Some one explaine to me why Neb fired a 9 win coach?

[Jack Lambert]

It doesn't look like it is panning out for them. Unless something happens they are going to have a eight lost season.

[ScoobaDawg]

tie game at halftime....

[Coach34]

It doesn't look like it is panning out for them. Unless something happens they are going to have a eight lost season.

Because they fired Frank Solich who was winning 10 games per season. Neither guy is Tom Osbourne and until a coach gets them back to their Glory Days- they will keep firing them

[Really Clark?]

Because they fired Frank Solich who was winning 10 games per season. Neither guy is Tom Osbourne and until a coach gets them back to their Glory Days- they will keep firing them

Tom Osborn maybe, as weird as this is to say, underrated when talking all time greats. Never won less than 9 games at Neb. Never. That's a consistency that will probably never be matched again.

[msstate7]

Nebraska needs Ken Niumatalolo of navy. Nebraska needs to be an option team and Ken is doing one hell of a job at navy

[HSVDawg]

Nebraska at this point is a program whose "big boy" status is officially extinct, and will be for the forseeable future. Pretty much all of their historic success was attributed to Tom Osbourne and his ability to not only have success with the option game, but also influence 75% of the high schools in the state to adopting the same offense. This created an assembly line of players in a talent deficient state that came in ready to play. A vast majority of these players were never NFL caliber, but Nebraska was able to win NC's based on sheer execution. Shit, look at Tommie Frazier as a prime example. Dude never sniffed the NFL, but was one of the greatest option QB's to ever play college football.

Unfortunately, once Osbourne left and future coaches switched to more modern offenses, the high schools in the state weren't so quick to adjust. Nebraska was forced to look out of state for the majority of its talent, and Lincoln isn't the most appealing destination for a good percentage of national prospects. The end result is what you've seen out of Nebraska football for the last 15 years....nothing but mediocrity.

[runwildjerious]

Because they fired Frank Solich who was winning 10 games per season. Neither guy is Tom Osbourne and until a coach gets them back to their Glory Days- they will keep firing them

The same Frank Solich that has made Ohio a good football team year in and year out. We all overreact from time to time regarding change in a program, but sometimes change is not good. Plus they brought in Riley who does not bring much, other than likability, as a head coach.

I read through this article that documents the changes that Iowa and Washington State DID NOT make that has helped them be successful. Yes, sometimes firing a coach and completely changing a system is the only rational thing to do because if you wait to long you just dig yourself a bigger hole (see the end of Stansbury), but sometimes you need to keep your people in place for the most part and recommit to what brought you success in the first place.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/12/3/9842204/iowa-washington-state-football

[Liverpooldawg]

Because they fired Frank Solich who was winning 10 games per season. Neither guy is Tom Osbourne and until a coach gets them back to their Glory Days- they will keep firing them

Something YOU need to take note of. You sound like ME there 34. Maybe you aren't completely hopeless.

[HancockCountyDog]

It doesn't look like it is panning out for them. Unless something happens they are going to have a eight lost season.

They will need a time machine and make them be the only team that is on TV, the only team that has money, and will need every power 5 school that is in a state that produces talent that Nebraska used to poach (FL, TX, Ca) to stop recruiting so well. They will also need to convince recruits that a Nebraska offer is not the same thing as an offer from KSU, Purdue, Illinois or Iowa.

Basically, they are the last Blockbuster store of college football. They simply fail to admit that they are no longer relevant on a national stage.

[Coach34]

Ive never once said we needed to fire Mullen. Not once. Neither has anybody else that Ive seen.

[Liverpooldawg]

Ive never once said we needed to fire Mullen. Not once. Neither has anybody else that Ive seen.

Lol. You have encouraged him to leave on his own though. It's the SAME thing. Thankfully you are only a very vocal internet "expert" from a miniscule fraction of our fan base. Most of us are sane.

[TUSK]

you can get a fork and turn Nebraska over... they are done...

with conference realignment(s) and now that everybody is on TV every week, unless they "go all Auburn/Ole Miss", they won't be able to recruit (to Lincoln) well enough to be "relevant", again...

It'd take a Saban/Harbrough/Meyer type hire to (maybe) get em there... and that's what they are shootin' for.

[Taog Redloh]

Nebraska at this point is a program whose "big boy" status is officially extinct, and will be for the forseeable future. Pretty much all of their historic success was attributed to Tom Osbourne and his ability to not only have success with the option game, but also influence 75% of the high schools in the state to adopting the same offense. This created an assembly line of players in a talent deficient state that came in ready to play. A vast majority of these players were never NFL caliber, but Nebraska was able to win NC's based on sheer execution. Shit, look at Tommie Frazier as a prime example. Dude never sniffed the NFL, but was one of the greatest option QB's to ever play college football.

Unfortunately, once Osbourne left and future coaches switched to more modern offenses, the high schools in the state weren't so quick to adjust. Nebraska was forced to look out of state for the majority of its talent, and Lincoln isn't the most appealing destination for a good percentage of national prospects. The end result is what you've seen out of Nebraska football for the last 15 years....nothing but mediocrity.
Nebraska will always be able to lay claim to the greatest college football team of all time, the 1995 team. So they have that.

And a team is never extinct, they'll just have to get the right guy. They have potential. If you've done it once, you can do it again. They are just going to have to find a guy that aligns with 'Nebraska' and can somehow find another recrootin niche. I think they need to find an elite defensive coach personally.

[Coach34]

Lol. You have encouraged him to leave on his own though. It's the SAME thing. .

I havent said one word to Dan Mullen. I have not once said he needed to be fired- so your post is bullshit.

[Coach34]

And a team is never extinct, they'll just have to get the right guy. They have potential. If you've done it once, you can do it again. .

You just gave fans at Army and Minnesota chills of hope.

Nebraska will never be what they were- just like Wichita State will never be a baseball power again

[Liverpooldawg]

I havent said one word to Dan Mullen. I have not once said he needed to be fired- so your post is bullshit.

LOL, the truely hilarious thing is you actually believe what you wrote there. I'll say this, if I was a totally disinterested third party you would be highly entertaining!

[Taog Redloh]

You just gave fans at Army and Minnesota chills of hope.

Nebraska will never be what they were- just like Wichita State will never be a baseball power again

I guess I assumed too much by thinking practicality would be taken for granted.

Big difference in Nebraska and Army in regards to program potential in the modern day game. I can't believe I really have to point this out.

[Taog Redloh]

you can get a fork and turn Nebraska over... they are done...

with conference realignment(s) and now that everybody is on TV every week, unless they "go all Auburn/Ole Miss", they won't be able to recruit (to Lincoln) well enough to be "relevant", again...

It'd take a Saban/Harbrough/Meyer type hire to (maybe) get em there... and that's what they are shootin' for.
It also took a Saban hire to get Alabama there too. Just sayin'.

Tennessee is in that same boat with Nebraska. It can and will happen....just has to be the right guy.

[Liverpooldawg]

You just gave fans at Army and Minnesota chills of hope.

Nebraska will never be what they were- just like Wichita State will never be a baseball power again

Nebraska is perhaps the highest profile victim of the change in College football offenses in the last 10 years. They used to be able to get a bunch of corn fed local boys to play up front at will. They can still do that. What they can't do is still make use of those guys and a few national speed guys to run the hell out the of traditional option game. I think they will be back once they adapt. They have everything else you need.

[Coach34]

I guess I assumed too much by thinking practicality would be taken for granted.

Big difference in Nebraska and Army in regards to program potential in the modern day game. I can't believe I really have to point this out.

You made the blanket statement- not me

Saban... Meyer...nor anybody close to it is walking into Lincoln ever again. They no longer have the cakewalk to get by Oklahoma and win the Big 8 like they used to. It's a new era and they just dont have the appeal anymore

[Taog Redloh]

Nebraska is perhaps the highest profile victim of the change in College football offenses in the last 10 years. They used to be able to get a bunch of corn fed local boys to play up front at will. They can still do that. What they can't do is still make use of those guys and a few national speed guys to run the hell out the of traditional option game. I think they will be back once they adapt. They have everything else you need.
I went back and looked at where their best skill guys came from, to see if I saw a pattern.....and there was none. Half of them were from Nebraska. Some from Arkansas, some from New Jersey, Frazier from Florida. No real rhyme or reason. I'm not sure what their keys to recrootin would be.....Texas maybe? But I would think the sledding is much tougher there now that they are in the B1G. Guess they'll just have to do what everybody does....get on a plane and fly to Miami.

[Todd4State]

The same Frank Solich that has made Ohio a good football team year in and year out. We all overreact from time to time regarding change in a program, but sometimes change is not good. Plus they brought in Riley who does not bring much, other than likability, as a head coach.

I read through this article that documents the changes that Iowa and Washington State DID NOT make that has helped them be successful. Yes, sometimes firing a coach and completely changing a system is the only rational thing to do because if you wait to long you just dig yourself a bigger hole (see the end of Stansbury), but sometimes you need to keep your people in place for the most part and recommit to what brought you success in the first place.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/12/3/9842204/iowa-washington-state-football

Honestly if you told me I had to suffer through three years of Ray to get Howland, I'd do it again.

It's a case by case situation- Solich may be winning enough for Ohio, but that still doesn't mean he would do well at Nebraska. Rich Rodriguez never was going to be successful at Michigan.

And FWIW Pelini was fired from Nebraska because he and their AD couldn't get along.

[Taog Redloh]

You made the blanket statement- not me


Saban... Meyer...nor anybody close to it is walking into Lincoln ever again.
Talk about blanket statements.

[Blackout]

We in the SEC could replace a mediocre coach much easier than Nebraska nowadays.

Deep pockets run deep

[Todd4State]

Lol. You have encouraged him to leave on his own though. It's the SAME thing. Thankfully you are only a very vocal internet "expert" from a miniscule fraction of our fan base. Most of us are sane.

Most of our fans are completely apathetic about the football program right now. When MSU is calling people up and begging them to buy bowl tickets- it's not good.

Dan better win the bowl to get some people back on his side. Dan talking around to other teams plus how the team presents in big games leaves a really bad taste in peoples mouths. No one wants to spend their time and money on that crap.

[Liverpooldawg]

I went back and looked at where their best skill guys came from, to see if I saw a pattern.....and there was none. Half of them were from Nebraska. Some from Arkansas, some from New Jersey, Frazier from Florida. No real rhyme or reason. I'm not sure what their keys to recrootin would be.....Texas maybe? But I would think the sledding is much tougher there now that they are in the B1G. Guess they'll just have to do what everybody does....get on a plane and fly to Miami.
That's the main difference from now and when they are now. They can't attract this national level skill guys like they used too.

[Liverpooldawg]

We in the SEC could replace a mediocre coach much easier than Nebraska nowadays.

Deep pockets run deep

That's just it, they didn't have one of those coaches for a long time.

[Liverpooldawg]

Most of our fans are completely apathetic about the football program right now. When MSU is calling people up and begging them to buy bowl tickets- it's not good.

Dan better win the bowl to get some people back on his side. Dan talking around to other teams plus how the team presents in big games leaves a really bad taste in peoples mouths. No one wants to spend their time and money on that crap.

This statement proves you are clueless.

[Jack Lambert]

tie game at halftime....

Good for them, they pulled it off.

[Liverpooldawg]

Most of our fans are completely apathetic about the football program right now. When MSU is calling people up and begging them to buy bowl tickets- it's not good.

Dan better win the bowl to get some people back on his side. Dan talking around to other teams plus how the team presents in big games leaves a really bad taste in peoples mouths. No one wants to spend their time and money on that crap.

Oh, as an after thought that also speaks to just how great a job Mullen is doing here: Apathy for what is considered a "lessor" bowl game is a totally wonderful problem to have. I remember the bumper to bumper traffic headed up to the Liberty Bowl under Croom. We were just as excited as hell over the freaking Liberty Bowl. That was a totally far from apathetic showing over a podunk bowl and I hope we NEVER go back to that. Perhaps you do?

[Todd4State]

This statement proves you are clueless.

The lack of bowl talk on this board plus the fact that MSU is trying is begging me to go to the Belk Bowl proves otherwise.

[Liverpooldawg]

The lack of bowl talk on this board plus the fact that MSU is trying is begging me to go to the Belk Bowl proves otherwise.

Actually it proves you are. See what I was writing above. Maybe you miss the days when we got excited over going to the Liberty Bowl or the Belk Bowl. I sure as heck don't. That we are pissed about ANY bowl says all anyone should need to know about what kind of job Mullen is doing.

[Todd4State]

Oh, as an after thought that also speaks to just how great a job Mullen is doing here: Apathy for what is considered a "lessor" bowl game is a totally wonderful problem to have. I remember the bumper to bumper traffic headed up to the Liberty Bowl under Croom. We were just as excited as hell over the freaking Liberty Bowl. That was a totally far from apathetic showing over a podunk bowl and I hope we NEVER go back to that. Perhaps you do?

Dan has raised our floor- but he hasn't raised our ceiling. I want Dan to raise the ceiling- and it's time for him to do so.

Our past means as much as Ole Miss's football past- not much. We have more potential to be a power than ever before. Unlike you, I'm not afraid to make a change to be better. If we make a bad hire after Dan, it's more than likely because we allowed him to run our team in the ground- which we have a bad history of at MSU. I fear a major rebuild much more than a coaching change. We fired Croom one year after the Liberty Bowl and made a better hire.

If we make a bad hire, we just fire that guy and hire someone else. Like we did with Howland.

[Todd4State]

Actually it proves you are. See what I was writing above. Maybe you miss the days when we got excited over going to the Liberty Bowl or the Belk Bowl. I sure as heck don't. That we are pissed about ANY bowl says all anyone should need to know about what kind of job Mullen is doing.


And I've never been called the worst poster on this board.

[Liverpooldawg]

Really now boyo? What ceiling would that be? The one where we went to a bowl every 10 years or so, or every 5 years or so allowing for the proliferation of the things now? You do know we had never been to more than three in a row prior to Mullen don't you? This one makes 6 straight. You do know that just last year we had only the third 10 win season in our history? You do know that we were #1 for a few weeks last year for the first time EVER? You do know we had the highest finish in the Heisman balloting for one of our players ever last year? You are totally clueless on so many levels that it's hard to document them all. That was just stab at it as I'm drifting off to sleep after an excellent meal, some excellent beer, a cheap but acceptable wine with dinner, and a truly excellent Islay whisky nightcap. If you want me to take you seriously at least TRY to ground your posts in reality.

[Liverpooldawg]

And I've never been called the worst poster on this board.

Oooooo, that put me in my place. Thanks for the compliment!

[Political Hack]

You just gave fans at Army and Minnesota chills of hope.

