Dude on SPS is right on about our offense this year......

[Taog Redloh]

Der Huntr says Mullen went all in on the passing offense because he didn't trust our OL (which I also heard from preseason camp observations). That is why you see Shumpert playing more when healthy, because he's the best blocker we got. He goes on to say that it's a smart move by Mullen, but we at MSU are just not accustomed to seeing MSU football without a punishing run game.

My only complaint is that I wish Dak would run when the hole is there. He's good at improvising. He doesn't have to be the bull-rushing guy from last year (which probably gets him hurt), but he does need to run the ball when he SHOULD run the ball.

I would also like to see a fullback or second tailback used more. I realize that takes a TE or the 3rd WR out of the game. Some of you ex-coaches who are into Xs and Os can maybe comment on the consequences of that, regarding what Mullen tries to do. I loved our offense with Hanrahan and I loved Auburn's offense with Prosche.

Also worth noting, is that the OL is getting better as the year goes on.

[Jack Lambert]

We will do with KY defense what we want.

[Mjoelner34]

My only complaint is that I wish Dak would run when the hole is there. He's good at improvising. He doesn't have to be the bull-rushing guy from last year (which probably gets him hurt), but he does need to run the ball when he SHOULD run the ball.


Mine too. If this would have happened, the LSU game wouldn't have come down to a delay of game, a timeout and Devon Bell. We would have been taking a knee.

[Jack Lambert]

Der Huntr says Mullen went all in on the passing offense because he didn't trust our OL (which I also heard from preseason camp observations). That is why you see Shumpert playing more when healthy, because he's the best blocker we got. He goes on to say that it's a smart move by Mullen, but we at MSU are just not accustomed to seeing MSU football without a punishing run game.

My only complaint is that I wish Dak would run when the hole is there. He's good at improvising. He doesn't have to be the bull-rushing guy from last year (which probably gets him hurt), but he does need to run the ball when he SHOULD run the ball.

I would also like to see a fullback or second tailback used more. I realize that takes a TE or the 3rd WR out of the game. Some of you ex-coaches who are into Xs and Os can maybe comment on the consequences of that, regarding what Mullen tries to do. I loved our offense with Hanrahan and I loved Auburn's offense with Prosche.

Also worth noting, is that the OL is getting better as the year goes on.


Sounds like to me we need to put shump at fullback.

[Taog Redloh]

Sounds like to me we need to put shump at fullback.
Maybe, if he can block as good as they say. I've always advocated a move to S or LB as he doesn't really have the look of a traditional FB, but hey, whatever works.

[Coach34]

I think Hev made a mistake not moving Senior to LT. I understand his reasoning (didn't want the right side to be totally new guys), but I think the OL would be better right now had we bitten the bullet and done it. This is just my opinion though- and we'll never know. Hindsight can often be 20/20

[Liverpooldawg]

That's been pretty obvious from the first game. We are doing what we can do. That's the mark of a good coach. That may sound stupid but it's true.

[Thick]

We will do with KY defense what we want.

^^^This^^^

If you watched AU/UK, you noticed that UK could not cover #5. We have several targets that they will struggle covering. AU seemed to get to the corner a lot too using speed sweeps. Myles, Holloway, and Dear should have big day. I would pound the middle with DL and DP to keep them honest, work vertical with Bear, Ross, and Gray.

[TrapGame]

Sounds like to me we need to put shump at fullback.

I'd love to see Dan go old school I formation with Shump as FB and Lee as TB and just start punishing defenses. Just something to kick start a run game.

[Coach34]

Kentucky also lost a DT to an ACL

[Really Clark?]

Kentucky also lost a DT to an ACL

Yep and a LB is questionable as well. And they are really thin at LB already.

[Taog Redloh]

I'd love to see Dan go old school I formation with Shump as FB and Lee as TB and just start punishing defenses. Just something to kick start a run game.
Me too but would this limit us in the pass game, due to having 3 receivers instead of 4? I mean, it comes down to who our best athletes are I guess.

[TrapGame]

Me too but would this limit us in the pass game, due to having 3 receivers instead of 4? I mean, it comes down to who our best athletes are I guess.

If we have success with the I formation runs wouldn't the safeties come up closer to the LOS and put single coverage on the receivers?

[State82]

He doesn't have to be the bull-rushing guy from last year (which probably gets him hurt), but he does need to run the ball when he SHOULD run the ball.

If Dak (and Mullen) would take advantage of just this one simple aspect of the run game we would be in a much better situation going forward.

[BulldogBear]

Der Huntr says Mullen went all in on the passing offense because he didn't trust our OL (which I also heard from preseason camp observations). That is why you see Shumpert playing more when healthy, because he's the best blocker we got. He goes on to say that it's a smart move by Mullen, but we at MSU are just not accustomed to seeing MSU football without a punishing run game.

My only complaint is that I wish Dak would run when the hole is there. He's good at improvising. He doesn't have to be the bull-rushing guy from last year (which probably gets him hurt), but he does need to run the ball when he SHOULD run the ball.
I would also like to see a fullback or second tailback used more. I realize that takes a TE or the 3rd WR out of the game. Some of you ex-coaches who are into Xs and Os can maybe comment on the consequences of that, regarding what Mullen tries to do. I loved our offense with Hanrahan and I loved Auburn's offense with Prosche.

