Interesting Note

[ShotgunDawg]

According to Billy Gonzales tonight Donald Gray tweaked his hamstring in the first half against USM & was just back to 100% this past weekend.

That may be insinuating that we are about to see the "Gray's Anatomy" carve up the Auburn defense.

[BeardoMSU]

http://media.giphy.com/media/CbyvWnGLWa6ek/giphy.gif

[ShotgunDawg]

http://media.giphy.com/media/CbyvWnGLWa6ek/giphy.gif

Interesting GIF. What does it mean though?

[Todd4State]

I saw that. It pretty much means that he will play against Auburn. Baby steps for Dan.

I think this game will tell us how things are going to go for us going forward one way or the other. If we see the underclassmen taking on larger roles, I'm going to be real happy. If it's same old same old- I won't be any more pissed than I was after USM, but I'll certainly be disappointed.

The ball is in Dan's court- does he want to stay loyal to the upper classmen or does he want to give us the best chance to win and make it easier on everyone?

[Indigo Wolf]

Interesting GIF. What does it mean though?

Is it just me or does it look like there's a flask hidden under the glove and she's drinking during the game?

[ShotgunDawg]

Is it just me or does it look like there's a flask hidden under the glove and she's drinking during the game?

I see that as well, but I'm not sure what it means. I can't comprehend they symbolism of this GIF

[BeardoMSU]

Is it just me or does it look like there's a flask hidden under the glove and she's drinking during the game?

This guy is observant^^^^.


As to your question, Shotgun, it's not my place to make interpretations; your life is yours to experience****

[DancingRabbit]

I saw that. It pretty much means that he will play against Auburn. Baby steps for Dan.

I think this game will tell us how things are going to go for us going forward one way or the other. If we see the underclassmen taking on larger roles, I'm going to be real happy. If it's same old same old- I won't be any more pissed than I was after USM, but I'll certainly be disappointed.

The ball is in Dan's court- does he want to stay loyal to the upper classmen or does he want to give us the best chance to win and make it easier on everyone

You say some of the most absurd things.

[Todd4State]

You say some of the most absurd things.

Do you feel like our current starting lineup gives us the best chance to win?

Do you feel like we are a better offense with Shumpert as the primary back or should we see Lee/Dear/Williams get some touches?

Do you feel like our LB situation is optimized with Jackson and Richie Brown or would we be better playing Green and Gray more?

[DancingRabbit]

Do you feel like our current starting lineup gives us the best chance to win?

Do you feel like we are a better offense with Shumpert as the primary back or should we see Lee/Dear/Williams get some touches?

Do you feel like our LB situation is optimized with Jackson and Richie Brown or would we be better playing Green and Gray more?

"or does he want to give us the best chance to win?"

Your phrasing insinuates Dan might not want to give the team the best chance to win.

I'm comfortable that Dan is always doing what he thinks is best for the program and for the young men in the program. He would probably admit that he is not always right, but he has reasons for what he does, he's a pretty bright guy and he knows things internal to the program that we don't know.

It's perfectly reasonable to say "I wish he would play so-and-so more" or say "I don't understand why he's playing X instead of Y".

I think it's ridiculous to insinuate that he doesn't want to give us the best chance to win.

[Todd4State]

"or does he want to give us the best chance to win?"

Your phrasing insinuates Dan might not want to give the team the best chance to win.

I'm comfortable that Dan is always doing what he thinks is best for the program and for the young men in the program. He would probably admit that he is not always right, but he has reasons for what he does, he's a pretty bright guy and he knows things internal to the program that we don't know.

It's perfectly reasonable to say "I wish he would play so-and-so more" or say "I don't understand why he's playing X instead of Y".

I think it's ridiculous to insinuate that he doesn't want to give us the best chance to win.

The blank stare on Dan's face after Devon Bell misses a long field goal disagrees with you.

I don't think Dan is intentionally trying to hurt us or is not doing what HE thinks is best for the team.