Nebraska will never be what they were- just like Wichita State will never be a baseball power again

Yep. Nebraska and Miami are dead. And unlike Miami, Nebraska doesnt have the homegrown talent and can't recruit south of them in TX and OK anymore because there a freaking Big Ten school now. So dumb. They lost 7 games this year and will be lucky to make it to a bowl next year. They beat USM by 8. That's their talent level. Their identity from the 80's and 90's is gone. Kids don't think Nebraska is anything special anymore, but that's mostly because they're largely irrelevant.

Sorry huskers. Y'all have nice fans.

[Todd4State]

Really now boyo? What ceiling would that be? The one where we went to a bowl every 10 years or so, or every 5 years or so allowing for the proliferation of the things now? You do know we had never been to more than three in a row prior to Mullen don't you? This one makes 6 straight. You do know that just last year we had only the third 10 win season in our history? You do know that we were #1 for a few weeks last year for the first time EVER? You do know we had the highest finish in the Heisman balloting for one of our players ever last year? You are totally clueless on so many levels that it's hard to document them all. That was just stab at it as I'm drifting off to sleep after an excellent meal, some excellent beer, a cheap but acceptable wine with dinner, and a truly excellent Islay whisky nightcap. If you want me to take you seriously at least TRY to ground your posts in reality.

Here is some reality- it's easier to make a bowl than it has ever been before. See three 5-7 teams making one.

Only one win over a SEC team that has finished the season with more than 8 wins.

Jackie had more wins over 9+ win teams than Dan has had at this point.

It's also easier to get to 10 wins since the advent of 12 games.

We are doing well relative to our history- that doesn't mean we should accept being above average when we can be great because mediocre people like you want to hold us back.

[Todd4State]

Oooooo, that put me in my place. Thanks for the compliment!

It pretty much did.

[J Paul Ronvonski III]

Nebraska at this point is a program whose "big boy" status is officially extinct, and will be for the forseeable future. Pretty much all of their historic success was attributed to Tom Osbourne and his ability to not only have success with the option game, but also influence 75% of the high schools in the state to adopting the same offense. This created an assembly line of players in a talent deficient state that came in ready to play. A vast majority of these players were never NFL caliber, but Nebraska was able to win NC's based on sheer execution. Shit, look at Tommie Frazier as a prime example. Dude never sniffed the NFL, but was one of the greatest option QB's to ever play college football.

Unfortunately, once Osbourne left and future coaches switched to more modern offenses, the high schools in the state weren't so quick to adjust. Nebraska was forced to look out of state for the majority of its talent, and Lincoln isn't the most appealing destination for a good percentage of national prospects. The end result is what you've seen out of Nebraska football for the last 15 years....nothing but mediocrity.


Has made a more level playing field for teams in the SEC. I remember when the only games every Saturday were either Ohio State, USC, Alabama, Nebraska and of course Notre Dame. There were a few more, but not many. We are still playing catch up from the past, but it's not as bad as it used to be compared to the 70's.

[raymond21]

There is 40 bowl games, which equals 80 teams. I'm not sure but it's around 120 D1 schools total. If you don't go to a bowl game , you should be fired. I'm all for having a total of 20 bowls, which allows the top 40 to play one additional game. Making a statement that we have been to 6 straight bowls, doesn't really mean anything

[Johnson85]

There is 40 bowl games, which equals 80 teams. I'm not sure but it's around 120 D1 schools total. If you don't go to a bowl game , you should be fired. I'm all for having a total of 20 bowls, which allows the top 40 to play one additional game. Making a statement that we have been to 6 straight bowls, doesn't really mean anything

20 bowls would not result in the top 40 teams going to bowls unless you intend to get rid of bowl tie ins for non-power 5 schools. The tots number of bowls is irrelevant when taking about an sec school at this point. A bowl game means you won at least two sec games and sweeping non conference. Starting next year, a bowl game will mean a minimum of three wins over power five schools and sweeping non power five out of conference games

Getting to a bowl game is no huge accompaniment, but never missing a bow game still means something, as evidenced by the fact that auburn, ark, and um haven't been able to do it.

[Liverpooldawg]

There is 40 bowl games, which equals 80 teams. I'm not sure but it's around 120 D1 schools total. If you don't go to a bowl game , you should be fired. I'm all for having a total of 20 bowls, which allows the top 40 to play one additional game. Making a statement that we have been to 6 straight bowls, doesn't really mean anything

It does mean something because for almost all of our history, certainly our modern history we wouldn't have gone to six straight even under today's bowl set up. Go back and look. What Todd is claiming as a floor now would have been above our ceiling not all that long ago.

[HancockCountyDog]

FYI, I'm hearing that LSU is doing everything they can this recruiting cycle, their coaches know they are on a 1 year deal, and they are going down swinging.

[HSVDawg]

Nebraska will always be able to lay claim to the greatest college football team of all time, the 1995 team. So they have that.

You must have been in a coma when the 2001 Miami Hurricanes were running roughshod over everybody. That team had 38 draft picks, including SEVENTEEN first rounders, and also had a double digit number of future Pro Bowlers including Jeremy Shockey, Jonathan Vilma, Vince Wilfork, Sean Taylor, Frank Gore, Clinton Portis, Willis McGahee, Andre Johnson, Kellen Winslow II and others.

Of course, they used the most notorious recruiting tactics since SMU in the 80's to land those guys. And speaking of programs that will be extinct for the forseeable future, that is another one.

[BulldogBear]

It does mean something because for almost all of our history, certainly our modern history we wouldn't have gone to six straight even under today's bowl set up. Go back and look. What Todd is claiming as a floor now would have been above our ceiling not all that long ago.

This^^^^

Gator, Music City, Gator, Liberty, Orange, and then finally Belk. The latter one is the only "new" bowl since bowls exploded past the 20-25 total market that should never have been crossed. Even then, the Belk came in as a mid-tier bowl, not G5 vs. G5. Gator, Orange, and Liberty are very old. We have not been going to bowls because there are more bowls. This would have been six straight in the 90s and probably 5 of 6 in the 80s and 4-5 of 6 on the 1970s.

[BulldogBear]

This^^^^

Gator, Music City, Gator, Liberty, Orange, and then finally Belk. The latter one is the only "new" bowl since bowls exploded past the 20-25 total market that should never have been crossed. Even then, the Belk came in as a mid-tier bowl, not G5 vs. G5. Gator, Orange, and Liberty are very old. We have not been going to bowls because there are more bowls. This would have been six straight in the 90s and probably 5 of 6 in the 80s and 4-5 of 6 on the 1970s.

It is the 5 win abominations and nonpower schools that are going to more bowls because there are more bowls, not MSU. It has very little effect on SEC teams, only the 6-6 might have been affected some years.

[Todd4State]

This^^^^

Gator, Music City, Gator, Liberty, Orange, and then finally Belk. The latter one is the only "new" bowl since bowls exploded past the 20-25 total market that should never have been crossed. Even then, the Belk came in as a mid-tier bowl, not G5 vs. G5. Gator, Orange, and Liberty are very old. We have not been going to bowls because there are more bowls. This would have been six straight in the 90s and probably 5 of 6 in the 80s and 4-5 of 6 on the 1970s.


We didn't go bowling with 7-4 in 97 and 6-5 in 86. I would guess that Dan would have missed bowling with the 2011 and 2013 teams in the 90's more than likely not to mention again the advent of the 12th game.

[Todd4State]

It does mean something because for almost all of our history, certainly our modern history we wouldn't have gone to six straight even under today's bowl set up. Go back and look. What Todd is claiming as a floor now would have been above our ceiling not all that long ago.


Our history is bad so let's accept average even after getting to number one because our history is bad. Again- mediocre thought process.

[BoomBoom]

Actually it proves you are. See what I was writing above. Maybe you miss the days when we got excited over going to the Liberty Bowl or the Belk Bowl. I sure as heck don't. That we are pissed about ANY bowl says all anyone should need to know about what kind of job Mullen is doing.

It proves the opposite. It only means what you say it does if you take it as a given that our current position is our ceiling. which is of course the view of the poor ol state crowd. if instead you think MSU can be a NC contender, then the current status of our program is huge red flag. if you are not moving forward, then you are falling behind. we're not moving forward. those that are happy where they are will never care that they are falling behind, but those with their eye on the end goal will always strive to continue moving forward. way of the world boyo, you are who you are, just accept it and quit bothering us with your defeatist attitude.

[Taog Redloh]

Yep. Nebraska and Miami are dead. And unlike Miami, Nebraska doesnt have the homegrown talent and can't recruit south of them in TX and OK anymore because there a freaking Big Ten school now. So dumb. They lost 7 games this year and will be lucky to make it to a bowl next year. They beat USM by 8. That's their talent level. Their identity from the 80's and 90's is gone. Kids don't think Nebraska is anything special anymore, but that's mostly because they're largely irrelevant.

Sorry huskers. Y'all have nice fans.
You done bumped yo head, especially regarding Miami.

Granted, they need to figure out their stadium situation, and yes, the whole eastern side of the country recruits south Florida. But they can still get back. I just laugh at ya'lls tunnel vision. How many of you thought South Carolina was now a destination job?

The formula for Nebraska? High level defensive guy (I know nothing about Mike Riley, he may already be this), and institute a run-based spread offense, very similar to ours or maybe Rich Rod's. Maybe even an option. Lock down ALL the instate talent, which really should not be that difficult. I would go to Los Angeles, Atlanta and Miami almost exclusively for skill players, and heavily hit the Kansas JUCOs. Sell the B1G angle. I bet they could find some ancillary guys in the surrounding states, Chicago and Detroit too that would like Lincoln. I wouldn't even mess with Texas.

Miami? I think it gets back to the stadium. They really need a facility that says, 'The U'. Get that, and nothing can hold them back. I think a smaller place like what Tulane just built, could be perfect for them. For big games, they could still play at Sun Life or whatever it is.

[Taog Redloh]

Going to go ahead and throw this out there, regarding Mike Riley:

- Lost on a hail mary fluke to BYU in his first game
- Lost a crazy game to Miami as well, if I remember correctly, OT, after they had a big lead
- Lost 3 other games by a total of 5 points
- Beat a playoff team
- Beat a pretty good Pac-12 team in the bowl
- OOC sked consisted of BYU, Miami, USA and USM - not too shabby

Yeah they still went 5-7, so he's still got a ton to prove. But, the results are what they are. I didn't think Riley had the best resume out there but I think you can tell that they aren't all that bad off. Interesting to see what he can do when it becomes 'his' team in the next few years.

[Taog Redloh]

We didn't go bowling with 7-4 in 97 and 6-5 in 86. I would guess that Dan would have missed bowling with the 2011 and 2013 teams in the 90's more than likely not to mention again the advent of the 12th game.
Todd's general attitude about Mullen and 'mediocrity' is pretty terrible, but this is a valid point that I've tried to mention on here plenty of times. In the 90s, without the 12 game (which is the FCS game), we were 5-6 in 2011 and 2013.

That being said, to me, bowls should not be handed out based on record, but more on some sort of BCS/committee/Power ranking that factors in SOS. In that case, we probably don't make a bowl in 2011, but we probably DO in 2009 and 2013 (not sure the ACTUAL SOS of the years, but 2009 and 2013 seemed harder compared to 2011).

[msstate7]

Going to go ahead and throw this out there, regarding Mike Riley:

- Lost on a hail mary fluke to BYU in his first game
- Lost a crazy game to Miami as well, if I remember correctly, OT, after they had a big lead
- Lost 3 other games by a total of 5 points
- Beat a playoff team
- Beat a pretty good Pac-12 team in the bowl
- OOC sked consisted of BYU, Miami, USA and USM - not too shabby

Yeah they still went 5-7, so he's still got a ton to prove. But, the results are what they are. I didn't think Riley had the best resume out there but I think you can tell that they aren't all that bad off. Interesting to see what he can do when it becomes 'his' team in the next few years.

They beat Michigan state on a fluke so that balances out byu

[Taog Redloh]

They beat Michigan state on a fluke so that balances out byu
Sure it can. I'm not defending him per se. Just put the facts out there and judge how you will. This sort of debate is endless, because for every point you make for him, someone else can make against him. Rinse, repeat.

[DudyDawg]

Our past means as much as Ole Miss's football past- not much. We have more potential to be a power than ever before.

Sorry to break it to you, but we will never be a national power.

[Taog Redloh]

You must have been in a coma when the 2001 Miami Hurricanes were running roughshod over everybody. That team had 38 draft picks, including SEVENTEEN first rounders, and also had a double digit number of future Pro Bowlers including Jeremy Shockey, Jonathan Vilma, Vince Wilfork, Sean Taylor, Frank Gore, Clinton Portis, Willis McGahee, Andre Johnson, Kellen Winslow II and others.

Of course, they used the most notorious recruiting tactics since SMU in the 80's to land those guys. And speaking of programs that will be extinct for the forseeable future, that is another one.
I agree on SMU, they are in conference realignment hell. That's the difference between them and Nebraska/Miami.

I take 1995 Nebraska over 2001 Miami any day of the week. They simply did not play a close game. I could care less about draft picks, that has nothing to do with any of it. I don't care how good they were on paper, I care about how they played.

[Taog Redloh]

Sorry to break it to you, but we will never be a national power.

^^ Yep. Unless we get incredibly lucky (like land Cam Newton, which propels us a tad bit higher), what we're doing right now is about our ceiling. It's never absolute in sports, but pretty close. Consistent winning seasons, plus an 'up' year every 5 or so years - yep that's us. Same for Ole Miss, though they may have a slightly higher ceiling right now because they actually have a good coach that will stay there as long as they will have him, and is passionate about his school, which is a rarity. That's why I wasn't happy when they hired Freeze, when most everybody else thought it was an average hire.

[Blackout]

Even when The U played at the old Orange Bowl many of their games were in front of small crowds. Stadium isn't the issue.

[Taog Redloh]

Even when The U played at the old Orange Bowl many of their games were in front of small crowds. Stadium isn't the issue.
Location too, bruh

[Liverpooldawg]

It proves the opposite. It only means what you say it does if you take it as a given that our current position is our ceiling. which is of course the view of the poor ol state crowd. if instead you think MSU can be a NC contender, then the current status of our program is huge red flag. if you are not moving forward, then you are falling behind. we're not moving forward. those that are happy where they are will never care that they are falling behind, but those with their eye on the end goal will always strive to continue moving forward. way of the world boyo, you are who you are, just accept it and quit bothering us with your defeatist attitude.

You mean like being #1?

[Liverpooldawg]

Even when The U played at the old Orange Bowl many of their games were in front of small crowds. Stadium isn't the issue.

My Miami grads in the family disagree with you. They all think it is THE main problem.

[BoomBoom]

You mean like being #1?

A smoke and mirrors #1. I thought Alabama, Ole Miss, and GT made that clear. It means as much as Auburn being a preseason favorite this past year. It means nothing, in other words.

