I have a few pearls of football info.

[gravedigger]

No, I'm not revealing my source because that would be like eating the goose that lays the golden egg.

1. The observation of my source is that we are an offense designed around a "tebow" type of qb and that will affect us this year like it did last year.
2. Our offensive line is as solid as it's ever been from center to guard. To include backups.
3. Our tackle position is lead by two guys that are good, but not great. They will need to get better. Our backups aren't good enough to replace them yet.
4. Our defense is ahead of the offense at this time. Or at least it appears so.
5. We are set at qb. and that is with the kids that are here now.
6. Quay is good enough to be in the nfl right the f'ing now.
7. N. James could be if he worked harder.
8. Tyler is taking OWNERSHIP of this offense. Is that good? Decide for yourself. But Mullen wants a qb that is confident enough to make his own calls, mistakes and decisions.
9. Dak is pushing tyler and that's all you need to know.
10. Be star struck or enamored with OM all you like if that is your cup of tea. It's not mine. Coaches who make 'teams' based on needs are far superior to coaches that need play to the needs of a fanbase that is objectively incompetent at determining the difference between a qb that is leading and one that has won a few games.
11. A real worry is how well we will block the kimdeche's of the world. Not whether we recruited better than him. We won the kid from MS.
12. Beast has really done a good job of revealing our future offense is some kind of great. You already know what our defense will look like.

Ask yourself really. If you could choose between our talent and Om's would you really trade what we have?

I wouldn't. I'd love the attention, just like they are basking in it. But I'd still want our situation, coaching staff and talent.

[sorantable]

8. Tyler is taking OWNERSHIP of this offense. Is that good? Decide for yourself. But Mullen wants a qb that is confident enough to make his own calls, mistakes and decisions.


This should benefit the Dawgs greatly as he seemed to lack confidence last year when the going got tough.

[CadaverDawg]

#1 is why I think we go 6-6 or 5-7. It's like putting Peyton Manning in at Redskins QB.....Tyler is a square peg and this offense is a round hole. But hopefully we can overcome it.

And I agree completely about OM. No way in hell would I trade for their team right now. We just have to play to our potential because the talent and depth are there.

[Harrydawg]

Yes #1 is a bit of a downer......your source does not think that our Off. Coaches have tweaked the system to our QB?

Square peg, round hole?

[gravedigger]

That is a fair assessment. Although, the actual problem is not his ownership. It's the fact that the offense just isn't designed to accentuate his skills. Tyler is a good qb and good enough to overcome a great deal. Whomever is the signal caller has to be the OWNER of the output.

I think that's Tyler right now. We state fans get a bit star struck sometimes by your teams recruiting rankings and the kids that cause it.

But fact is, it's the Strongs, the younger kimdeche, the kids that don't have that national attention that make bigger impacts for OM.

I wont think that Tyler is the man if he doesn't lead us to a victory over OSU or Auburn. Losing both, will lead me to believe that it's time to go full blast and top down towards the type of offense that Mullen is best at coaching.

THe egg bowl will prove what it will. We spend too much time in the March to October range thinking about each other when so much affects the outcome between that time.

[CadaverDawg]

Yes #1 is a bit of a downer......your source does not think that our Off. Coaches have tweaked the system to our QB?

Square peg, round hole?

Yes, as in, Tyler does not fit our offensive scheme. And Mullen and Company can't get TOO far away from what we do best because he has 2 dual threat guys waiting behind Tyler. It's what I've been saying all along, Tyler just isn't the best fit for a Mullen offense.

[gravedigger]

I think my source thinks that the 'clicking' of the offense when qb's with the ability to run are in there is attributable to the nature of the coaches.

My source is young and with time may change his/her mind. But that is the observation of the present time. And yes, they see what we don't. But keep in mind about my sources observations. THey are simply the observations based on the limited amount of time this team has practiced. They will become more accurate as times goes on. I'm ok with conflict this early in the process. To me, it's necessary.

[msstate7]

#6. So we should expect quay to dominate in 3 weeks?

[Coach34]

I had heard Quay was separating himself from James and is in pretty good shape. Now he just has to get in football shape. He's a game changer at DT- and combined with Eulls and PJ- would give us a solid inside group.

And I'm not worried about DE one bit.

If our defensive front comes to play- then our team will be what we want it to be.