BUT I DO think that Dan is an idealist. I think he feels like in a perfect world the upperclassmen and the guys that work hard would all come through at the end of the day and perform at a high level. I think Dan tries to force his ideal scenario into place and it sometimes results in less than ideal results. That's not intentional or meant to hurt us. But that also doesn't mean it's the BEST thing for us even though HE THINKS it's the best thing.

Some examples- anyone remember when he named Tyler AND Dak as starters before a game in 2013? They had them both announced on the jumbotron- and I believe it was after Dak was clearly better than Tyler. And then there was 1A/1B.

The problem right now is we have several players that have shown to be productive that haven't been used as they should. We all see it. Some may deny it and try to spin it as something that is going on that we don't see at practice or blow a mistake made by an underclassman out of proportion- like Lee's "missed block". But these players are performing overall nonetheless. So, is Dan going to give those players a chance on Saturday or are we going to see Shumpert up the middle for two ad nauseum?

[msugolf]

There's a very good chance that we're only going to get one year of production/watching Gerri Green. That's unacceptable. It reminds me when Cutcliffe started Rob Robertson over Patrick Willis. At this current moment Dan is our Cutcliffe.

[Liverpooldawg]

Do you feel like our current starting lineup gives us the best chance to win?

Do you feel like we are a better offense with Shumpert as the primary back or should we see Lee/Dear/Williams get some touches?

Do you feel like our LB situation is optimized with Jackson and Richie Brown or would we be better playing Green and Gray more?

Do you feel like you are a better coach than the only coach to take MSU football to a #1 ranking in our entire 110+ history?

[KentuckyDawg13]

+1


You say some of the most absurd things.

[Statefan]

Where was all this in-depth analysis and questioning of Mullen's desire to win games when we were 9-0 last year?

I haven't looked but I am 100% sure you probably complained about Mullen hating Donald Gray or refusing to play him because when in reality he was injured and you have no idea what you are talking about. We get it man, you have only posted 1000000000000 times since LSU that Mullen won't play his best player because he apparently doesn't want to win. Why don't you give it more than a missed FG loss to a top 10 team before you toss aside the 6 golden years of MSU football and decide Mullen sucks

[Really Clark?]

The blank stare on Dan's face after Devon Bell misses a long field goal disagrees with you.

I don't think Dan is intentionally trying to hurt us or is not doing what HE thinks is best for the team.

BUT I DO think that Dan is an idealist. I think he feels like in a perfect world the upperclassmen and the guys that work hard would all come through at the end of the day and perform at a high level. I think Dan tries to force his ideal scenario into place and it sometimes results in less than ideal results. That's not intentional or meant to hurt us. But that also doesn't mean it's the BEST thing for us even though HE THINKS it's the best thing.

Some examples- anyone remember when he named Tyler AND Dak as starters before a game in 2013? They had them both announced on the jumbotron- and I believe it was after Dak was clearly better than Tyler. And then there was 1A/1B.

The problem right now is we have several players that have shown to be productive that haven't been used as they should. We all see it. Some may deny it and try to spin it as something that is going on that we don't see at practice or blow a mistake made by an underclassman out of proportion- like Lee's "missed block". But these players are performing overall nonetheless. So, is Dan going to give those players a chance on Saturday or are we going to see Shumpert up the middle for two ad nauseum?

Are you talking about the Auburn game, Tyler's first game back after the concussion and it was late on game day when it was going back and forth about who would start that day? And Dan went with the younger Dak over the veteran Tyler. That kind of punches a hole in the always plays the older guys theory. Of course it is a good argument to say maybe Tyler wasn't quit ready or worries if he is rusty.

[Statefan]

Are you talking about the Auburn game, Tyler's first game back after the concussion and it was late on game day when it was going back and forth about who would start that day? And Dan went with the younger Dak over the veteran Tyler. That kind of punches a hole in the always plays the older guys theory. Of course it is a good argument to say maybe Tyler wasn't quit ready or worries if he is rusty.

Speaking of that, Dak had a really good first road game start at Auburn that day. Not that he needs confidence or lacks any experiences, but I'm hoping that that confidence from that start carries over on Saturday

[MadDawg]

I think it's ridiculous to insinuate that he doesn't want to give us the best chance to win.