[Liverpooldawg]

A smoke and mirrors #1. I thought Alabama, Ole Miss, and GT made that clear. It means as much as Auburn being a preseason favorite this past year. It means nothing, in other words.

Yeah, we have got that far a lot under many different coaches. You are right, no big deal. *****

[BoomBoom]

Yeah, we have got that far a lot under many different coaches. You are right, no big deal. *****

Yeah, a meaningless midseason ranking should take precedence on coaching decision making. That makes perfect sense.** who cares about you're body of work, what did idiots rank you after playing teams early that those same idiots overrated? THAT'S what matters. **

[Coach34]

Yeah, we have got that far a lot under many different coaches. You are right, no big deal. *****

Actually- we did. Jackie was 8-0 in 99 just like Mullen in 2014 and lost 2/3 to end the season. Only difference is the meaningless ratings in midseason had us at 8 or so

[Todd4State]

Actually- we did. Jackie was 8-0 in 99 just like Mullen in 2014 and lost 2/3 to end the season. Only difference is the meaningless ratings in midseason had us at 8 or so

And that was mainly because of politics as much as anything. I'll never forget Jackie being interviewed by Spencer Tillman and Tillman said something to Jackie about us "not playing anyone"- and Jackie goes- "well, you should know about that since Oklahoma didn't play anyone when you were there either". The other two football hosts started laughing at a shocked Tillman. It was awesome.

Anyway- Jackie raised our ceiling when he was the coach because he beat some really good Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Tennessee teams during his tenure. That tells me that a good coach can do the same here at MSU- and I don't know why some of our fans want to be stuck in 1986 and not believe it. We need a coach that wins all of the games he is "supposed to" like Dan- but at the same time pulls off a major win every other year or so like Jackie. Based on our program history (Jackie and Dan) our resources and the current state of the SEC, I don't see why those expectations are unreasonable. Heck- even Croom managed to beat some decent teams time to time and he practically insisted that we play with one arm and a leg tied behind our back.

[bluelightstar]

And that was mainly because of politics as much as anything. I'll never forget Jackie being interviewed by Spencer Tillman and Tillman said something to Jackie about us "not playing anyone"- and Jackie goes- "well, you should know about that since Oklahoma didn't play anyone when you were there either". The other two football hosts started laughing at a shocked Tillman. It was awesome.

Anyway- Jackie raised our ceiling when he was the coach because he beat some really good Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Tennessee teams during his tenure. That tells me that a good coach can do the same here at MSU- and I don't know why some of our fans want to be stuck in 1986 and not believe it. We need a coach that wins all of the games he is "supposed to" like Dan- but at the same time pulls off a major win every other year or so like Jackie. Based on our program history (Jackie and Dan) our resources and the current state of the SEC, I don't see why those expectations are unreasonable. Heck- even Croom managed to beat some decent teams time to time and he practically insisted that we play with one arm and a leg tied behind our back.

It is actually remarkable to me that in 7 years we've not been able to pull one such upset.

[Taog Redloh]

And that was mainly because of politics as much as anything. I'll never forget Jackie being interviewed by Spencer Tillman and Tillman said something to Jackie about us "not playing anyone"- and Jackie goes- "well, you should know about that since Oklahoma didn't play anyone when you were there either". The other two football hosts started laughing at a shocked Tillman. It was awesome.

Anyway- Jackie raised our ceiling when he was the coach because he beat some really good Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Arkansas, Ole Miss, and Tennessee teams during his tenure. That tells me that a good coach can do the same here at MSU- and I don't know why some of our fans want to be stuck in 1986 and not believe it. We need a coach that wins all of the games he is "supposed to" like Dan- but at the same time pulls off a major win every other year or so like Jackie. Based on our program history (Jackie and Dan) our resources and the current state of the SEC, I don't see why those expectations are unreasonable. Heck- even Croom managed to beat some decent teams time to time and he practically insisted that we play with one arm and a leg tied behind our back.
Ah, so we need a combination of the best of King Jackie, and the best of Dan Mullen. Snap your fingers, and it shall be done!

Name ONE freaking good team that Croom beat. I'll be waiting.

[Coach34]

It is actually remarkable to me that in 7 years we've not been able to pull one such upset.

Improving the program is one thing- going 2-16 vs Bama, LSU, and A&M is another

[msstate7]

Improving the program is one thing- going 2-16 vs Bama, LSU, and A&M is another

Why include aTm, but not Arkansas, auburn, and om? Seems all those programs are about even

[K9 Avenger]

Why include aTm, but not Arkansas, auburn, and om? Seems all those programs are about even

That, of course, is a rhetorical question because you know as well as I that there is an agenda being driven here....

[Coach34]

Why include aTm, but not Arkansas, auburn, and om? Seems all those programs are about even

Because those have been the top 3 teams in the West the last 4 years. Anyway you slice it- Mullen has the worst record in the West other than Bert. And even Bert finished ahead of him this season.

Mullen has lost 3 of 4 vs Ole Missus
Mullen is 3-4 vs Auburn

Why does it bother you that I show Mullen's record against those 3 teams? There is literally no way to dress up his SEC West record

[Todd4State]

Ah, so we need a combination of the best of King Jackie, and the best of Dan Mullen. Snap your fingers, and it shall be done!

Name ONE freaking good team that Croom beat. I'll be waiting.

Auburn 2007. 9-4 and won the Peach Bowl. BITCH.

[Todd4State]

It is actually remarkable to me that in 7 years we've not been able to pull one such upset.

I agree with you about that- or at least that you would think it would occur more often because honestly I would consider beating Ole Miss in 2009 to be in the "good team" category- with the caveat that we now know in hindsight that they were on the decline but no one realized it until they lost to Jacksonville State the next year.

[Quaoarsking]

We've got MSU fans trying to favorably compare CROOM's tenure to Mullen's...

Bowl-eligible teams Croom beat:
2004 Florida: 7-5
2006 Alabama: 6-7
2007 Auburn: 9-4 and #15
2007 Kentucky: 8-5
2007 Alabama: 7-6
2007 UCF: 10-4
2008 Vanderbilt: 7-6

Bowl-eligible teams Mullen beat:
2009 Middle Tennessee: 10-3
2009 Kentucky: 7-6
2009 Ole Miss: 9-4 and #20
2010 Georgia: 6-7
2010 Florida: 8-5
2010 Michigan: 7-6
2011 Louisiana Tech: 8-5
2011 Wake Forest: 6-7
2012 Middle Tennessee: 8-4
2013 Troy: 6-6
2013 Bowling Green: 10-4
2013 Ole Miss: 8-5
2013 Rice: 10-4
2014 UAB: 6-6
2014 South Alabama: 6-7
2014 LSU: 8-5
2014 Texas A&M: 8-5
2014 Auburn: 8-5 and #22
2014 Arkansas: 7-6
2015 Southern Miss: 9-5
2015 Auburn: 6-6 (still 1 to play)
2015 Louisiana Tech: 9-4
2015 Arkansas 7-5 (still 1 to play)

[HancockCountyDog]

We've got MSU fans trying to favorably compare CROOM's tenure to Mullen's...

Bowl-eligible teams Croom beat:
2004 Florida: 7-5
2006 Alabama: 6-7
2007 Auburn: 9-4 and #15
2007 Kentucky: 8-5
2007 Alabama: 7-6
2007 UCF: 10-4
2008 Vanderbilt: 7-6

Bowl-eligible teams Mullen beat:
2009 Middle Tennessee: 10-3
2009 Kentucky: 7-6
2009 Ole Miss: 9-4 and #20
2010 Georgia: 6-7
2010 Florida: 8-5
2010 Michigan: 7-6
2011 Louisiana Tech: 8-5
2011 Wake Forest: 6-7
2012 Middle Tennessee: 8-4
2013 Troy: 6-6
2013 Bowling Green: 10-4
2013 Ole Miss: 8-5
2013 Rice: 10-4
2014 UAB: 6-6
2014 South Alabama: 6-7
2014 LSU: 8-5
2014 Texas A&M: 8-5
2014 Auburn: 8-5 and #22
2014 Arkansas: 7-6
2015 Southern Miss: 9-5
2015 Auburn: 6-6 (still 1 to play)
2015 Louisiana Tech: 9-4
2015 Arkansas 7-5 (still 1 to play)

Pretty interesting, Dan's best win looks to be the bears in 2009 or AU in 2014.

The really interesting detail to me was the 2011-2013 run. Pretty underwhelming.

[HancockCountyDog]

Because those have been the top 3 teams in the West the last 4 years. Anyway you slice it- Mullen has the worst record in the West other than Bert. And even Bert finished ahead of him this season.

Mullen has lost 3 of 4 vs Ole Missus
Mullen is 3-4 vs Auburn

Why does it bother you that I show Mullen's record against those 3 teams? There is literally no way to dress up his SEC West record

One thing Mullen is great at is taking advantage of a train wreck program. If you are down. He steps on your throat.

2010 & 2011 - bears were awful
2012 & 2015 - AU were awful
2012 - Upig, john l smith year
2010-2015 - UK, just bad.

Mullen handled his business against these teams.

[Really Clark?]

SEC wins the last 4 years Bama - 20, LSU - 14, Miss - 13, A & M - 12, State - 10, Auburn - 8, Ark - 6. That's each team's West record the last 4 years. Also been better than Auburn as well as Ark. Clearly Bama has been the class of the West as we know. A & M, LSU, UNM, and Us have each finished second in the west once the last 4 years. It's been pretty close back and forth between who finishes 2nd-5th the last 4 years.

[Todd4State]

We've got MSU fans trying to favorably compare CROOM's tenure to Mullen's...

Bowl-eligible teams Croom beat:
2004 Florida: 7-5
2006 Alabama: 6-7
2007 Auburn: 9-4 and #15
2007 Kentucky: 8-5
2007 Alabama: 7-6
2007 UCF: 10-4
2008 Vanderbilt: 7-6

Bowl-eligible teams Mullen beat:
2009 Middle Tennessee: 10-3
2009 Kentucky: 7-6
2009 Ole Miss: 9-4 and #20
2010 Georgia: 6-7
2010 Florida: 8-5
2010 Michigan: 7-6
2011 Louisiana Tech: 8-5
2011 Wake Forest: 6-7
2012 Middle Tennessee: 8-4
2013 Troy: 6-6
2013 Bowling Green: 10-4
2013 Ole Miss: 8-5
2013 Rice: 10-4
2014 UAB: 6-6
2014 South Alabama: 6-7
2014 LSU: 8-5
2014 Texas A&M: 8-5
2014 Auburn: 8-5 and #22
2014 Arkansas: 7-6
2015 Southern Miss: 9-5
2015 Auburn: 6-6 (still 1 to play)
2015 Louisiana Tech: 9-4
2015 Arkansas 7-5 (still 1 to play)

For the record- I am NOT saying that Croom is better than Dan in any way, shape, or form. Just saying that if a coach as bad as Croom can win some big games from time to time- then pretty much any coach we hire should do the same- for the people that think that Dan is the absolute best that we can possibly do.

[Todd4State]

One thing Mullen is great at is taking advantage of a train wreck program. If you are down. He steps on your throat.

2010 & 2011 - bears were awful
2012 & 2015 - AU were awful
2012 - Upig, john l smith year
2010-2015 - UK, just bad.

Mullen handled his business against these teams.

That's Dan's best asset- he simply does not lose to teams he absolutely shouldn't. At the same time, it's uncanny that he very rarely upsets anyone.

[bulldawg28]

Improving the program is one thing- going 2-16 vs Bama, LSU, and A&M is another
What is the SEC's record against those teams? This post is stupid hell A&M hasn't even been in the league but a few years. What's the record the West teams record against Bama and LSU?

[DancingRabbit]

For the record- I am NOT saying that Croom is better than Dan in any way, shape, or form. Just saying that if a coach as bad as Croom can win some big games from time to time- then pretty much any coach we hire should do the same- for the people that think that Dan is the absolute best that we can possibly do.

Who do you suggest that would be better, and would want to follow Mullen here?

[OurState]

Ive never once said we needed to fire Mullen. Not once. Neither has anybody else that Ive seen.

Feels like Engie pushed that agenda pretty hard for a year, although he may deny that now.

[OurState]

That's Dan's best asset- he simply does not lose to teams he absolutely shouldn't. At the same time, it's uncanny that he very rarely upsets anyone.

This is because Dan plays to maximize the odds of scoring the most points instead of maximizing the odds of winning.

If Dan finds himself down 16 and score he kicks the extra point rather than going for two.

Dan would rather be sure that he loses by 9 than risk losing by 10 and have a chance to win.

[Quaoarsking]

This is because Dan plays to maximize the odds of scoring the most points instead of maximizing the odds of winning.

If Dan finds himself down 16 and score he kicks the extra point rather than going for two.

Dan would rather be sure that he loses by 9 than risk losing by 10 and have a chance to win.

Um, that has literally never happened.

[DancingRabbit]

Um, that has literally never happened.

I was about to ask for some examples. I don't think it ever happened in the 2nd half of a game.

[Taog Redloh]

Auburn 2007. 9-4 and won the Peach Bowl. BITCH.
Ole Miss 2009. 9-4 and won the Cotton Bowl. BITCH.
LSU 2014 was also 8-4 in the regular season
Auburn 2014 was also 8-4 in the regular season

That Auburn 2007 team had just lost at home to South Florida, and we had gotten blown the eff out by LSU on opening Thursday night. That was about as big of a game as 3-2. Mullen has beaten 10 or more teams that would have beaten that 07 Auburn squad. See Quaoarsking's post for the details.

[Todd4State]

Ole Miss 2009. 9-4 and won the Cotton Bowl. BITCH.
LSU 2014 was also 8-4 in the regular season
Auburn 2014 was also 8-4 in the regular season

That Auburn 2007 team had just lost at home to South Florida, and we had gotten blown the eff out by LSU on opening Thursday night. That was about as big of a game as 3-2. Mullen has beaten 10 or more teams that would have beaten that 07 Auburn squad. See Quaoarsking's post for the details.

You asked for one example of Croom beating a good team. I gave you one. BITCH. Never said that Dan "never" won a big game- just that he doesn't do it enough. The circumstances coming into the game itself are irrelevant- but keep trying to move the goal posts. You're simply wrong if you think that Croom never beat a good team when he was here. And I certainly could have used UK 2007 on the road as well. See Quaor's post for details indeed.

[Todd4State]

Who do you suggest that would be better, and would want to follow Mullen here?

We'll see what the coaching landscape is when Dan leaves. The biggest thing I would prefer as a fan is that a coach has head coaching experience- something that Dan lacked coming in and we would have seen his flaws from the start.

Arkansas State has had some good coaches go to the SEC (Mahlzahn, Freeze)- and I think Blake Anderson would potentially be a promising up and coming type of guy that would likely be interested in our job if we offered it to him.