[War Machine Dawg]

#1 is why I think we go 6-6 or 5-7. It's like putting Peyton Manning in at Redskins QB.....Tyler is a square peg and this offense is a round hole. But hopefully we can overcome it.

And I agree completely about OM. No way in hell would I trade for their team right now. We just have to play to our potential because the talent and depth are there.

It's what we've been saying since the Egg Bowl, Cadaver. We're going to struggle to move the ball and score so long as Tyler is QB. Why? We're a soft, pass-first team with Tyler. And what really pisses me off is the amount of talent we're wasting by continuing to pound the square peg into the round hole. There's no excuse for this offense to not average 24-28 points a game with what we have returning.

[msstate7]

It's what we've been saying since the Egg Bowl, Cadaver. We're going to struggle to move the ball and score so long as Tyler is QB. Why? We're a soft, pass-first team with Tyler. And what really pisses me off is the amount of talent we're wasting by continuing to pound the square peg into the round hole. There's no excuse for this offense to not average 24-28 points a game with what we have returning.

Does the change to more under center make us a more physical team with TR out there?

[CadaverDawg]

Does the change to more under center make us a more physical team with TR out there?

That's my hope

[Todd4State]

It's what we've been saying since the Egg Bowl, Cadaver. We're going to struggle to move the ball and score so long as Tyler is QB. Why? We're a soft, pass-first team with Tyler. And what really pisses me off is the amount of talent we're wasting by continuing to pound the square peg into the round hole. There's no excuse for this offense to not average 24-28 points a game with what we have returning.

My biggest disappointment is Dan won't adjust the offense to fit him. I'm not saying scrap Dan's offense and run an Air Raid or a pro-style offense. But I feel like we should be able to call plays that fit his strengths better. And I do believe it can be done because the Patriots offense from what I have read is pretty much a pro version of what we're running- and they have Tom Brady at QB who is one of the slowest guys in the league.

[CadaverDawg]

My biggest disappointment is Dan won't adjust the offense to fit him. I'm not saying scrap Dan's offense and run an Air Raid or a pro-style offense. But I feel like we should be able to call plays that fit his strengths better. And I do believe it can be done because the Patriots offense from what I have read is pretty much a pro version of what we're running- and they have Tom Brady at QB who is one of the slowest guys in the league.

I agree. As soon as Relf graduated, we should have jumped in to an offense built for Tyler with both feet. Instead, we stuck a few toes in and now we are trying to make all of these changes for ONE season. Because we know this "new" look will go back to a Relf style as soon as Russell graduates. It is frustrating fo sho

[Goat Holder]

Before this thread gets a little too stupid, let's clarify some things:


The observation of my source is that we are an offense designed around a "tebow" type of qb and that will affect us this year like it did last year........Tyler is taking OWNERSHIP of this offense. Is that good? Decide for yourself. But Mullen wants a qb that is confident enough to make his own calls, mistakes and decisions..........Dak is pushing tyler and that's all you need to know.

I think it's well documented that I go against the grain on this, but damnit, I'm right. But for the 18,000th time, all of you who think that Dak should play over Tyler are idiots. Do you REALLY think our coaches can't make this decision? Do you REALLY think that they would play to Tyler's ego over winning games? Do you REALLY think that the coaches didn't tweak the offense to suit Tyler's strengths? And lastly, do any of you REALLY think the offense's problem last year was Tyler Russell??? REALLY??? Is it really that "frustrating" that Mullen doesn't want a RSo. Prescott (who's not near Tebow by the way) to start over a RSR. Russell who he's been developing for 5 f*cking years? Mullen isn't the frustrating one, YOU GUYS are the frustrating ones. Just please don't boo at the stadium. That's all I really ask. Rant over.


Coaches who make 'teams' based on needs are far superior to coaches that need play to the needs of a fanbase that is objectively incompetent at determining the difference between a qb that is leading and one that has won a few games.

Needs is the wrong word. I know what you're trying to say, but 'needs' is a terrible way to describe it. Every football team NEEDS a Cam Newton, a huge, dominating OL and Julio Jones and Mike Wallace. I think you are trying to convey that a team needs to be built around a school's and a coach's strengths.

