up.

ETA: Trying to run Holloway on interior zone reads and off tackle didn't help matters either. I wish we had gone with Aeris a lot sooner. But my point still remains....you can't be one dimensional and expect to run the ball on anyone in the SEC (except Arkansas and Ole Miss).

[dawgday166]

You are a coach. Um, sorry, your buddy coach34 is a coach, so surely he's taught you enough that you know it isn't this simple. At the time we played LSU and Auburn, we were extremely one dimensional on offense. Fitz was shaky and hadn't settled in. We weren't throwing the ball especially well. Yes, our OL talent was lacking....but you don't just line up and run the ball against those teams, you have to do other things to open up the run...especially with our OL struggling the way it was. Those are things were weren't able to do against LSU and Auburn. Especially Auburn. It's just not as simple as to say, we couldn't run the ball because the OL sucked. If teams have a solid defense and load the box, it really doesn't matter how good your OL is. You gotta be able to do some other things to open it up.

ETA: Trying to run Holloway on interior zone reads and off tackle didn't help matters either. I wish we had gone with Aeris a lot sooner. But my point still remains....you can't be one dimensional and expect to run the ball on anyone in the SEC (except Arkansas and Ole Miss).

2015 we had Dak. Couldn't run against anyone, including a horrible AU team.

[lamont]

2015 we had Dak. Couldn't run against anyone, including a horrible AU team.

Yep- even a Taco Bell manager can see his post was not very good. Either we have a system problem or a talent problem when we face good defenses. And It's not the system. Doesn't matter if we have Dak or what at QB- we don't ever run the ball vs good defenses. That shows we lack talent on the OL.

Make sure and watch this Fall- we have Fitz and Aeris and we still won't run effectively vs Georgia, Bama, Auburn, or LSU

[dawgday166]

Yep- even a Taco Bell manager can see his post was not very good. Either we have a system problem or a talent problem when we face good defenses. And It's not the system. Doesn't matter if we have Dak or what at QB- we don't ever run the ball vs good defenses. That shows we lack talent on the OL.

Make sure and watch this Fall- we have Fitz and Aeris and we still won't run effectively vs Georgia, Bama, Auburn, or LSU

I'll be watching. Hope you (and I) are wrong ... but fear we probably won't be.

[1bigdawg]

It's just not as simple as to say, we couldn't run the ball because the OL sucked. If teams have a solid defense and load the box, it really doesn't matter how good your OL is. You gotta be able to do some other things to open it up.

So you are putting the blame on Mullen?

[lamont]

So you are putting the blame on Mullen?

We had the NFL ROY at QB plus 2 All-SEC WR's in 2015. Our problems in the run game had zero to do with teams "loading the box"