I don't have my heart set on anybody to be honest with you. Anderson is just an example of the type of coach we should look at. With what we pay and being in the SEC, it shouldn't be that difficult to land a quality coach.

[Taog Redloh]

You asked for one example of Croom beating a good team. I gave you one. BITCH. Never said that Dan "never" won a big game- just that he doesn't do it enough. The circumstances coming into the game itself are irrelevant- but keep trying to move the goal posts. You're simply wrong if you think that Croom never beat a good team when he was here. And I certainly could have used UK 2007 on the road as well. See Quaor's post for details indeed.

You made a dumb point, just sack up and admit it. By insinuating Mullen has not accomplished something that Croom did, is utterly ridiculous.

[Liverpooldawg]

You asked for one example of Croom beating a good team. I gave you one. BITCH. Never said that Dan "never" won a big game- just that he doesn't do it enough. The circumstances coming into the game itself are irrelevant- but keep trying to move the goal posts. You're simply wrong if you think that Croom never beat a good team when he was here. And I certainly could have used UK 2007 on the road as well. See Quaor's post for details indeed.

Croom? Seriously Todd? You need to step away from the ledge man.

[Johnson85]

For the record- I am NOT saying that Croom is better than Dan in any way, shape, or form. Just saying that if a coach as bad as Croom can win some big games from time to time- then pretty much any coach we hire should do the same- for the people that think that Dan is the absolute best that we can possibly do.

I'm not sure many people think Dan is the absolute best that we can possibly do; they're just not stupid enough to think that the way to build a championship program is to fire your coach anytime you think he's not the absolute best you can do.

[Political Hack]

You done bumped yo head, especially regarding Miami.

Granted, they need to figure out their stadium situation, and yes, the whole eastern side of the country recruits south Florida. But they can still get back. I just laugh at ya'lls tunnel vision. How many of you thought South Carolina was now a destination job?

The formula for Nebraska? High level defensive guy (I know nothing about Mike Riley, he may already be this), and institute a run-based spread offense, very similar to ours or maybe Rich Rod's. Maybe even an option. Lock down ALL the instate talent, which really should not be that difficult. I would go to Los Angeles, Atlanta and Miami almost exclusively for skill players, and heavily hit the Kansas JUCOs. Sell the B1G angle. I bet they could find some ancillary guys in the surrounding states, Chicago and Detroit too that would like Lincoln. I wouldn't even mess with Texas.

Miami? I think it gets back to the stadium. They really need a facility that says, 'The U'. Get that, and nothing can hold them back. I think a smaller place like what Tulane just built, could be perfect for them. For big games, they could still play at Sun Life or whatever it is.

Miami has a student body of 10k that's largely graduate students that have allegiances to other schools that they attended for undergrad. It's in a pro city. They couldn't steal Dan Mullen from Miss State and they damn sure can't steal a recruit from Florida or Florida State. Their student body probably puts 5k butts in the stadium weekly, if they're lucky. You know why they won't move the stadium on campus? Because a game in the ghetto would actually lower attendance. Further, there players always have been and always will be out for numero uno. Sapp and Irvin aren't building new weight rooms there... And the relevant players from Miami that young guys identify with have almost aged out of relevancy. They have a very short window left to ever take advantage of their brief pimple on the ass of relevancy in the history of college football. It's also an academic school where the administration is more concerned with the school than it is the football program. The football program has actually been nothing but a black eye for the school since the 90's. That doesn't sit well with the academic side of the university. Outside of the professionalization of college football, Miami is dead. People think they can recruit because they're from Florida. Lmao. They're in the corner of a huge state. They can be 12 hours away from an in-state recruit. You think momma's driving 12 hours to Miami or 4 to Auburn?

The day of corn fed white boys dominating the line of scrimmage for a triple option QB in Lincoln are long gone too. Minnesota isn't coming back. Navy will never win another national championship either (throw Army's irrelevancy in there too). Tulane will never win the SEC again either.

[WinningIsRelentless]

We'll see what the coaching landscape is when Dan leaves. The biggest thing I would prefer as a fan is that a coach has head coaching experience- something that Dan lacked coming in and we would have seen his flaws from the start.

Arkansas State has had some good coaches go to the SEC (Mahlzahn, Freeze)- and I think Blake Anderson would potentially be a promising up and coming type of guy that would likely be interested in our job if we offered it to him.

I don't have my heart set on anybody to be honest with you. Anderson is just an example of the type of coach we should look at. With what we pay and being in the SEC, it shouldn't be that difficult to land a quality coach.

Did you just f@@@@@@ say Gus bus was a good coach? His ass will be fired at the end of next year.

[Taog Redloh]

Check out this list, which is even better:

Completely inexplicable games King Jackie lost (or tied, and we'll keep it over the first 7 years like Mullen):
1991 Memphis 5-6
1992 LSU 2-9
1992 South Carolina 5-6
1994 LSU 4-7
1993 Arkansas State 2-8-1
1995 NE Louisiana 2-9
1996 Louisiana Tech
1996 Arkansas 4-7
1997 Arkansas 4-7
Honorable Mention with a winning record: 1993 Memphis

Completely inexplicable games Croom lost:
2004 Maine record doesn't matter
2004 Vanderbilt 2-9
2004 Arkansas 5-6
2004 Ole Miss 4-7
2005 Kentucky 3-8
2005 Arkansas 4-7
2006 Tulane 4-8 plus Katrina
2008 Auburn 5-7
Honorable Mentions with winning records: 2004 UAB, 2005 Houston, 2008 Louisiana Tech

Completely inexplicable games Mullen lost:
.....

only thing that comes close is 2009 Houston, and they were 10-4 and C-USA runner-ups
Honorable Mention with winning records: 2012 Ole Miss

[engie]

Feels like Engie pushed that agenda pretty hard for a year, although he may deny that now.

No. But you've already misrepresented my position then -- so keep on keeping on.

[BrunswickDawg]

Check out this list, which is even better:

Completely inexplicable games King Jackie lost (or tied, and we'll keep it over the first 7 years like Mullen):
1991 Memphis 5-6
1992 LSU 2-9
1992 South Carolina 5-6
1994 LSU 4-7
1993 Arkansas State 2-8-1
1995 NE Louisiana 2-9
1996 Louisiana Tech
1996 Arkansas 4-7
1997 Arkansas 4-7
Honorable Mention with a winning record: 1993 Memphis

Completely inexplicable games Croom lost:
2004 Maine record doesn't matter
2004 Vanderbilt 2-9
2004 Arkansas 5-6
2004 Ole Miss 4-7
2005 Kentucky 3-8
2005 Arkansas 4-7
2006 Tulane 4-8 plus Katrina
2008 Auburn 5-7
Honorable Mentions with winning records: 2004 UAB, 2005 Houston, 2008 Louisiana Tech

Completely inexplicable games Mullen lost:
.....

only thing that comes close is 2009 Houston, and they were 10-4 and C-USA runner-ups
Honorable Mention with winning records: 2012 Ole Miss

And people tend to have pumped then number of Jackie's "Big Wins" up in their heads too. Following Quaosars' lead -

'91 None
'92 TX 6-5
'92 Memphis 6-5
'92 UF 9-4
'93 None
'94 Memphis 6-5
'94 SC 7-5
'95 Baylor 7-4
'96 SC 6-5
'96 Bama 10-3
'97 AU 10-3
'98 Bama 8-5
'98 Ark 9-3
'98 OM 7-5
'99 UK 6-6
'99 OM 8-4
'99 Clemson 6-6
'00 BYU 6-6
'00 UF 10-3
'00 AU 9-4
'00 A&M 7-5
'01 OM 7-4
'02 None
'03 Memphis 9-4

Yes, Jackie pulled off a few Big wins - normally negated by at least 1 (if not more) WTF loses. But, we are really only taking about 4-5 total games in 12 years against high quality teams - '92 UF, '96 Bama, '97 AU, '98 Ark, '00 UF, '00 AU

[Johnson85]

Miami has a student body of 10k that's largely graduate students that have allegiances to other schools that they attended for undergrad. It's in a pro city. They couldn't steal Dan Mullen from Miss State and they damn sure can't steal a recruit from Florida or Florida State. Their student body probably puts 5k butts in the stadium weekly, if they're lucky. You know why they won't move the stadium on campus? Because a game in the ghetto would actually lower attendance. Further, there players always have been and always will be out for numero uno. Sapp and Irvin aren't building new weight rooms there... And the relevant players from Miami that young guys identify with have almost aged out of relevancy. They have a very short window left to ever take advantage of their brief pimple on the ass of relevancy in the history of college football. It's also an academic school where the administration is more concerned with the school than it is the football program. The football program has actually been nothing but a black eye for the school since the 90's. That doesn't sit well with the academic side of the university.

Their administration has killed them. From what I can tell, their athletic department hasn't been as autonomous as most and the university as a whole has been less reluctant to recognize the value of their athletic department being a business (hence the resistance to paying a big boy salary for a football coach when they interviewed Mullen the first time). I think they are over that now or else why would they have been willing to interview Mullen again.



Outside of the professionalization of college football, Miami is dead. People think they can recruit because they're from Florida. Lmao. They're in the corner of a huge state. They can be 12 hours away from an in-state recruit. You think momma's driving 12 hours to Miami or 4 to Auburn?

I think people think they can recruit because they are in Miami. They have plenty of rich alumni that if they are interested, can finance a good recruiting network. Look at the pulls UM has gotten from reasonably far away from Oxford. You think the U couldn't find plenty of top rated recruits willing to come to South Beach? They will probably have to move slowly because of their recent NCAA problems, but if they hire the right coach and are committed to paying for good talent, I think they can come back. Maybe not have a dominant stretch or even championship team, but relevant nationally again. I'm not predicting that this will happen, but it's certainly within reach, even if they are stuck with pretty mediocre facilities. I do think that if they come back they will always be volatile. They would have all the issues that UM has with getting players mainly interested in the highest bid, but compounded by the fact that they are getting players to whom the city of Miami is appealing, so they'll likely always have some issues with discipline on and off the field if they go that route.

[Coach34]

The SEC and it's money has lifted State up a good bit higher than we were in 1991 when Jackie took over. Not quite an apple to apples comparison.

When Jackie came in- we had a 35K capacity stadium that we didn't fill. We weren't top 50 in budget as we are now. Teams like Memphis and La Tech were on a much closer level to us than they are now. Hell, Jackie's 1st year is the first year the Egg Bowl moved back to campus.

[blacklistedbully]

I agree with you about that- or at least that you would think it would occur more often because honestly I would consider beating Ole Miss in 2009 to be in the "good team" category- with the caveat that we now know in hindsight that they were on the decline but no one realized it until they lost to Jacksonville State the next year.

Actually, I did, and said as much on Rivals message board. It's what triggered the ensuing fight that reminded me why I hated TSUN so much from the 80's, and started a war with their fans that has me the most-hated poster on that board for TSUN fans.

I had actually softened my stance on them after decades of being away from home after graduation. I was even complementary about them in 2008, making posts about how underrated they were and predicting they were going to easily handle Texas Tech in the CB.

But the following year, after watching a few games, I stated they were a little overrated that year, and that I thought we were actually better, despite our record, and would beat them in the Egg Bowl. The moment I said the slightest thing uncomplimentary about OM, their fans went ape-shit on me, getting highly personal and ugly, a few so much so that they were banned from Rivals.

That delusional bunch is a real piece-of-work. As long as you say nice things about them, you're a good dude, but the moment you say, even respectfully, anything critical of their team, they can't just disagree or debate you, they feel the need to destroy you personally, attacking, not your comments, but YOU. They make it, again, personal and ugly. They aren't capable of winning an argument on the merits, so they relentlessly attack the messenger, rather than the message.

That was the year I got reminded why I justifiably hated those arrogant, obnoxious, delusional a-holes all those years ago. I will never again forget or tamp down on my hate for those morons.

GTHOM! GTHUNM!

[HoopsDawg]

The SEC and it's money has lifted State up a good bit higher than we were in 1991 when Jackie took over. Not quite an apple to apples comparison.

When Jackie came in- we had a 35K capacity stadium that we didn't fill. We weren't top 50 in budget as we are now. Teams like Memphis and La Tech were on a much closer level to us than they are now. Hell, Jackie's 1st year is the first year the Egg Bowl moved back to campus.

Yes and we get an extra cupcake win now. Plus 80 teams make bowl games.

[Taog Redloh]

Oh, you want to keep playing......OK I'll keep going too....

Bottom line in this game, it's all about what you win, right? So let's look at bottom line accomplishments:

Record in 1st 7 years:
King Jackie: 47-38-2 (.540), 23-31-1 (.418)
Mullen: 54-35 (.607), 26-30 (.464)

I gave KJ 7 more wins to make up for the 12 game schedule (12th game is the FCS game for Mullen). SEC record also factors out SEC money. You lose.

Hardware in 1st 7 years:
King Jackie: no significant bowl wins, 4 Eggs, 1 3-loss regular season in 1994
Mullen: 1 Gator Bowl win, 4 Eggs, 1 2-loss regular season in 2014

Better overall record and more tangible accomplishments.....this is no contest. It's not a blow-out, but no tangible evidence shows King Jackie was better in his 1st 7 years than Mullen. You lose again.

Logic would say, give Mullen a chance to out-do Jackie in his next couple of years.....when ended up being the best of his tenure. You SHOULD be excited, but instead you are a negative blowhard.

Do you want to talk about NFL draft picks next?

ETA: I'll go ahead and do that one for you too. King Jackie had 20, Mullen had 17. But, wait......Jones, Prescott and Redmond count too. Not to mention Wilson, Brown or Ross.

[DancingRabbit]

The SEC and it's money has lifted State up a good bit higher than we were in 1991 when Jackie took over. Not quite an apple to apples comparison.

When Jackie came in- we had a 35K capacity stadium that we didn't fill. We weren't top 50 in budget as we are now. Teams like Memphis and La Tech were on a much closer level to us than they are now. Hell, Jackie's 1st year is the first year the Egg Bowl moved back to campus.

I'll acknowledge some of what you're saying, but we had 40K capacity when Jackie arrived. And the year before Dan arrived we were averaging 43K.

The SEC money has lifted us above the mid-major teams, but just like always we are still in the bottom 2 or 3 in the SEC. And mid-major teams still rise up and beat SEC teams - see Memphis and Toledo.

I do agree that it's reasonable to expect Dan to pull off some big upsets, while still beating the teams he's supposed to beat.

[HancockCountyDog]

Oh, you want to keep playing......OK I'll keep going too....

Bottom line in this game, it's all about what you win, right? So let's look at bottom line accomplishments:

Record in 1st 7 years:
King Jackie: 47-38-2 (.540), 23-31-1 (.418)
Mullen: 54-35 (.607), 26-30 (.464)

I gave KJ 7 more wins to make up for the 12 game schedule (12th game is the FCS game for Mullen). SEC record also factors out SEC money. You lose.