Also worth noting, is that the OL is getting better as the year goes on.

Same here. All the rushing issues, be they scheme or personnel are frustrating but I'd be way happier with Dak coming back from the Checkdown Charlie brink.

[Liverpooldawg]

Let's see: we have a questionable offensive line; questionable running backs; really good receivers and a lot of them; and the best quarterback in the SEC. Hummmm, what to do, what to do? Maybe an offensive scheme built around the short passing game? It makes sense to me. Evidently I'm not the only one.

[BB30]

Let's see: we have a questionable offensive line; questionable running backs; really good receivers and a lot of them; and the best quarterback in the SEC. Hummmm, what to do, what to do? Maybe an offensive scheme built around the short passing game? It makes sense to me. Evidently I'm not the only one.

yep... or we can line up in the I formation with our questionable offensive line go Croom style and run it up the gut on 1st and 2nd throw a pass on 3rd maybe... and punt like others have stated in this thread. We havent lined up in the I since maybe Mullen's first year not sure we went under center then. But lets in one week put in the I form package and plays that are not in our playbook and go against what has been working makes tons of sense, wish Dan would understand this. Georgia couldn't line up and run it against bama but surely we can.***

[defiantdog]

Let's see: we have a questionable offensive line; questionable running backs; really good receivers and a lot of them; and the best quarterback in the SEC. Hummmm, what to do, what to do? Maybe an offensive scheme built around the short passing game? It makes sense to me. Evidently I'm not the only one.

don't be logical

[Jack Lambert]

yep... or we can line up in the I formation with our questionable offensive line go Croom style and run it up the gut on 1st and 2nd throw a pass on 3rd maybe... and punt like others have stated in this thread. We havent lined up in the I since maybe Mullen's first year not sure we went under center then. But lets in one week put in the I form package and plays that are not in our playbook and go against what has been working makes tons of sense, wish Dan would understand this. Georgia couldn't line up and run it against bama but surely we can.***

Don't take it to seriously. We are giving arm chair Sunday Morning Coaches what if's. It's fun to do and it's also fun to kick ole miss fans when they are down like this week.

[TrapGame]

yep... or we can line up in the I formation with our questionable offensive line go Croom style and run it up the gut on 1st and 2nd throw a pass on 3rd maybe... and punt like others have stated in this thread. We havent lined up in the I since maybe Mullen's first year not sure we went under center then. But lets in one week put in the I form package and plays that are not in our playbook and go against what has been working makes tons of sense, wish Dan would understand this. Georgia couldn't line up and run it against bama but surely we can.***

Switch to decaf.***

[blacklistedbully]

I'd still love to see us have a wingbone package for Fitz that we could roll into the game every once-in-a-while. Stay with what we have with Dak for the majority, but switch it up perhaps 3-4 times a game.

Imagine what a nightmare that could be for opposing defenses and DC's charged with prepping for the game, then executing, etc. Yes, we would have to be effective with it offensively, but if we limited it to just a handful of plays, could we not have the potential to make it highly effective if used somewhat sparingly?

And if we did that successfully, imagine having Dak in, then suddenly shifting into the wingbone on any given play. The defense might shit-a-brick.

[maroonmania]

He goes on to say that it's a smart move by Mullen, but we at MSU are just not accustomed to seeing MSU football without ANY run game.



FIFY

[smootness]

I have a feeling those who want a power running game are going to love our offense next year.

With Dak out at QB and Wilson and possibly Ross gone from the WR corps, I think we're going to see a run-heavy offense again in 2016. And we'll have the personnel to do it.

Williams/Lee/Gibson at RB with some Dear here and there out of the backfield; Shump in at FB; Justin Johnson getting more time at TE. And I think we'll see the passing game consist mostly of screens to guys like Dear, Myles, and Mixon along with play-action deep shots to Gray and Brown, and hopefully AJ Brown.

[defiantdog]

I have a feeling those who want a power running game are going to love our offense next year.

With Dak out at QB and Wilson and possibly Ross gone from the WR corps, I think we're going to see a run-heavy offense again in 2016. And we'll have the personnel to do it.

Williams/Lee/Gibson at RB with some Dear here and there out of the backfield; Shump in at FB; Justin Johnson getting more time at TE. And I think we'll see the passing game consist mostly of screens to guys like Dear, Myles, and Mixon along with play-action deep shots to Gray and Brown, and hopefully AJ Brown.

Shump won't move to fullback. D. Thomas is going to be our next slot guy. Hell, he might even lose his redshirt this year. Murray is going to be pretty good at RB as well. And I'm not quite sure Wilson is going to leave after this season.

[smootness]

Shump won't move to fullback. D. Thomas is going to be our next slot guy. Hell, he might even lose his redshirt this year. Murray is going to be pretty good at RB as well. And I'm not quite sure Wilson is going to leave after this season.

Sure, plenty of things are uncertain. But Murphy will be a power runner himself, and I'm not necessarily saying Shumpert will move to FB full-time. But I think you'll definitely see him in as the lead blocker in 2-back sets next year, like he did at times last year. I think his time actually running the ball will continue to decrease.