Thank you. And anyone stating anything different has some serious issues they need to deal with.

[MadDawg]

Do you feel like you are a better coach than the only coach to take MSU football to a #1 ranking in our entire 110+ history?

Of course

[FISHDAWG]

Where was all this in-depth analysis and questioning of Mullen's desire to win games when we were 9-0 last year?

I haven't looked but I am 100% sure you probably complained about Mullen hating Donald Gray or refusing to play him because when in reality he was injured and you have no idea what you are talking about. We get it man, you have only posted 1000000000000 times since LSU that Mullen won't play his best player because he apparently doesn't want to win. Why don't you give it more than a missed FG loss to a top 10 team before you toss aside the 6 golden years of MSU football and decide Mullen sucks

^^^^ BRAVO ^^^

[Beaver]

But these players are performing overall nonetheless. So, is Dan going to give those players a chance on Saturday or are we going to see Shumpert up the middle for two ad nauseum?

Again, in 3 games, Shumpert has had a grand total of 28 carries. I agree that we need to play the other rb's, but all of this dogging of Shumpert is unnecessary. Watch the first half of the LSU game. You'll see the O-line get dominated play after play. It's not all on Shumpert.

[missouridawg]

Do you feel like our current starting lineup gives us the best chance to win?

Do you feel like we are a better offense with Shumpert as the primary back or should we see Lee/Dear/Williams get some touches?

Do you feel like our LB situation is optimized with Jackson and Richie Brown or would we be better playing Green and Gray more?

If you think Mullen puts out a lineup that he doesn't feel gives us the best chance to win, you have lost your ****ing mind. YOu may disagree with that lineup, but I can assure you, that never once, does Dan think "this lineup is my 3rd best lineup, but I have to get these guys ready for 2018".

[Barking 13]

I think we need to give Todd 4 mil and see what he can do***

[CottonDog]

If you truly think Dan isn't playing what he (the coach that sees everything that happens- in practice live and on film as well as in games live and on film) thinks is the best lineup, you probably think the government was behind 9/11, tupac and Elvis are still alive, and the moon landing was fake. Come on conspiracy guy. Who has time for that?

[Bama_Dawg]

If DG is full go now, he needs to be back with Holloway returning kicks. Holloway is a straight up speed guy, but DG can make 'em miss and get gone.

If DG does what he's shown he's been capable, then we are all in for a treat.

[Liverpooldawg]

Thank you. And anyone stating anything different has some serious issues they need to deal with.

Yep

[MSUDawg99]

This guy is observant^^^^.


As to your question, Shotgun, it's not my place to make interpretations; your life is yours to experience****

Guys. The gif is obvious. That's the the chick Christina, who played on Grey's Anatomy. Yes that's a flask in her glove. She turned it up. Sweet.

[Johnson85]

If you think Mullen puts out a lineup that he doesn't feel gives us the best chance to win, you have lost your ****ing mind.

If you are talking about putting out a lineup in a game that Mullen doesn't feel gives us the best chance to win that game, I think Mullen has done that plenty. Basically every game Perkins started over Robinson in Perkin's senior year was a sacrifice of the probability of winning the game in question in exchange for putting in place an atmosphere/culture where it's recognized that hard work and good attitude are just as valued as talent when it comes to playing time. I think he has also happily redshirted people that could have made us marginally better because he's thinking long term.

That's just a tradeoff all coaches make and Mullen, from what info is available publicly, tend to be towards one end of the spectrum (at least with respect to the talent v. hard work and attitude aspect). I don't think anybody other than maybe the assistant coaches have enough information to really know whether Mullen balances the short and long term appropriately, but it's hard to argue with his results so far.