Hardware in 1st 7 years:
King Jackie: no significant bowl wins, 4 Eggs, 1 3-loss regular season in 1994
Mullen: 1 Gator Bowl win, 4 Eggs, 1 2-loss regular season in 2014

Better overall record and more tangible accomplishments.....this is no contest. It's not a blow-out, but no tangible evidence shows King Jackie was better in his 1st 7 years than Mullen. You lose again.

Logic would say, give Mullen a chance to out-do Jackie in his next couple of years.....when ended up being the best of his tenure. You SHOULD be excited, but instead you are a negative blowhard.

Do you want to talk about NFL draft picks next?

ETA: I'll go ahead and do that one for you too. King Jackie had 20, Mullen had 17. But, wait......Jones, Prescott and Redmond count too. Not to mention Wilson, Brown or Ross.

So we should expect 1998 and 1999 type results in 2016 and 2017. Sweet. Where should I book in Atlanta? Also, the bears are going to be pissed that they are about to get blown out at home next year.

[Quaoarsking]

You know what's better than upsets? Beating good teams because you're better than them.

Dan could've lost some extra games in 2014 and then our wins over LSU and Auburn, etc., could have been upsets in hindsight. But I'm glad they weren't.

[Really Clark?]

There are several variables when trying to compare different era's. Like mentioned our budget has grown a lot since Jackie's time, etc. Jackie also didn't have to compete in a West division that at least during 2010-2013 was by far the most brutal of any division in the history of college football. The number of 10 win teams in our division alone was incredible. I looked at it one time and Dan has had to play against more 10+ win teams in his tenure than Jackie did over the course of his entire time here. By a surprising margin. An upset would be great and it's past time but there have been more than one year when you had multiple legit national title powers going at it. That 2010 team in any other conference or even just in the SEC east probably wins 10-11 reg season games. The West that year through 2013 really was churning out some mind boggling teams.

[Taog Redloh]

So we should expect 1998 and 1999 type results in 2016 and 2017. Sweet. Where should I book in Atlanta? Also, the bears are going to be pissed that they are about to get blown out at home next year.
I'll say this again:


Logic would say, give Mullen a chance to out-do Jackie in his next couple of years.....when ended up being the best of his tenure. You SHOULD be excited, but instead you are a negative blowhard.
Pay attention to the last part. It particularly applies to you too.

If I remember correctly, the end of 1997 resulted in a home Egg loss as well, which sent Ole Miss to a bowl game and kept us at home. Plus, we got beat up in the pre-game fight. We recovered from that pretty well, didn't we?

I see no reason not to expect success going forward in the next 2 years. We've recruited well, and have depth at QB.

[Coach34]

I see no reason not to expect success going forward in the next 2 years. We've recruited well, and have depth at QB.

We're going to be picked 7th in SEC West in preseason next year- and I cant say I disagree. I cant say any other team with what they have returning should finish lower than us

[confucius say]

We're going to be picked 7th in SEC West in preseason next year- and I cant say I disagree. I cant say any other team with what they have returning should finish lower than us

1. We were picked 7th this year.

2. I don't think your definition of success and his are the same.

[Johnson85]

We're going to be picked 7th in SEC West in preseason next year- and I cant say I disagree. I cant say any other team with what they have returning should finish lower than us

I don't disagree, but we don't look to be in that much different shape than pretty much any other west team besides Bama. Arkansas is losing their very good Qb, UM is losing a lot, A&M is flirting with dumpster fire, auburn is flirting with dumpster fire. The West is Bama and everybody else. Everybody but Bama looks like they will take a step backwards next year or it's not obvious they'll be better. Obviously somebody will end up having a better year than expected, but it's not clear who at this point.

Us being picked 7th doesn't mean anything except that we're not looking like a top team in the West, which is pretty much what is required for us to be picked something other than last in the preseason. I'm not expecting good things next year, but getting picked 7th by people that are almost always wrong doesn't make me feel any worse.

[HancockCountyDog]

I see no reason not to expect success going forward in the next 2 years. We've recruited well, and have depth at QB.

If you look at next year's roster and you can see a Floyd Womack or a Randy Thomas on the OL or a JJ Johnson at RB, and then see a defense that has been shredded the last two times it has taken the field, even with a first round talent on the DL, an NFL draft pick at corner, and you see things as projecting towards a 1998 season, then great.

I don't see it.

[HancockCountyDog]

I don't disagree, but we don't look to be in that much different shape than pretty much any other west team besides Bama. Arkansas is losing their very good Qb, UM is losing a lot, A&M is flirting with dumpster fire, auburn is flirting with dumpster fire. The West is Bama and everybody else. Everybody but Bama looks like they will take a step backwards next year or it's not obvious they'll be better. Obviously somebody will end up having a better year than expected, but it's not clear who at this point.

Us being picked 7th doesn't mean anything except that we're not looking like a top team in the West, which is pretty much what is required for us to be picked something other than last in the preseason. I'm not expecting good things next year, but getting picked 7th by people that are almost always wrong doesn't make me feel any worse.

LSU is not taking a step backwards. They still don't have a QB, but they are loaded at every other position and are bringing in the top recruiting class in the country.

[scottycameron]

So we should expect 1998 and 1999 type results in 2016 and 2017. Sweet. Where should I book in Atlanta? Also, the bears are going to be pissed that they are about to get blown out at home next year.

The days of a team like our 98 team going to Atl are long gone. They were 6-2 like Mullen last year. That doesn't cut it anymore. JWS got it while the gettin was good (as did Nutt with Arky for that matter).

[Coach34]

LSU is not taking a step backwards. They still don't have a QB, but they are loaded at every other position and are bringing in the top recruiting class in the country.

LSU is returning 15-16 starters and bringing in a top 3 recruiting class to go with it.
Auburn is returning 15 starters and both QB's. Their Crooting class is 7th in the country right now
UPig loses their QB but returns 15-16 starters- including 9 on D.
A&M returns 16 starters- has to answer QB question. But they are loaded at WR and on the DL.
OM loses alot- but returns their QB and has a top 5 recruiting class
Bama is Bama

The SEC West should be improved next year

[Really Clark?]

LSU is not taking a step backwards. They still don't have a QB, but they are loaded at every other position and are bringing in the top recruiting class in the country.

Depends on how much Miles is a lame duck coach. And they have recruited well the last 3 years. 6th, 2nd, and 5th in the country to go with these last 2 8 win seasons. It's quite possible they don't win any more than that next year. However, Miles may be the type of coach to overcome a lame duck year because he is such a players coach. It's 50/50 at best that they win more than 9 next year. Which is pretty average for them recruiting above Top 5 on average the last three years.

[Coach34]

And should we finish 7th- and a 4th loss in 5 years to Freezus...he doesnt need to be fired. But 2017 would be his make or break year

[Ifyouonlyknew]

LSU is returning 15-16 starters and bringing in a top 3 recruiting class to go with it.
Auburn is returning 15 starters and both QB's. Their Crooting class is 7th in the country right now
UPig loses their QB but returns 15-16 starters- including 9 on D.
A&M returns 16 starters- has to answer QB question. But they are loaded at WR and on the DL.
OM loses alot- but returns their QB and has a top 5 recruiting class
Bama is Bama

The SEC West should be improved next year

Based on our depth chart we return 13,14 starters as well.

[Coach34]

Based on our depth chart we return 13,14 starters as well.

yes- but who we lose is the problem.

The West is going to be improved next year- even with all the questions teams have. Lots of starters returning across the board.

[HancockCountyDog]

This has been circulating and I think a bear put it together and I have been hesitant to post it because the board was on suicide watch most of Christmas, but this spreadsheet really is really telling about Mullen's tenure in the SEC. He definitely beats who he should beat and loses to who he should lose to.

http://images.yuku.com/image/jpg/2f7a393de9144e45aada0676249def60_r.jpg

What it tells me is that Mullen should send a thank you note to Lexington pretty much every year.

Its also amazing to me that Mullen has only beaten one SEC team with a winning SEC record. Only 5 teams that were .500 or better that he beat. 17 of the 26 SEC teams he has beaten won 2 or less SEC games.

IT's fair to say that Mullen has feasted on some pretty shitty competition.

[Coach34]

Mullen raised the floor

[Ifyouonlyknew]

yes- but who we lose is the problem.

The West is going to be improved next year- even with all the questions teams have. Lots of starters returning across the board.

Not to get into a back & forth but how is what we're losing any worse than what say an Arkansas is losing?

[Blackout]

ONE win over a team finishing above .500 in league play lol damn.

But we all knew this. Beat those we should, lose to those we "should". Rinse and repeat.

[confucius say]

yes- but who we lose is the problem.

The West is going to be improved next year- even with all the questions teams have. Lots of starters returning across the board.

Which teams in the west are going to be improved? Serious question. Ark, miss, and a&m I doubt. Auburn probably. Lsu maybe. Bama is bama.

[HancockCountyDog]

Not to get into a back & forth but how is what we're losing any worse than what say an Arkansas is losing?

It depends on what Kirkland, Henry, Collins and the tall OT that I can't remember his name do. That is basically the entire offense.

I think their defense stays bad, and even though they got that transfer QB from USC, I think they take a step back for sure.

Whether we win 6 or 8-9 will depend on the OL. They either make huge strides, or they don't. If they don't Fitz won't survive the season. He is a big kid, but Im not sure any QB in the country can be as durable as Dak.

[Coach34]

Not to get into a back & forth but how is what we're losing any worse than what say an Arkansas is losing?

UPig returns 20 of 22 on their defensive 2 deep- that puts them a little better off defensively.

Offensively- there is not as much on their QB's shoulders as it is in our offense. We'll see how Allen's brother does

[HancockCountyDog]

Which teams in the west are going to be improved? Serious question. Ark, miss, and a&m I doubt. Auburn probably. Lsu maybe. Bama is bama.

If Machine Gun Kelly returns, the bears are going to be pretty good. Not as good as this year, but pretty good. A&M is a complete unknown, but they have probably 2 of the top 5 players in the conference on their team. LSU will be improved. Their OL was young, it will be better and their defense was young as well.

AU has no where to go but up.

Thankfully for us we get UK and USC, two teams that will battle with Vandy for last place in the East.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

It depends on what Kirkland, Henry, Collins and the tall OT that I can't remember his name do. That is basically the entire offense.

I think their defense stays bad, and even though they got that transfer QB from USC, I think they take a step back for sure.

Whether we win 6 or 8-9 will depend on the OL. They either make huge strides, or they don't. If they don't Fitz won't survive the season. He is a big kid, but Im not sure any QB in the country can be as durable as Dak.

I don't disagree with any of what you said. My point is to say that Auburn, Arkansas, A&M, & OM will be better than us is based off what? They return a lot of players? Well on paper so do we. We lose a lot of good players well so do they. I think after Bama & LSU there's 5 teams that you really don't have a good grasp of what they are in 2016.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

It depends on what Kirkland, Henry, Collins and the tall OT that I can't remember his name do. That is basically the entire offense.

I think their defense stays bad, and even though they got that transfer QB from USC, I think they take a step back for sure.

Whether we win 6 or 8-9 will depend on the OL. They either make huge strides, or they don't. If they don't Fitz won't survive the season. He is a big kid, but Im not sure any QB in the country can be as durable as Dak.

double post

[Ifyouonlyknew]

UPig returns 20 of 22 on their defensive 2 deep- that puts them a little better off defensively.

Offensively- there is not as much on their QB's shoulders as it is in our offense. We'll see how Allen's brother does

Yes they return a lot on defense of arguably the worst defense in the West. On offense they lose Allen, a minimum of 2 starting OL (Could be 3 if Skipper leaves), along with Collins, & more than likely Hunter Henry. I just don't see what they bring back being any better than what we have.

[Coach34]

Yes they return a lot on defense of arguably the worst defense in the West. On offense they lose Allen, a minimum of 2 starting OL (Could be 3 if Skipper leaves), along with Collins, & more than likely Hunter Henry. I just don't see what they bring back being any better than what we have.

13 of their 22 on D were Sophs or Fr- that had alot to do with their performance defensively. With 20/22 returing- they more certainly should improve.

We lose 4 draft picks on D- we wont be as good in those positions.

We'll see how it plays out

[Ifyouonlyknew]

13 of their 22 on D were Sophs or Fr- that had alot to do with their performance defensively. With 20/22 returing- they more certainly should improve.

We lose 4 draft picks on D- we wont be as good in those positions.

We'll see how it plays out

Yep. It will be interesting. Esp if Skipper, Henry, & Collins all leave. A&M & Auburn are going to either right the ship or it's going to sink like the Titanic. Next year is going to be a real make or break year in the West.

[Coach34]

Yep. It will be interesting. Esp if Skipper, Henry, & Collins all leave. A&M & Auburn are going to either right the ship or it's going to sink like the Titanic. Next year is going to be a real make or break year in the West.

Gus has some big road games- OM, State, Georgia, Bammer....

[tcdog70]

Yes they return a lot on defense of arguably the worst defense in the West. On offense they lose Allen, a minimum of 2 starting OL (Could be 3 if Skipper leaves), along with Collins, & more than likely Hunter Henry. I just don't see what they bring back being any better than what we have.

Right-they are bringing back a lot of players that ain't worth a shit on defense. Whoop de Do. Their QB is what made their offense click. Hunter Henry is gone plus the Hogs have become our BITCH. A&M comes To Vegas with who knows who playing QB. The Rebs won't be better for sure if MGK goes Pro. Auburn might be Better but not a given plus we play them at Home. LSU still doesn't have a QB and Les will let Us keep it close. Then the is Bama and they are Bama to everyone and that Blind Hog is going to find an acorn some day , why not next year. Do we have to be negative for no reason? Have some faith, I think our DBs will be Better and our LBs are a strength. Our DL will be Ok. And Our Offense will be top 5 or 6 in the SEC.

[tcdog70]

Based on our depth chart we return 13,14 starters as well.

plus dan doesn't get enough credit for his Red Shirt program. How many RS are going to come board and really be a factor--at least 4 or 5 maybe more.

1. Rankin
2. Jung
3 Lewis
4 one of the RBs
5. Mixon or the other Slot guy-can't think of his name.
6 at least one defensive back.

[Johnson85]

LSU is returning 15-16 starters and bringing in a top 3 recruiting class to go with it.
LSU is loaded with talent every year. I could see them being better next year or I could see them being exactly the same. If I were forced to guess, I'd bet they are slightly better but that it wasn't experience holding them back this year. Miles has just very slowly been losing his edge.


Auburn is returning 15 starters and both QB's. Their Crooting class is 7th in the country right now
Both QB's that weren't very good. How many of their recruiting class is going to be able to make a difference their first season on campus? They certainly could be better, but they have recruited pretty well for a while and yet weren't good this year.


