Saturday Down South- SEC strength of schedule 2013

[Coach34]

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/sec-2013-strength-of-schedule/



"Mississippi State played six currently ranked teams and lost to all of them; however, they won the other six games, bringing them to 6-6 and bowl eligible. The Bulldogs played the toughest schedule, with opponents winning 66.4 percent of their games and 67.9 percent if you remove the Bulldogs."

[justwin]

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/sec-2013-strength-of-schedule/



"Mississippi State played six currently ranked teams and lost to all of them; however, they won the other six games, bringing them to 6-6 and bowl eligible. The Bulldogs played the toughest schedule, with opponents winning 66.4 percent of their games and 67.9 percent if you remove the Bulldogs."

Please tell me rice is in top 25

[mstatefan91]

I don't think Rice made it in the top 25.

This further points out why we don't need a harder OOC schedule. Yeah, none of our 6 wins are against marquee opponents (maybe TSUN?) but we made it to a bowl game and that gives us a better chance to improve for next season than if we were 3-9 but played a harder OOC.

[PMDawg2]

I will admit that this softens my stance some. However, it doesn't change the fact that it's time for Dan to change that stat from 0-6 to 1-5 or better. Every year it's the same story. We are 0-x vs x amount of elite teams. That 0 is a manifestation of all of his shortcomings (exactly what those are is debatable). Next year will tell a lot. If this article is written again after next season, then...I don't know, we will have to wonder if he can ever take that next step.

[Coach34]

We all agree that we need to take down a big school. With Auburn and A&M coming to S'ville next year, we have two prime chances to get it done.

[Jack Lambert]

We all agree that we need to take down a big school. With Auburn and A&M coming to S'ville next year, we have two prime chances to get it done.

We will win both of them. I am calling it now.

[smootness]

I will admit that this softens my stance some. However, it doesn't change the fact that it's time for Dan to change that stat from 0-6 to 1-5 or better. Every year it's the same story. We are 0-x vs x amount of elite teams. That 0 is a manifestation of all of his shortcomings (exactly what those are is debatable). Next year will tell a lot. If this article is written again after next season, then...I don't know, we will have to wonder if he can ever take that next step.

I think fans look at this the wrong way sometimes...they'll say, 'Yeah, we keep going to bowls but we're not beating any top teams!'

I think you can also look at the same data and think, 'We're going to bowls consistently and we're not even beating any top teams yet...imagine when we do start beating them.'

In the past, we have had coaches who could jump up and beat a top team here and there but they would also have inexplicable losses because it seemed like beating the top teams was based more on getting them 'up' for one game every once in a while as our true level of play meant that we weren't clearly better than some bad teams at the same time.

Well, right now, we're clearly better than bad teams. We're not losing to Kentucky, we're not losing to a crappy Arkansas, and we're mostly not losing to Ole Miss, either. And this year we were competitive in some of those games against top teams. Rather than just periodically beating a really good team, we've raised the entire level of our program up a notch.

As long as we keep doing that, the wins against top teams will start to come. And if you combine a program that doesn't lose to bad teams with one that sometimes beats really good teams, you end up with a great product...certainly better than what we've had in the past.

So sure, Mullen hasn't beaten a top team yet. But he has improved the level of our program, and I view the fact that we're still able to make bowl games and have decent-to-good seasons without those wins (while playing top teams constantly in the SEC West) as a good sign because I feel confident those wins are eventually coming.

[PMDawg2]

I think fans look at this the wrong way sometimes...they'll say, 'Yeah, we keep going to bowls but we're not beating any top teams!'

I think you can also look at the same data and think, 'We're going to bowls consistently and we're not even beating any top teams yet...imagine when we do start beating them.'

In the past, we have had coaches who could jump up and beat a top team here and there but they would also have inexplicable losses because it seemed like beating the top teams was based more on getting them 'up' for one game every once in a while as our true level of play meant that we weren't clearly better than some bad teams at the same time.

Well, right now, we're clearly better than bad teams. We're not losing to Kentucky, we're not losing to a crappy Arkansas, and we're mostly not losing to Ole Miss, either. And this year we were competitive in some of those games against top teams. Rather than just periodically beating a really good team, we've raised the entire level of our program up a notch.

As long as we keep doing that, the wins against top teams will start to come. And if you combine a program that doesn't lose to bad teams with one that sometimes beats really good teams, you end up with a great product...certainly better than what we've had in the past.

So sure, Mullen hasn't beaten a top team yet. But he has improved the level of our program, and I view the fact that we're still able to make bowl games and have decent-to-good seasons without those wins (while playing top teams constantly in the SEC West) as a good sign because I feel confident those wins are eventually coming.

I agree with 99% of this. I am fully able to admit that I may be too eager with my expectations. Maybe it just takes longer than I've been willing to give. On the other hand, I see a few red flags that induce doubt. For me, it's just not as cut and dried. My main problem is that many on this board simply refuse to allow me to hold my own take on the situation without being ridiculed and called names. If there's 500 people on this board, there are 500 different opinions and 500 people who think they are 100% right. It's growing tiresome to read most threads due to the pervasive tone (which was originally not allowed - sports and information board).

[smootness]

I agree with 99% of this. I am fully able to admit that I may be too eager with my expectations. Maybe it just takes longer than I've been willing to give. On the other hand, I see a few red flags that induce doubt. For me, it's just not as cut and dried. My main problem is that many on this board simply refuse to allow me to hold my own take on the situation without being ridiculed and called names. If there's 500 people on this board, there are 500 different opinions and 500 people who think they are 100% right. It's growing tiresome to read most threads due to the pervasive tone (which was originally not allowed - sports and information board).

Fully agree. I do think there are some, and it's a growing number, who insist on talking down to those with whom they disagree, and it makes the board tiresome to read.

[blacklistedbully]

Goat is the poster-child of what makes this board sometimes tedious.

[Coach34]

Fully agree. I do think there are some, and it's a growing number, who insist on talking down to those with whom they disagree, and it makes the board tiresome to read.

yeah- we need to tighten back down on the personal insults