[FISHDAWG]

If you truly think Dan isn't playing what he (the coach that sees everything that happens- in practice live and on film as well as in games live and on film) thinks is the best lineup, you probably think the government was behind 9/11, tupac and Elvis are still alive, and the moon landing was fake. Come on conspiracy guy. Who has time for that?

go easy about that moon landing now :confused:

[missouridawg]

If you are talking about putting out a lineup in a game that Mullen doesn't feel gives us the best chance to win that game, I think Mullen has done that plenty. Basically every game Perkins started over Robinson in Perkin's senior year was a sacrifice of the probability of winning the game in question in exchange for putting in place an atmosphere/culture where it's recognized that hard work and good attitude are just as valued as talent when it comes to playing time. I think he has also happily redshirted people that could have made us marginally better because he's thinking long term.

That's just a tradeoff all coaches make and Mullen, from what info is available publicly, tend to be towards one end of the spectrum (at least with respect to the talent v. hard work and attitude aspect). I don't think anybody other than maybe the assistant coaches have enough information to really know whether Mullen balances the short and long term appropriately, but it's hard to argue with his results so far.

There is a helluva lot more to being a RB than taking a hand off from the QB and trying not to get tackled.

[tireddawg]

Do you feel like our current starting lineup gives us the best chance to win?

Do you feel like we are a better offense with Shumpert as the primary back or should we see Lee/Dear/Williams get some touches?

Do you feel like our LB situation is optimized with Jackson and Richie Brown or would we be better playing Green and Gray more?

Do you feel like you know more than Dan?

[smootness]

Do you feel like you are a better coach than the only coach to take MSU football to a #1 ranking in our entire 110+ history?

Yes, he does.

[Johnson85]

There is a helluva lot more to being a RB than taking a hand off from the QB and trying not to get tackled.

There is, but that's not responsive to anything I said.

[Really Clark?]

There is, but that's not responsive to anything I said.

Here is the sticking point of why I have a hard time going down this path that in 2013 Dan played Perkins only because he was a senior and did it knowing it would put an inferior team on the field. We have evidence that he did not do this with other positions on the offense in that same season. Bear over took Marrow and others to get significant playing time down the stretch as a true freshman. He earned the spot by talent and becoming proficient enough with the position that they could trust him to get the job done. Secondly, when Tyler is finally able to play, right before Auburn he doesn't start that game. Or the next. Dak does. In fact the only start Tyler got while both were healthy after the first game was Bowling Green I believe. Dak had more starts and played more series in most of the games after he returned. Now after A & M it was just do what we can to get through the season. And that Arkansas game Tyler gutted it out and should have earned the respect of the fans for that game alone. So another example of Dan going with the younger guy, in that season. Then you have Perk vs Robinson. Perk was hurt most of the year and still had some good games, 10-81 yards against LSU, but shouldn't the question be if Dan has already proven he will go younger with the QB why couldn't JRob get more carriers with a hurt Perk? There was more going on that gave the coach that either Perk gave us the best chance even hurt or JRob couldn't earn more carries because of not being reliable to run the offense, attitude, etc.

[basedog]

Why are you guys talking about the past, it was been talked about enough, let's move on and as what happened yesterday in Msu football has no baring what's about to happen.

We are a missed FG away from being ranked high and everyone is having a Merry Christmas, well...........maybe.

Dan Mullen is doing the best he can and playing to win the game!

We win Saturday I say and will be 1-1 in conference play 3-1 overall. That's what most were predicting pre-season as for as Msu fans, not so much by the media.

[Johnson85]

Here is the sticking point of why I have a hard time going down this path that in 2013 Dan played Perkins only because he was a senior and did it knowing it would put an inferior team on the field. Nobody is making the argument he did.



Then you have Perk vs Robinson. Perk was hurt most of the year and still had some good games, 10-81 yards against LSU, but shouldn't the question be if Dan has already proven he will go younger with the QB why couldn't JRob get more carriers with a hurt Perk? There was more going on that gave the coach that either Perk gave us the best chance even hurt or JRob couldn't earn more carries because of not being reliable to run the offense, attitude, etc.