UPig loses their QB but returns 15-16 starters- including 9 on D. The D that let us score 50 on them? If those 9 returning starters were all freshmen and sophomores this year, maybe. Otherwise returning starters from a mediocre defense doesn't seem to be an obviously good thing.



A&M returns 16 starters- has to answer QB question. But they are loaded at WR and on the DL. Weren't they loaded at WR and on the DL this year?


OM loses alot- but returns their QB and has a top 5 recruiting class How many of their recruits are really going to be significant upgrades as true freshmen?[/QUOTE]


Bama is Bama True


The SEC West should be improved next year I'm just not seeing it. It certainly could be because LSU, Auburn, and A&M seem to be under performing their talent. But if they don't magically get it together in the upcoming year (and I think one of them will, just not thinking all three will), you have UM, Arkansas, and MSU losing pretty key contributors. It's most likely going to be like this year. Bama will be the class. Then there will be a bunch of flawed teams and a team or two that is a dumpster fire.

[BoomBoom]

Mullen raised the floor

and that new floor won't leave with him. that's what the "woe is MSU" crowd can't seem to grasp.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

and that new floor won't leave with him. that's what the "woe is MSU" crowd can't seem to grasp.

I'm definitely not a woe as me guy but this is an assumption not a fact. Could someone come in & do better than Mullen? Of course they could. Could someone come in & suck & do worse? Of course they could.

[Really Clark?]

and that new floor won't leave with him. that's what the "woe is MSU" crowd can't seem to grasp.

History actually disputes this statement. By a fairly large percentage. More times than not the new guy may have a good first year (usually happens when hired within the prior staff or a similar style coach comes in) and it declines back to historic levels or it just reverts back immediately. That is by far the norm. A few maintains the floor or it drops just a little. Very few have actually improved upon the floor.

[Johnson85]

plus dan doesn't get enough credit for his Red Shirt program. How many RS are going to come board and really be a factor--at least 4 or 5 maybe more.

1. Rankin

I think people are setting themselves up for disappointment here. The coaches looked at what we had with Rankin and then looked at what we had with Warren and Jenkins and decided to redshirt Rankin. He certainly could be a slight upgrade over Warren, but be a significant upgrade after not being able to earn a starting spot this year would require a significant improvement over his RS year. Possible, but just seems unlikely that anyone with the natural ability to be an upgrade over Warren wouldn't ahve been able to get on the field at all this year.

[BoomBoom]

I'm definitely not a woe as me guy but this is an assumption not a fact. Could someone come in & do better than Mullen? Of course they could. Could someone come in & suck & do worse? Of course they could.

will the new facilities leave with him? the bowled in stadium? the budget?

could someone come in and coach worse? lower expectations from the players and let rot set in? of course, but that would take sustained effort which would be headed off by firing the imbecile and replacing him. we are looking at a 6 win season next year, maybe worse. i just don't see how any competent hire can do worse.

[Really Clark?]

I think people are setting themselves up for disappointment here. The coaches looked at what we had with Rankin and then looked at what we had with Warren and Jenkins and decided to redshirt Rankin. He certainly could be a slight upgrade over Warren, but be a significant upgrade after not being able to earn a starting spot this year would require a significant improvement over his RS year. Possible, but just seems unlikely that anyone with the natural ability to be an upgrade over Warren wouldn't ahve been able to get on the field at all this year.

We will have to see how it translates but he looked pretty good late in the year. Just no reason to pull the red shirt at that point. And I don't think it was really physical issues that hampered him early. But have to see how he handles spring and then the lights.

[Johnson85]

and that new floor won't leave with him. that's what the "woe is MSU" crowd can't seem to grasp.

We don't have to make an outstanding hire to continue to keep the same floor as Mullen, but we'd have to hire a good coach and the chances of doing that after running off a coach that just took us from one bowl game in 5 years (the liberty), to six bowl games in seven years (including, the Orange, Gaotor X2, the Music City, Belk, and Liberty) or even six bowl games in 8 years would probably not be great.

Out of curiosity, I'd like to see what coaching hires that were made this off season the fans that want Mullen to leave would have been happy with. http://www.collegefootballpoll.com/coaching_changes.html Some of these hires will look great in hindsight, but how many would people be excited about now? Fuente? Matt Campbell? Bronco Mendenhall? Dino Babers? I get thinking Mullen has peaked, I just don't get who people think we could go get that would justify taking the risk of making a bad hire.

[Ifyouonlyknew]

will the new facilities leave with him? the bowled in stadium? the budget?

could someone come in and coach worse? lower expectations from the players and let rot set in? of course, but that would take sustained effort which would be headed off by firing the imbecile and replacing him. we are looking at a 6 win season next year, maybe worse. i just don't see how any competent hire can do worse.

I'll take the bet on that 6-6 or worse.

[Coach34]

LSU is loaded with talent every year. I could see them being better next year or I could see them being exactly the same. If I were forced to guess, I'd bet they are slightly better but that it wasn't experience holding them back this year. Miles has just very slowly been losing his edge.


Both QB's that weren't very good. How many of their recruiting class is going to be able to make a difference their first season on campus? They certainly could be better, but they have recruited pretty well for a while and yet weren't good this year.

The D that let us score 50 on them? If those 9 returning starters were all freshmen and sophomores this year, maybe. Otherwise returning starters from a mediocre defense doesn't seem to be an obviously good thing.


Weren't they loaded at WR and on the DL this year?

How many of their recruits are really going to be significant upgrades as true freshmen?
.[/QUOTE]

LSU was better than us this season- and will be again next season- in Baton Rouge
We struggled to beat Auburn. They only returned something like 9 starters last year- now they will return 15 and add depth with their recruiting class.
We may beat UPig- but with 15-16 starters returning to a team that went 5-3 in the SEC- they might be pretty good again
A&M beat us for the 3rd time in 4 years- and returns more starters than we do. And is recruiting better than us
OM returns some good players and their QB- and we go to Oxford next year

Gonna be a tough road for us in 2016- harder than 2015.

[HancockCountyDog]

I think people are setting themselves up for disappointment here. The coaches looked at what we had with Rankin and then looked at what we had with Warren and Jenkins and decided to redshirt Rankin. He certainly could be a slight upgrade over Warren, but be a significant upgrade after not being able to earn a starting spot this year would require a significant improvement over his RS year. Possible, but just seems unlikely that anyone with the natural ability to be an upgrade over Warren wouldn't ahve been able to get on the field at all this year.

This. Rankin could be adequate next year, but to think we sat an all sec caliber OT that got here in January is ridiculous.

[BoomBoom]

I'll take the bet on that 6-6 or worse.

i think we could be much better than 6-6, but i don't think Mullen will make the offensive adjustments that would take. i see a lot of zone read off the DE and Holloway up the gut next year. the exact same offense we've seen for years, that nearlyevery team we see will be vastly prepared for. it could get ugly. hope i'm wrong.

[Coach34]

i think we could be much better than 6-6, but i don't think Mullen will make the offensive adjustments that would take. i see a lot of zone read off the DE and Holloway up the gut next year. the exact same offense we've seen for years, that nearlyevery team we see will be vastly prepared for. it could get ugly. hope i'm wrong.

I actually think the offense will be ok. We'll turn it over a little more- but Fitz can hit the deep ball to create big plays too. Defense scares the shit out of me

[WinningIsRelentless]

and that new floor won't leave with him. that's what the "woe is MSU" crowd can't seem to grasp.
That is what southern said when Fedora left!

[scottycameron]

I'll take the bet on that 6-6 or worse.

I'll take some of that too. All you feel comfortable taking.

[confucius say]

.

LSU was better than us this season- and will be again next season- in Baton Rouge
We struggled to beat Auburn. They only returned something like 9 starters last year- now they will return 15 and add depth with their recruiting class.
We may beat UPig- but with 15-16 starters returning to a team that went 5-3 in the SEC- they might be pretty good again
A&M beat us for the 3rd time in 4 years- and returns more starters than we do. And is recruiting better than us
OM returns some good players and their QB- and we go to Oxford next year

Gonna be a tough road for us in 2016- harder than 2015.[/QUOTE]

Maybe so, but that has nothing to do with the original point - whether the west will be improved next year. If the road is harder, it will likely be due to how much we fall off, not how improved everybody else is. Just my two cents.

[TimberBeast]

That is what southern said when Fedora left!

None that I know said that, they knew they were screwed when he left just like everyone else. Comparing USM and State right now is asinine.

[tcdog70]

.
I think people are setting themselves up for disappointment here. The coaches looked at what we had with Rankin and then looked at what we had with Warren and Jenkins and decided to redshirt Rankin. He certainly could be a slight upgrade over Warren, but be a significant upgrade after not being able to earn a starting spot this year would require a significant improvement over his RS year. Possible, but just seems unlikely that anyone with the natural ability to be an upgrade over Warren wouldn't ahve been able to get on the field at all this year.


Rankin could have played but Dan would rather have him 100% for two years. What I have heard is Rankin has been looking really good in practice. His talent and ability have been there but he didn't grasp the blocking schemes early on.
Too many experts had this Guy as the number one OL in JuCo for Him to be a bust.

[Political Hack]

I actually think the offense will be ok. We'll turn it over a little more- but Fitz can hit the deep ball to create big plays too. Defense scares the shit out of me

That's hilarious. I think the defense could be pretty good if we can find some productivity along the DL. I think the DBs as a group will be better, our LBs will be the best and deepest in the SEC, and we have some decent talent to play with at DE if they will move a guy or two around.

Offensive line could be worse possibly, barring a redshirted juco showing up as a stud, we could be in trouble up front...with a 150 lb RB cramming it up the middle. I think Fitz is great, but he's going to need help up front and at RB. I'm not convinced either position is a middle or upper tier SEC group.

[Coach34]

That's hilarious. I think the defense could be pretty good if we can find some productivity along the DL. I think the DBs as a group will be better, our LBs will be the best and deepest in the SEC, and we have some decent talent to play with at DE if they will move a guy or two around.

Offensive line could be worse possibly, barring a redshirted juco showing up as a stud, we could be in trouble up front...with a 150 lb RB cramming it up the middle. I think Fitz is great, but he's going to need help up front and at RB. I'm not convinced either position is a middle or upper tier SEC group.

Hilarious?

We lose draft picks at both CB's- and after your boy went down you saw how much worse the defense got. And I wont rehash the DL problems

The OL will be a little better. We return 3 starters- and Jenkins was every bit as good as Rufus- with a higher upside. Calhoun will be a year older and will be a good player.
Ours WR group will be even better than this season if Bear stays and adding AJ to the group
RB's get a year older.
New QB throws a great deep ball.
TE is a question mark

Offense will be pretty good again- defense? Not so much

[cheewgumm]

I think the offense will be fun to watch. Hard to imagine Fitz being that good being so new.

OL - can't get worse so will be "better". I still think they will struggle against good teams. Hopefully they can not give up 10 sacks in any one game.

Defense - in trouble

WR - will be great but won't matter.

RB - more terribleHate to be Debbie Downer but, I don't think we will beat anyone in the West.

[engie]

I just think it's funny how much grief I've caught and continue to catch for being pissed when we had gone 5-11 over 16 games, in which the wins were 4-8 Arky, Alcorn St, Troy, and getting lucky to squeak by Bowling Green and Kentucky by 1 and 6 points respectively. While losing by 31 to Bama, 25 to aTm, 20 to LSU, 17 to OM, 14 to Northwestern, 18 to Oklahoma St, 4 to Auburn in a botched game, 33 to LSU, 18 to SCe at the point when we started to turn the corner at aTm and vs Bama even while QBs were dropping like flies.

But now -- it's somehow widely acceptable here to be pissed the heck off and saying the same things I was saying off a really bad 5-11 stretch -- off a 20-7 stretch that saw us at #1 for 5 weeks.

[cheewgumm]

You were right Engie.

[Coach34]

I just think it's funny how much grief I've caught and continue to catch for being pissed when we had gone 5-11 over 16 games, in which the wins were 4-8 Arky, Alcorn St, Troy, and getting lucky to squeak by Bowling Green and Kentucky by 1 and 6 points respectively. While losing by 31 to Bama, 25 to aTm, 20 to LSU, 17 to OM, 14 to Northwestern, 18 to Oklahoma St, 4 to Auburn in a botched game, 33 to LSU, 18 to SCe at the point when we started to turn the corner at aTm and vs Bama even while QBs were dropping like flies.

But now -- it's somehow widely acceptable here to be pissed the heck off and saying the same things I was saying off a really bad 5-11 stretch -- off a 20-7 stretch that saw us at #1 for 5 weeks.

The difference for me personally Engie is that we were a young team in 2013 and had been hampered by injuries. You could see that when Dakota was healthy- we were a much better team. Then in 2014- when we returned the most starters in he SEC- we had a great season.

We we were a veteran team in 2015- and it's been decent. We will still be a veteran team for the most part in 2016- and our expectations will again be very low- as in 2015. If we aren't expected to win when we have veteran teams- then our developmental- redshirt as many in the freshman class mentality is failing. When you don't start a person younger than a Jr on your OL- and THAT is what we look like- we are failing

[engie]

And I'd say we will be a very young team in 2016. At least -- that's where the talent is. It's in the class of 2015 and the handful of key remaining rsSRs from the class of 2012.

The vast majority of the "veterans" are from bust classes and are less talented than the underclassmen. The only places where we have good, veteran depth for next year is at WR and LB.

[Political Hack]

Hilarious?



Hilarious because our concerns are the exact opposite. Our luck we'll end up sucking on both sides of the ball.

[Taog Redloh]

I just think it's funny how much grief I've caught and continue to catch for being pissed when we had gone 5-11 over 16 games, in which the wins were 4-8 Arky, Alcorn St, Troy, and getting lucky to squeak by Bowling Green and Kentucky by 1 and 6 points respectively. While losing by 31 to Bama, 25 to aTm, 20 to LSU, 17 to OM, 14 to Northwestern, 18 to Oklahoma St, 4 to Auburn in a botched game, 33 to LSU, 18 to SCe at the point when we started to turn the corner at aTm and vs Bama even while QBs were dropping like flies.

But now -- it's somehow widely acceptable here to be pissed the heck off and saying the same things I was saying off a really bad 5-11 stretch -- off a 20-7 stretch that saw us at #1 for 5 weeks.

You were wrong in 2013, and Coach34 is wrong now. Hell, he ain't never been right. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k2d5q1I468) That's the long and short of it. At least you had some sort of evidence in 2013, when we were sitting at 4-6. These morons now are bitching after we went 10-2 and 8-4.