[Todd4State]

I agree. As soon as Relf graduated, we should have jumped in to an offense built for Tyler with both feet. Instead, we stuck a few toes in and now we are trying to make all of these changes for ONE season. Because we know this "new" look will go back to a Relf style as soon as Russell graduates. It is frustrating fo sho

I have to wonder if using Josh Robinson or Nick Griffen more instead of trying to make Perkins an every down back would help make us more physical and maybe also fit what Dan wants/knows how to do. To me, that's as much of a square peg if not moreso than having Tyler at QB. I like Perkins, and if I were the coach he would be a big part of the offense- but I would use him more in the passing game on screens, maybe occasionally in the slot, as well as in the running game. And then use Robinson/Griffen (maybe even Shumpert IF he is ready) as the in between the tackles type of guy- like we used AD and Vick Ballard. Not utilizing guys like Robinson and then putting Perkins in a situation that isn't necessarily using him to his maximum potential- that's the kind of thing that should be easy to fix.

[CadaverDawg]

I have to wonder if using Josh Robinson or Nick Griffen more instead of trying to make Perkins an every down back would help make us more physical and maybe also fit what Dan wants/knows how to do. To me, that's as much of a square peg if not moreso than having Tyler at QB. I like Perkins, and if I were the coach he would be a big part of the offense- but I would use him more in the passing game on screens, maybe occasionally in the slot, as well as in the running game. And then use Robinson/Griffen (maybe even Shumpert IF he is ready) as the in between the tackles type of guy- like we used AD and Vick Ballard. Not utilizing guys like Robinson and then putting Perkins in a situation that isn't necessarily using him to his maximum potential- that's the kind of thing that should be easy to fix.

Could not agree more. Been saying this and getting shredded for it for a while.

[I seen it dawg]

Before this thread gets a little too stupid, let's clarify some things:



I think it's well documented that I go against the grain on this, but damnit, I'm right. But for the 18,000th time, all of you who think that Dak should play over Tyler are idiots. Do you REALLY think our coaches can't make this decision? Do you REALLY think that they would play to Tyler's ego over winning games? Do you REALLY think that the coaches didn't tweak the offense to suit Tyler's strengths? And lastly, do any of you REALLY think the offense's problem last year was Tyler Russell??? REALLY??? Is it really that "frustrating" that Mullen doesn't want a RSo. Prescott (who's not near Tebow by the way) to start over a RSR. Russell who he's been developing for 5 f*cking years? Mullen isn't the frustrating one, YOU GUYS are the frustrating ones. Just please don't boo at the stadium. That's all I really ask. Rant over.



Needs is the wrong word. I know what you're trying to say, but 'needs' is a terrible way to describe it. Every football team NEEDS a Cam Newton, a huge, dominating OL and Julio Jones and Mike Wallace. I think you are trying to convey that a team needs to be built around a school's and a coach's strengths.

Shut the **** up. You sound like a choking on a bloody tampon bitch. I'll be booing you.

[CadaverDawg]

Before this thread gets a little too stupid, let's clarify some things:



I think it's well documented that I go against the grain on this, but damnit, I'm right. But for the 18,000th time, all of you who think that Dak should play over Tyler are idiots. Do you REALLY think our coaches can't make this decision? Do you REALLY think that they would play to Tyler's ego over winning games? Do you REALLY think that the coaches didn't tweak the offense to suit Tyler's strengths? And lastly, do any of you REALLY think the offense's problem last year was Tyler Russell??? REALLY??? Is it really that "frustrating" that Mullen doesn't want a RSo. Prescott (who's not near Tebow by the way) to start over a RSR. Russell who he's been developing for 5 f*cking years? Mullen isn't the frustrating one, YOU GUYS are the frustrating ones. Just please don't boo at the stadium. That's all I really ask. Rant over.



Needs is the wrong word. I know what you're trying to say, but 'needs' is a terrible way to describe it. Every football team NEEDS a Cam Newton, a huge, dominating OL and Julio Jones and Mike Wallace. I think you are trying to convey that a team needs to be built around a school's and a coach's strengths.

Goat, the problem is not Tyler.... it is the offensive scheme not matching his skill set.

Why did we half ass change the scheme last year when we knew Tyler was zero threat to run on the shotgun read option? We should have made all of these changes before LAST season. And I'm still not convinced that we have made the necessary changes to make our offense more productive this season. We should have JRob or Griffin as our every down back, or a FB leading from a pro set, etc.