This is what pretty clearly happened. For any one game, we were clearly better with Robinson as our primary back instead of Perkins. He just gave us too much that Perkins couldn't even though Perkins was good in his own right. But there is a long term cost if you let a player move to the depth chart even though they don't do things you've told the team are required. Other players that are the most talented realize maybe they can take some reps easy during practice. Or maybe you lose respect of some of your glue guys and your team chemistry suffers. Whatever Mullen's reasons, he clearly thought we were better off in the long term keeping Perkins as the primary back. As I said, it's hard to question the results so far.

[Really Clark?]

Nobody is making the argument he did.




This is what pretty clearly happened. For any one game, we were clearly better with Robinson as our primary back instead of Perkins. He just gave us too much that Perkins couldn't even though Perkins was good in his own right. But there is a long term cost if you let a player move to the depth chart even though they don't do things you've told the team are required. Other players that are the most talented realize maybe they can take some reps easy during practice. Or maybe you lose respect of some of your glue guys and your team chemistry suffers. Whatever Mullen's reasons, he clearly thought we were better off in the long term keeping Perkins as the primary back. As I said, it's hard to question the results so far.

I agree with your second paragraph. But a lot of people believes Perk played mainly because he was a senior and uses this a one of the big examples of Dan doing this a whole lot. I apologize if I took your original statement that way a well.

[Todd4State]

My retorts:

1. No, I do not think I am as good of a football coach as Dan Mullen. And neither are the people that accuse me of thinking that way. I DO think that I am less stubborn than Dan.

2. Was I bitching when we were 9-0? YES. About 1A/1B. Ended up costing us in the end BIG TIME. And possibly even cost us a NC.

3. Perkins/Robinson is not the only example of Dan having absolutely ridiculous personnel management. And with Perkins/Robinson- the issue is not necessarily Perkins starting as much as it is HOW Dan used Perkins that year. Then you have Corey Broomfield over Darius Slay. You have Dak/Tyler being co-starters for SEVERAL- not just one game where there was a question about Tyler due to concussions- games, and then the whole 1A/1B silliness. If anyone thinks that those players were all used correctly- then you are smoking crack.

4. AGAIN- since apparently some of you suck at reading comprehension- NO I DO NOT THINK DAN IS INTENTIONALLY PUTTING WORSE PLAYERS OUT THERE. That does not mean that the players he DOES put out there are unquestionably the best players.

5. It's hilarious to me that the guys that "miss assignments" or "don't know the playbook" actually show out when they actually ARE given a chance to play. But I'm not at practice.**

6. On Donald Gray to whomever tried to call me out about that- nope, I didn't call for him to play more at WR. I only called for him to get a look at PR instead of Ross after Ross struggled against USM.

7. Dan has done a great job at MSU- but just because we have had some success it does not mean that we are maximizing our potential. It also doesn't make Dan infallible. Not maximizing our potential doesn't mean that we will lose every game- but it does mean we won't win a couple that we should have- and it means we won't be as dominant, which in turn hurts us in the rankings and in terms of media perception. If we beat Auburn we will be 3-1. But what would people be saying about us if we were 4-0 like we should be after the Auburn game? What would people say if we had beat USM 70-0 on the road to go along with those other two SEC wins?

All I really want is Dan to play some more people that can really help take us to the top. That is it.

[DownwardDawg]

There's a very good chance that we're only going to get one year of production/watching Gerri Green. That's unacceptable. It reminds me when Cutcliffe started Rob Robertson over Patrick Willis. At this current moment Dan is our Cutcliffe.

Maybe so. Cutcliffe is the best coach ole miss ever had. They would have won the SEC by now if they would have kept him.

[Liverpooldawg]

My retorts:

1. No, I do not think I am as good of a football coach as Dan Mullen. And neither are the people that accuse me of thinking that way. I DO think that I am less stubborn than Dan.

2. Was I bitching when we were 9-0? YES. About 1A/1B. Ended up costing us in the end BIG TIME. And possibly even cost us a NC.