[Johnson85]

We lose draft picks at both CB's- and after your boy went down you saw how much worse the defense got. And I wont rehash the DL problems

We lose two CB's, but surely our safeties will be much better. Brandon Bryant and Peters as RS and true sophomores hopefully will have a good jump. I'm also hoping that bringing in a new safeties coach will help. Coman shouldn't be as bad as he is if you believe his stats on the iron dawg board or whatever they call it now. I know some athletes are just not football players, but we've had Cox and Coman back to back. Maybe there was something lacking in coaching there and a new coach can coach Coman up to at least be a good backup (of course we also had Market and Hughes, two players that did an excellent and good job of maximizing their athletic ability, but trying to be optimistic). We will need somebody new (like Graham maybe) to step up at CB, but if we can get two decent corners and two pretty good safeties, I feel like that'd be better than two good corners and two liabilities at safety. There may be some games where you really need that lock down corner for a specific wide receiver, but most games I'd rather just not have a big liability. Of course there is the potential that we will have a bigger liability at one of the corners than we had at either safety, but again, trying to be optimistic.

[Coach34]

You were wrong in 2013, and Coach34 is wrong now. Hell, he ain't never been right. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k2d5q1I468) That's the long and short of it. At least you had some sort of evidence in 2013, when we were sitting at 4-6. These morons now are bitching after we went 10-2 and 8-4.

lol....Goat is something else

[engie]

We lose two CB's, but surely our safeties will be much better. Brandon Bryant and Peters as RS and true sophomores hopefully will have a good jump. I'm also hoping that bringing in a new safeties coach will help. Coman shouldn't be as bad as he is if you believe his stats on the iron dawg board or whatever they call it now. I know some athletes are just not football players, but we've had Cox and Coman back to back. Maybe there was something lacking in coaching there and a new coach can coach Coman up to at least be a good backup (of course we also had Market and Hughes, two players that did an excellent and good job of maximizing their athletic ability, but trying to be optimistic). We will need somebody new (like Graham maybe) to step up at CB, but if we can get two decent corners and two pretty good safeties, I feel like that'd be better than two good corners and two liabilities at safety. There may be some games where you really need that lock down corner for a specific wide receiver, but most games I'd rather just not have a big liability. Of course there is the potential that we will have a bigger liability at one of the corners than we had at either safety, but again, trying to be optimistic.

Smitherman is the best corner on the team IMO. Will we play him as a rsFR ahead of a senior that was terrible this year?

[Coach34]

And I'd say we will be a very young team in 2016. At least -- that's where the talent is. It's in the class of 2015 and the handful of key remaining rsSRs from the class of 2012.

The vast majority of the "veterans" are from bust classes and are less talented than the underclassmen. The only places where we have good, veteran depth for next year is at WR and LB.

We aren't young next year- our two deep is full of upperclassmen. Our Secondary will be Coman, Cleveland, Jiles, etc...Our starting WR's will all be Sr's...Shumpert and Holloway will be Sr's- our OL will start at least 3 Sr- with possibly Rankin in there as a 4th ur Jr..LB's will be Sr's and Jr's...DL will start 3 Sr's

Veteran team. That's what Mullen has built and that was his plan. You can't say "all
the talent is young"- because that means Mullen's redshirting and development philosophy has failed

[DancingRabbit]

And I'd say we will be a very young team in 2016. At least -- that's where the talent is. It's in the class of 2015 and the handful of key remaining rsSRs from the class of 2012.

The vast majority of the "veterans" are from bust classes and are less talented than the underclassmen. The only places where we have good, veteran depth for next year is at WR and LB.

After a quick google search I couldn't find it, but someone posted a while back that State had played the 2nd most freshmen this year, behind only Georgia. If true, that would seem to bode well for next year and not taking too big of a step backward. Some pretty talented red-shirts should contribute too.

No way to know for sure, but my guess is that the relative strength of the SECW will be about the same next year.

[engie]

You were wrong in 2013, and Coach34 is wrong now. Hell, he ain't never been right. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7k2d5q1I468) That's the long and short of it. At least you had some sort of evidence in 2013, when we were sitting at 4-6. These morons now are bitching after we went 10-2 and 8-4.

I don't think I was "right" in 2013. The extreme nature of the turnaround that followed pretty much proved that. I just think it's funny how much further down the rabbit hole we were then when I was losing my mind in comparison to where we sit right now when those that argued against me then are losing their minds now. If we get blown out in the bowl game and then start 4-6 next year and are not competitive in the losses while consistently playing average juniors and seniors over great freshmen and sophomores the situation will then be similar. As bad as it is to say -- injuries saved that 2013 season for us because it forced us to play the more talented young guys.

[engie]

You can't say "all
the talent is young"- because that means Mullen's redshirting and development philosophy has failed

Sure I can. Redshirting and development hasn't failed -- recruiting and retaining has failed. 2/3 of the class of 2013 which would be 4th year players next year are gone. Single digit real contributors from that class. As for your projected 2-deep -- you just skewed it to fit your narrative.

Our most talented corner will be a rs fr.
Our most talented rb will be a rs fr.
Our 2nd best dt will be a rs fr.
Our 3 best S will be sophs.
Our best TE will be a tr SO.
Arguably our 2 best OL will be rs SOs.
Our QB will be a rs SO.

You are just playing the "veteran team" line of bs so you can continue the narrative if we struggle next year. But now that you've done a 180 on Mullen, I suspect that you'll continue to drive the narrative that direction regardless.

[HancockCountyDog]

Sure I can. Redshirting and development hasn't failed -- recruiting and retaining has failed. 2/3 of the class of 2013 which would be 4th year players next year are gone. Single digit real contributors from that class. As for your projected 2-deep -- you just skewed it to fit your narrative.

Our most talented corner will be a rs fr.
Our most talented rb will be a rs fr.
Our 2nd best dt will be a rs fr.
Our 3 best S will be sophs.
Our best TE will be a tr SO.
Arguably our 2 best OL will be rs SOs.
Our QB will be a rs SO.

You are just playing the "veteran team" line of bs so you can continue the narrative if we struggle next year. But now that you've done a 180 on Mullen, I suspect that you'll continue to drive the narrative that direction regardless.

I think its fair to say that you are making some assumptions as well. We haven't seen Smitherman, Gibson, and Adams play - We want them to be good, but we haven't seen them play against live competition.

Who is the TE you are referencing? I genuinely don't know.

As for the OL - Jenkins has shown nothing but getting smoked in the egg bowl. He has shown nothing. Calhoun does have promise.

I think the narrative that all of our most talented players are freshman or RS freshman that haven't seen the field is just an argument that people use because no one wants to think that the guys behind them aren't better than what we are seeing on the field.

[Coach34]

Sure I can. Redshirting and development hasn't failed -- recruiting and retaining has failed. 2/3 of the class of 2013 which would be 4th year players next year are gone. Single digit real contributors from that class. As for your projected 2-deep -- you just skewed it to fit your narrative.

Our most talented corner will be a rs fr.
Our most talented rb will be a rs fr.
Our 2nd best dt will be a rs fr.
Our 3 best S will be sophs.
Our best TE will be a tr SO.
Arguably our 2 best OL will be rs SOs.
Our QB will be a rs SO.

You are just playing the "veteran team" line of bs so you can continue the narrative if we struggle next year. But now that you've done a 180 on Mullen, I suspect that you'll continue to drive the narrative that direction regardless.

There is no BS- i mentioned the players that will be on the football field playing for us next year. The guys playing for us will not be young. That's just fact.

[Coach34]

I think its fair to say that you are making some assumptions as well. We haven't seen Smitherman, Gibson, and Adams play - We want them to be good, but we haven't seen them play against live competition.

Who is the TE you are referencing? I genuinely don't know.

As for the OL - Jenkins has shown nothing but getting smoked in the egg bowl. He has shown nothing. Calhoun does have promise.

I think the narrative that all of our most talented players are freshman or RS freshman that haven't seen the field is just an argument that people use because no one wants to think that the guys behind them aren't better than what we are seeing on the field.

exactly

To say Smitherman is our best CB at this point is ludicrous. Too many assumptions- especially at DT. Our starting DT's are gonna be James and Adams- and it won't be the younger Adams.

[Coach34]

It's just like last year at this time- people kept saying Coman wouldn't start and that our awesome signee was going to start from Day 1. All the guys saying that haven't paid attention to the way we do things at State under Mullen. Guys that pay their dues and work hard are going to play over younger guys until the younger guy proves to be much better. That's the way it is. We are not about to sit a bunch of Sr's to start freshman

[Really Clark?]

It's just like last year at this time- people kept saying Coman wouldn't start and that our awesome signee was going to start from Day 1. All the guys saying that haven't paid attention to the way we do things at State under Mullen. Guys that pay their dues and work hard are going to play over younger guys until the younger guy proves to be much better. That's the way it is. We are not about to sit a bunch of Sr's to start freshman

I see what you are saying but you have to admit and commented during the season as well that Peters and McLaurin were not ready to start even after the first 1/3 of the season. The safety position just isn't easy to come in and start especially for players from small MS schools. Them not being ready negates the age factor with that position group. Even at the end of the year McLaurin wasn't ready to start. Peters best play was from the Husky position not true safety either. Although he would have been serviceable I believe if he had to start at the end of the year. Which is what we were telling people even during the season. Peters might be close at the end but McLaurin would not be ready this year for full time.

[engie]

exactly

To say Smitherman is our best CB at this point is ludicrous. Too many assumptions- especially at DT. Our starting DT's are gonna be James and Adams- and it won't be the younger Adams.

Because we've got history of starting the most talented guys we have as true freshmen**

Smitherman is our best CB right now -- at this moment -- that is going to be here next year. For such an extreme talent evaluator as yourself -- it's amazing to me that you don't already know that. Even though the initial post you responded to did NOT include me calling him our "best" -- but "most talented".

[Jack Lambert]

We aren't young next year- our two deep is full of upperclassmen. Our Secondary will be Coman, Cleveland, Jiles, etc...Our starting WR's will all be Sr's...Shumpert and Holloway will be Sr's- our OL will start at least 3 Sr- with possibly Rankin in there as a 4th ur Jr..LB's will be Sr's and Jr's...DL will start 3 Sr's

Veteran team. That's what Mullen has built and that was his plan. You can't say "all
the talent is young"- because that means Mullen's redshirting and development philosophy has failed

As long as Mullen is coach I don't think we will ever technically be young. We might lose some SR's but our red shirting and giving play time to second team will keep us from being young.

[Coach34]

Because we've got history of starting the most talented guys we have as true freshmen**

Smitherman is our best CB right now -- at this moment -- that is going to be here next year. For such an extreme talent evaluator as yourself -- it's amazing to me that you don't already know that.

i haven't been to practice this year- so I can't evaluate what I haven't seen.

He he may very well be- but we don't "know" he is until we see him play. And it won't be on the 1st snap on Defense in 2016 unless Jiles and Cleveland are hurt or suspended

[Coach34]

As long as Mullen is coach I don't think we will ever technically be young. We might lose some SR's but our red shirting and giving play time to second team will keep us from being young.

well that's the theory behind it. Redshirt most of your classes to ensure you won't ever have to start a bunch of Freshman

[engie]

I think its fair to say that you are making some assumptions as well. We haven't seen Smitherman, Gibson, and Adams play - We want them to be good, but we haven't seen them play against live competition.
Talent is able to be evaluated without seeing guys play under the lights. Would you argue that baseball talent can't be assessed in practice? Talent level and game productivity are two entirely different things that generally converge with experience.


Who is the TE you are referencing? I genuinely don't know.
Justin Johnson. Who was our best option for the majority of this year -- but didn't see the field so much because -- gasp, freshmenz.


As for the OL - Jenkins has shown nothing but getting smoked in the egg bowl. He has shown nothing. Calhoun does have promise.
A rsFR got smoked by a first rounder? The heck you say?


I think the narrative that all of our most talented players are freshman or RS freshman that haven't seen the field is just an argument that people use because no one wants to think that the guys behind them aren't better than what we are seeing on the field.
So -- you are saying is that the 2012 team was more talented than the 2014 team I guess? Since the guys on the bench are never more talented than the guys Mullen trots out there as seniors.

[Coach34]

He's saying that sometimes R-Sr's are better at that particular than more talented younger players. There is lots of things experience helps with on a football field- it's more than just who has the most overall talent.

[engie]

i haven't been to practice this year- so I can't evaluate what I haven't seen.

He he may very well be- but we don't "know" he is until we see him play. And it won't be on the 1st snap on Defense in 2016 unless Jiles and Cleveland are hurt or suspended

And I said I thought he was going to be the day 1 starter in 2016 at what point? I didn't. Yes -- we can already know he's the most talented guy without knowing for 100% sure that he's going to be the best option in October. Talent is much easier to evaluate than game productivity, instincts, and successful assignments.

I don't remember even saying what I thought was going to happen or what should happen -- just an honest evaluation of where we are. Anyone claiming that the vast majority of this team's real talent isn't coming from the 2015 class is lying to themselves. Hell, we've already hit on nearly as many players from that class as we have for the entire 2013 class. And still got pretty elite players coming off redshirt.

[engie]

He's saying that sometimes R-Sr's are better at that particular than more talented younger players. There is lots of things experience helps with on a football field- it's more than just who has the most overall talent.

Are you are talking to a 5 year old here?

You have said more than once that we've got a 6 win ceiling next year. What advantage does playing untalented seniors to get to 6 wins give us vs playing more talented freshmen that -- by the end of the year -- probably ends up with the same number of wins because they'll be a better team in November than we would be with the seniors. If you think -- by the end of the year -- we will be better off playing seniors vs baptizing the young guys by fire and letting them take their lumps in order to get those truly ready and give us a window to make true runs in 2017 and 2018 -- then it's just another thing you've flip flopped on. You knight what happened with the 2013 team -- yet are arguing against letting the same thing happen with the 2016 team -- when the talent differential between the youngsters and the upperclassmen is much wider now than it was then.

[Coach34]

No- I said we are a 6 win team next year. We may get lucky and get a 7th- and if so- good job Mullen with what we have.

But it I have been firm on 6-6

[HoopsDawg]

No- I said we are a 6 win team next year. We may get lucky and get a 7th- and if so- good job Mullen with what we have.

But it I have been firm on 6-6

In 2013, I thought we might be a 6 win team, but I felt good about what we were building for 2014/15. Don't feel the same way now. I think we are going to win 7 games next year, but I don't see a roster that's built for a big run in 2017. I think we are going to be around 2-6, 3-5 in conference the next couple of years.

[HancockCountyDog]

Talent is able to be evaluated without seeing guys play under the lights. Would you argue that baseball talent can't be assessed in practice? Talent level and game productivity are two entirely different things that generally converge with experience.

Sure, practice is definitely exposes talent. The problem is that other than the coaching staff, I don't think anyone on this board has been to practice more than just a few times. I kept hearing how great Shumpert looked in practice by those that were in the know, and I just went by what I saw on the field, in games. He simply wasn't a high level SEC RB. In practice he may look great, but in games, he has proven that he doesn't have it. Smitherman may be great, I hope he is, but to say he is better than Giles and Cleveland while he has never tried to cover Ridley or Paidwell, is just silly.