3. Perkins/Robinson is not the only example of Dan having absolutely ridiculous personnel management. And with Perkins/Robinson- the issue is not necessarily Perkins starting as much as it is HOW Dan used Perkins that year. Then you have Corey Broomfield over Darius Slay. You have Dak/Tyler being co-starters for SEVERAL- not just one game where there was a question about Tyler due to concussions- games, and then the whole 1A/1B silliness. If anyone thinks that those players were all used correctly- then you are smoking crack.

4. AGAIN- since apparently some of you suck at reading comprehension- NO I DO NOT THINK DAN IS INTENTIONALLY PUTTING WORSE PLAYERS OUT THERE. That does not mean that the players he DOES put out there are unquestionably the best players.

5. It's hilarious to me that the guys that "miss assignments" or "don't know the playbook" actually show out when they actually ARE given a chance to play. But I'm not at practice.**

6. On Donald Gray to whomever tried to call me out about that- nope, I didn't call for him to play more at WR. I only called for him to get a look at PR instead of Ross after Ross struggled against USM.

7. Dan has done a great job at MSU- but just because we have had some success it does not mean that we are maximizing our potential. It also doesn't make Dan infallible. Not maximizing our potential doesn't mean that we will lose every game- but it does mean we won't win a couple that we should have- and it means we won't be as dominant, which in turn hurts us in the rankings and in terms of media perception. If we beat Auburn we will be 3-1. But what would people be saying about us if we were 4-0 like we should be after the Auburn game? What would people say if we had beat USM 70-0 on the road to go along with those other two SEC wins?

All I really want is Dan to play some more people that can really help take us to the top. That is it.

So you know more about who is best without ever attending a practice or really knowing about attitude, work ethic, grades, class attendance, discipline, knowing the play book and all that other stuff that affects who fits what is best for the program? You have seen me post about Shumpert but from a few things I have gleaned here and there the last few days I probably need to shut up about it. I think there is one thing that is becoming quite clear: If you are going to play for Dan Mullen you are going to have to earn it. If you are going to start you have to earn it and you don't just earn it on Saturday. When you get right down to it, that is exactly what is going to work for Mississippi State in the long run. Let the man do his job and support what he does.

[Todd4State]

So you know more about who is best without ever attending a practice or really knowing about attitude, work ethic, grades, class attendance, discipline, knowing the play book and all that other stuff that affects who fits what is best for the program? You have seen me post about Shumpert but from a few things I have gleaned here and there the last few days I probably need to shut up about it. I think there is one thing that is becoming quite clear: If you are going to play for Dan Mullen you are going to have to earn it. If you are going to start you have to earn it and you don't just earn it on Saturday. When you get right down to it, that is exactly what is going to work for Mississippi State in the long run. Let the man do his job and support what he does.


And you know all of this how? Making you essentially in the same boat as me.

I'm pretty sure than 99% of the people posting on here even the most connected people aren't at practice either.

I have an OPINION based on what I have seen in games so far- and I know based on that who is producing. And again- for all of those guys that ARE producing to not be up to snuff off the field is HIGHLY unlikely. As far as the playbook- I don't see a ton of guys lining up wrong and missing a ton of assignments due to not being where they are supposed to be. The Clarion-Ledger is more than willing to air out any discipline issues we have- which thus far have been a walk-on LB getting a ticket.

I do support Dan- but I want him to do some things that I feel will make the team better. Which in turn will make all of us happier.

[FISHDAWG]

There's a very good chance that we're only going to get one year of production/watching Gerri Green. That's unacceptable. It reminds me when Cutcliffe started Rob Robertson over Patrick Willis. At this current moment Dan is our Cutcliffe.

what makes you think Green is better ?

[Liverpooldawg]

And you know all of this how? Making you essentially in the same boat as me.

I'm pretty sure than 99% of the people posting on here even the most connected people aren't at practice either.

I have an OPINION based on what I have seen in games so far- and I know based on that who is producing. And again- for all of those guys that ARE producing to not be up to snuff off the field is HIGHLY unlikely. As far as the playbook- I don't see a ton of guys lining up wrong and missing a ton of assignments due to not being where they are supposed to be. The Clarion-Ledger is more than willing to air out any discipline issues we have- which thus far have been a walk-on LB getting a ticket.