Justin Johnson. Who was our best option for the majority of this year -- but didn't see the field so much because -- gasp, freshmenz.

Im not sure how much better he was than Hutcherson. I thought he was solid, but nothing more than that. Just because he made a few nice catches in an all star game, doesn't mean he was better than Walley. Actually though Walley played pretty well this year.


A rsFR got smoked by a first rounder? The heck you say?

He was getting whipped by their white DE who's name escapes me. Their entire DL isn't going pro despite what the bears may say. I watched Rawlings give machine gun enough time to throw the ball against Bama in game 3 in Tuscaloosa, yet Jenkins was a damn windmill in our game. This was despite everyone clamoring how much better he was than Warren. I truly believe people wanted to believe that because Warren was so damn bad, people just didn't want to believe the guy behind him was actually worse. Guess what - he was worse. I have my problems with Mullen, but this belief that Mullen is sitting guys that are clearly more talented and most importantly, are clearly better players in the game, is just silly. Joe Morrow sat this year. Shump sat most of this year. Benni started over seniors, so did Bmac, Wells and several more. Does Jenkins have a higher ceiling than Warren? Probably. The problem is that right now, Warren's floor is higher than Jenkins.


So -- you are saying is that the 2012 team was more talented than the 2014 team I guess? Since the guys on the bench are never more talented than the guys Mullen trots out there as seniors.

The 2012 team did have defensive talent and some nice offensive talent, the problem was that Mullen was trying to force a QB that didn't fit his system at all. It eventually caught up to us when we started playing teams that could rush the QB. Do I think that 2012 team had more talent on its roster than 2014? Im not sure, Id have to see them side by side, my gut says no, but we are simply talking about talent, not who is the better player when lining up on a Saturday night.

I think Jamal Peters is extremely talented. I don't think he should be in coverage a ton. I think we should use him the same way the bears use Conner in the box and lined up on TE's. If I could choose to play Charles Mitchell from his senior year or Jamal Peters in his freshman year - I go with Charles. Now Peters is more talented, but Charles is the better player. With our program why would we force a more talented, but not better player on the field?

[Taog Redloh]

I don't think I was "right" in 2013. The extreme nature of the turnaround that followed pretty much proved that. I just think it's funny how much further down the rabbit hole we were then when I was losing my mind in comparison to where we sit right now when those that argued against me then are losing their minds now.
Those people are idiots. What else can you really say?


If we get blown out in the bowl game and then start 4-6 next year and are not competitive in the losses while consistently playing average juniors and seniors over great freshmen and sophomores the situation will then be similar. As bad as it is to say -- injuries saved that 2013 season for us because it forced us to play the more talented young guys.
At that point, at least it's understandable that people get frustrated. Just as it was in 2013 before Arkansas and Ole Miss. Doesn't make it right, but it was understandable.

Coach34, Todd4State and the other members of their band are just plumb retarded. The can point to coaching searches, agents, rumors, recrootin, all they want to, and it don't change a thing. This is big time college football, and everybody has to deal with that. Bottom line is they have an irrational inferiority to Ole Miss. For about the 12th time, I'll say this again. Had we lost to Arkansas and beaten Ole Miss, those same guys would be wanting Mullen to get an extension and another million dollars.

[Taog Redloh]

Are you are talking to a 5 year old here?

You have said more than once that we've got a 6 win ceiling next year. What advantage does playing untalented seniors to get to 6 wins give us vs playing more talented freshmen that -- by the end of the year -- probably ends up with the same number of wins because they'll be a better team in November than we would be with the seniors. If you think -- by the end of the year -- we will be better off playing seniors vs baptizing the young guys by fire and letting them take their lumps in order to get those truly ready and give us a window to make true runs in 2017 and 2018 -- then it's just another thing you've flip flopped on. You knight what happened with the 2013 team -- yet are arguing against letting the same thing happen with the 2016 team -- when the talent differential between the youngsters and the upperclassmen is much wider now than it was then.
You conveniently forget about all the younger players that Mullen DOES play, and has since he got here. Why fixate on Josh Robinson? You know there is a reason he wasn't playing. Plus, I'd say it's best to start out with older players and let the younger players actually beat them out, or bring them along slowly. It's not rocket science.

You're arguing about nothing.

[engie]

Sure, practice is definitely exposes talent. The problem is that other than the coaching staff, I don't think anyone on this board has been to practice more than just a few times. I kept hearing how great Shumpert looked in practice by those that were in the know, and I just went by what I saw on the field, in games. He simply wasn't a high level SEC RB. In practice he may look great, but in games, he has proven that he doesn't have it. Smitherman may be great, I hope he is, but to say he is better than Giles and Cleveland while he has never tried to cover Ridley or Paidwell, is just silly.
I don't think I ever thought Shump would be the guy after seeing him run in 2014, even with the good runs in the Egg Bowl. If you look back, I wanted to play Aeris as true freshman some so we wouldn't end up in the situation we ended up in. Especially with what was obviously always going to be a deep RB class in 2015.


Im not sure how much better he was than Hutcherson. I thought he was solid, but nothing more than that. Just because he made a few nice catches in an all star game, doesn't mean he was better than Walley. Actually though Walley played pretty well this year.
Which highlights my exact point. If a freshman is indistinguishable from a senior -- it's idiotic to play the senior. He was a true freshman -- and he was arguably our best blocker at TE. He's a better blocker than Walley -- faster than Walley -- bigger than Walley. The only things that could be argued was route running, assignments, and as a pass catcher. It was close enough -- that the smart thing to do is to go with the freshman.


He was getting whipped by their white DE who's name escapes me. Their entire DL isn't going pro despite what the bears may say. I watched Rawlings give machine gun enough time to throw the ball against Bama in game 3 in Tuscaloosa, yet Jenkins was a damn windmill in our game. This was despite everyone clamoring how much better he was than Warren. I truly believe people wanted to believe that because Warren was so damn bad, people just didn't want to believe the guy behind him was actually worse. Guess what - he was worse. I have my problems with Mullen, but this belief that Mullen is sitting guys that are clearly more talented and most importantly, are clearly better players in the game, is just silly. Joe Morrow sat this year. Shump sat most of this year. Benni started over seniors, so did Bmac, Wells and several more. Does Jenkins have a higher ceiling than Warren? Probably. The problem is that right now, Warren's floor is higher than Jenkins.
CJ Johnson had 0.5
Breeland Speaks had 1
Woodrow Hamilton had 1
DJ Jones had 1
Channing Ward had 1
RN had 1.5
Marquise Haynes had 1
Those are a bunch of really good pass rushers -- and those ain't all on one guy either. Hamilton is really the only questionable talent of that group. And it's been obvious for a long time now that the mississippi academy kids get up to speed more quickly on the OL.


The 2012 team did have defensive talent and some nice offensive talent, the problem was that Mullen was trying to force a QB that didn't fit his system at all. It eventually caught up to us when we started playing teams that could rush the QB. Do I think that 2012 team had more talent on its roster than 2014? Im not sure, Id have to see them side by side, my gut says no, but we are simply talking about talent, not who is the better player when lining up on a Saturday night.
Wait -- do what? That 2012 team played a crap ton of seniors -- and was the worst defense we've fielded since year 1 under Mullen by far. Couldn't stop the run and couldn't stop the pass. We started Dwayne Cherrington at DT and Eulls at DE for goodness sake. Preston Smith says hello. Who still led the team in sacks and was 3rd in TFL in spite of playing 1/3 of the snaps at most -- and watching us give teams all day to throw and not even be able to stop the run in doing it.


I think Jamal Peters is extremely talented. I don't think he should be in coverage a ton. I think we should use him the same way the bears use Conner in the box and lined up on TE's. If I could choose to play Charles Mitchell from his senior year or Jamal Peters in his freshman year - I go with Charles. Now Peters is more talented, but Charles is the better player. With our program why would we force a more talented, but not better player on the field?

Charles Mitchell was a DRAFTED, borderline elite college DB. A high 4* himself. A 4 year starter that I don't recall ever being a posterized liability. Hardly the same thing as Coman vs Peters/McLaurin. No one is bitching about us playing NFL quality players on our first string regardless of what's behind them. No one is bitching about us playing Richie and redshirting Leo. It's when the starter is an upperclassmen that isn't good. If Cleveland is a starter next year -- we are totally screwed. It's the most obvious thing imaginable. Once Redmond went down -- teams literally found whoever Cleveland was lined up on -- and threw completions to his man for 10 up and down the field. I'd rather roll the dice with Graham than go back with Cleveland -- I'm that convinced he's not the guy at this point.

[engie]

You conveniently forget about all the younger players that Mullen DOES play, and has since he got here. Why fixate on Josh Robinson? You know there is a reason he wasn't playing. Plus, I'd say it's best to start out with older players and let the younger players actually beat them out, or bring them along slowly. It's not rocket science.

You're arguing about nothing.

There are WAAYYYY more examples than just Robinson of us not playing the best talent on the front end.

[Coach34]

Those people are idiots. What else can you really say?


At that point, at least it's understandable that people get frustrated. Just as it was in 2013 before Arkansas and Ole Miss. Doesn't make it right, but it was understandable.

Coach34, Todd4State and the other members of their band are just plumb retarded. The can point to coaching searches, agents, rumors, recrootin, all they want to, and it don't change a thing. This is big time college football, and everybody has to deal with that. Bottom line is they have an irrational inferiority to Ole Miss. For about the 12th time, I'll say this again. Had we lost to Arkansas and beaten Ole Miss, those same guys would be wanting Mullen to get an extension and another million dollars.

This is where you go full rahtard Goat and it ends up getting you banned. I have no inferiority feelings toward OM- actually just he opposite. I can't understand how we ever lose to them. They are beneath us.

Secondly, you have seen me post our record vs Bama, LSU, and A&M. 2-16. That is who I'm comparing our program to and we are failing miserably. Everybody calls Les a moron- but they beat us. Everybody says A&M is soft and Sumlin is approaching dumpster fire- but they beat us. We have trouble scoring against Bama year after year- but other teams are able to put points up. It's about the top half of the SEC- not the team that just finished ahead of us in the West for the 1st time in 6 seasons.

[Johnson85]

You conveniently forget about all the younger players that Mullen DOES play, and has since he got here. Why fixate on Josh Robinson? You know there is a reason he wasn't playing. Plus, I'd say it's best to start out with older players and let the younger players actually beat them out, or bring them along slowly. It's not rocket science.

You're arguing about nothing.

It's not so much that Mullen won't play young people, it's that he seems to be much more demanding of younger players than other coaches. It's a combination of expecting a lot out of them from a discipline perspective and practicing the right way along with a refusal to let them take their lumps the way he does upper classmen. The benefits are that we get a very disciplined team for the most part. The downsides are that we lose some valuable production from younger players because it takes them so long to put it together. I don't know enough to evaluate how Mullen handles this balance. He clearly does not err on the side of playing players that don't have it all put together as freshmen. Some players have proven it's possible, but they've also proven how hard it is. Basically takes NFL potential combined with a lot of maturity. Bear was able to do it by coming in and destroying practice along with having a ton of potential and not much competition. Chris Jones was able to do it by being a physical freak but was still held back a little by I presume the coach's belief that he took too many plays off. Justin Johnson came in and got playing time. Preston Smith sat on the bench with NFL potential and literally not a single pass rusher to compete with; he somehow didn't get to play even though the next option was playing a DT out of position (I'm not sure if his body was undeveloped or if it was an extreme discipilne problem or a combination). Robinson sat on the bench while we ran a 170lb back up the middle, but it seems obvious he needed to be held to a high standard. Peters and McLauren sat the bench despite not much competition at safety. Brandon Bryant redshirted even though it left us with no competence experience at safety (but hard to fault the coaches for not predicting that Market would go down and that Coman wouldn't get better). We definitely get a lot of benefits out of Mullen's approach but it was frustrating as hell watching how inept we were at RB this year while two redshirt freshmen sat the bench and it was frustrating as hell watching a RS Fr get punished mroe for a fumble than a Junior.

[HoopsDawg]

This is what people need to understand. The reason we redshirt so many players is b/c we are not signing classes full of guys that are ready to play. They HAVE to redshirt. Peters, Dear, McLaurin, and Justin Johnson all played as true freshman for us this year. Other guys like Bear, Cox, Boyd, Bumphis, and Chris Jones all played as true freshman b/c they were all talented 4 star/5 star players (except for Bear). So Mullen does play young guys. It's just a lot of the guys we sign, particularly on the O-line aren't ready to contribute for 3 years.

[Taog Redloh]

This is where you go full rahtard Goat and it ends up getting you banned. I have no inferiority feelings toward OM- actually just he opposite. I can't understand how we ever lose to them. They are beneath us.
What gets me banned is my lack of respect for board moderators, on here and 6-pack. That's fair enough, it's your board. But don't get it twisted, you know better than that. I get it, you don't like to look bad. That's fine, I just won't celebrate it.


Secondly, you have seen me post our record vs Bama, LSU, and A&M. 2-16. That is who I'm comparing our program to and we are failing miserably. Everybody calls Les a moron- but they beat us. Everybody says A&M is soft and Sumlin is approaching dumpster fire- but they beat us. We have trouble scoring against Bama year after year- but other teams are able to put points up. It's about the top half of the SEC- not the team that just finished ahead of us in the West for the 1st time in 6 seasons.
The ONLY thing that changes this is R E C R O O T I N. And that doesn't happen overnight. If you haven't noticed, our recrootin has gotten slowly better since Mullen's been here. My ONLY point is this.....wait to judge next year and 2017. At least get on the train, and don't help the derailment....until it's time to do so. That is my message to all MSU fans, not just you. Our fanbase loves to strokes their own egos and might among itself more than any other. Mirrors the state of Mississippi.

[Taog Redloh]

I think we are going to win 7 games next year, but I don't see a roster that's built for a big run in 2017. I think we are going to be around 2-6, 3-5 in conference the next couple of years.
What gives you this impression?

- The 25th ranked recrootin class of 2013?
- The 35th ranked recrootin class of 2014 (small class)?
- The 18th ranked recrootin class of 2015?
- Or is it the THREE competent QBs on the roster?
- What about that we lose 17 players off this squad (14 Srs, 3 EDs), and have 31 rising seniors?
- Or the HUGE group of freshmen (HS and RS) that will be Juniors in 2017?

I think we do probably win 6-8 games next year, like many others, but the team will be pretty good. At the very least we'll have veteran leadership. Schedule sort of sucks IMO, although it also could end up easier than I think. I don't like only 6 home games. But 2017 sets up well. You know, we set up 2014 with the 22nd ranked class in 2012, the 35th ranked class in 2011, and the 33rd ranked class in 2010. We've moved up a notch.

All I can say....is give it a chance.