I do support Dan- but I want him to do some things that I feel will make the team better. Which in turn will make all of us happier.

Yep I'm in exactly the same boat as you. That was my whole point. You and I don't know much if anything about what is really going on. I'm glad to see you admit that. When you constantly harp on the negative you are defining yourself by that negative.

[BB30]

So you know more about who is best without ever attending a practice or really knowing about attitude, work ethic, grades, class attendance, discipline, knowing the play book and all that other stuff that affects who fits what is best for the program? You have seen me post about Shumpert but from a few things I have gleaned here and there the last few days I probably need to shut up about it. I think there is one thing that is becoming quite clear: If you are going to play for Dan Mullen you are going to have to earn it. If you are going to start you have to earn it and you don't just earn it on Saturday. When you get right down to it, that is exactly what is going to work for Mississippi State in the long run. Let the man do his job and support what he does.

This... As most have stated the only glaring youth vs senority that really could have been questioned was Jrob and Perkins. And, as several people have stated Perk was starting because of his attitude and work ethic mostly attitude. I think this is how Dan has managed to have continued success and a big part of our current run. Showing favoritism to certain players based solely on ability is a dangerous road to go down that can potentially bring the program down. I think I am alright with a more talented player sitting if they aren't doing what they are supposed to off the field or do not fully know the system yet.

[Really Clark?]

This... As most have stated the only glaring youth vs senority that really could have been questioned was Jrob and Perkins. And, as several people have stated Perk was starting because of his attitude and work ethic mostly attitude. I think this is how Dan has managed to have continued success and a big part of our current run. Showing favoritism to certain players based solely on ability is a dangerous road to go down that can potentially bring the program down. I think I am alright with a more talented player sitting if they aren't doing what they are supposed to off the field or do not fully know the system yet.

One of the best telltale signs that it's an issue among the players is transfers. Our players during the Mullen era have been very loyal to the program and the way it's being run. Including playing time. We have a low turnover rate and they are getting it done in the classroom as well. When have we lost a more talented player because of playing time? I'm not saying some don't want to play or even think they should play more or ahead of someone else. But they respect and believe in the process and the way Mullen is running the program well enough that it has not been an issue. A large part of that is the leadership grooming he and the coaches have done with the players.

[Johnson85]

I agree with your second paragraph. But a lot of people believes Perk played mainly because he was a senior and uses this a one of the big examples of Dan doing this a whole lot. I apologize if I took your original statement that way a well.

I think a lot of people thought Mullen was overly loyal to Perkins until Robinson sort of showed his ass toward the end of and after last season. I think most (all?) of those people realize now that it wasn't simply loyalty to Perkins but Mullen actually wanting Robinson to improve some off the field behavior. I assume something similar is going on with D Lee right now. Or else he just isn't as good as he looks.

[Really Clark?]

I think a lot of people thought Mullen was overly loyal to Perkins until Robinson sort of showed his ass toward the end of and after last season. I think most (all?) of those people realize now that it wasn't simply loyalty to Perkins but Mullen actually wanting Robinson to improve some off the field behavior. I assume something similar is going on with D Lee right now. Or else he just isn't as good as he looks.

Well I think the posts from several people either disagree with you and they really believe it was upperclassman favoritism or they continue to ignore that the player caused some of his own lack of playing time for the sake of their argument or believe that issues like that should not effect playing time. Which I disagree with that stance as well.

[Offshore Dawg]

Interesting GIF. What does it mean though?

Beer, Jack, Crown, wine, the bitch is drinking.

[archdog]

There is a helluva lot more to being a RB than taking a hand off from the QB and trying not to get tackled.

But that is in the top two things.

[Todd4State]

Yep I'm in exactly the same boat as you. That was my whole point. You and I don't know much if anything about what is really going on. I'm glad to see you admit that. When you constantly harp on the negative you are defining yourself by that negative.

Did I ever claim to be at practice and have insider info on our team?

If you want to find a MSU website where opinions aren't encouraged, I know a guy named Gene....