And yes, I DO think that Mullen did some things despite them not being the best for the offense. BUT, he did it because in the long run it is better for the program.

In other words, I think Mullen started Tyler last year and this year for a multiple of reasons....
1) Tyler is our first highly rated QB recruit, so it would look bad to bench him
2) Tyler broke all of our passing records last year so again, it would look bad.
3) We didn't have any experience behind him at QB last year, so he didn't have any choice really.
4) Dak had the toe issue this year so it would have been risky
5) Recruits don't want to go somewhere that a coach benches a fifth year Senior 4 star QB

So I'm not saying that he SHOULD bench him....I'm saying I wish he could. But I know it would have too many negative effects on the program. There is 100% no doubt in my mind that Mullen would much rather have Dak under center this year behind this O-Line and with our inexperience at WR....but he can't for other reasons that I listed above.

Again, if you're going to go with the passing QB, go all the **** in with him...not half assed. And last year was a half assed patchwork scheme on offense and that pisses me off. If Mullen knew Russell was starting last year, then he damn sure knew he would start this year as a Senior....so we are a year and a half late making these changes to the offense in my opinion. That is where my frustration comes from.

And nobody blames Russell for e offense last year. You totally make that shit up every time we discuss this. It has nothing to do with Russell or his skill set. It is that Mullen didn't make the changes necessary for Our offense to succeed last year with Russell under center.

[Goat Holder]

Goat, the problem is not Tyler.... it is the offensive scheme not matching his skill set.

Why did we half ass change the scheme last year when we knew Tyler was zero threat to run on the shotgun read option? We should have made all of these changes before LAST season. And I'm still not convinced that we have made the necessary changes to make our offense more productive this season. We should have JRob or Griffin as our every down back, or a FB leading from a pro set, etc.

And yes, I DO think that Mullen did some things despite them not being the best for the offense. BUT, he did it because in the long run it is better for the program.

In other words, I think Mullen started Tyler last year and this year for a multiple of reasons....
1) Tyler is our first highly rated QB recruit, so it would look bad to bench him
2) Tyler broke all of our passing records last year so again, it would look bad.
3) We didn't have any experience behind him at QB last year, so he didn't have any choice really.
4) Dak had the toe issue this year so it would have been risky
5) Recruits don't want to go somewhere that a coach benches a fifth year Senior 4 star QB

So I'm not saying that he SHOULD bench him....I'm saying I wish he could. But I know it would have too many negative effects on the program. There is 100% no doubt in my mind that Mullen would much rather have Dak under center this year behind this O-Line and with our inexperience at WR....but he can't for other reasons that I listed above.

Again, if you're going to go with the passing QB, go all the **** in with him...not half assed. And last year was a half assed patchwork scheme on offense and that pisses me off. If Mullen knew Russell was starting last year, then he damn sure knew he would start this year as a Senior....so we are a year and a half late making these changes to the offense in my opinion. That is where my frustration comes from.

And nobody blames Russell for e offense last year. You totally make that shit up every time we discuss this. It has nothing to do with Russell or his skill set. It is that Mullen didn't make the changes necessary for Our offense to succeed last year with Russell under center.

I just disagree, with basically every bit of that. You all have your opinions, but I 100% feel I am correct in my assessment. The offense WAS changed to fit Tyler. We just didn't have the talent. Mullen succeeded with Tyson Lee at QB in 2009. But there are big differences in that offense and this current. Most notably Anthony Dixon and Derek Sherrod.

I think if you all would quit putting the 'scheme' up on a pedestal, the truth may become clearer. WAY too much value put on that. And no, Mullen is not playing Russell for those ridiculous reasons. This is his job, his life, we're talking about here. He's not compromising it for some feel good story about a QB from Mississippi.

My opinion.

[War Machine Dawg]

I have to wonder if using Josh Robinson or Nick Griffen more instead of trying to make Perkins an every down back would help make us more physical and maybe also fit what Dan wants/knows how to do. To me, that's as much of a square peg if not moreso than having Tyler at QB. I like Perkins, and if I were the coach he would be a big part of the offense- but I would use him more in the passing game on screens, maybe occasionally in the slot, as well as in the running game. And then use Robinson/Griffen (maybe even Shumpert IF he is ready) as the in between the tackles type of guy- like we used AD and Vick Ballard. Not utilizing guys like Robinson and then putting Perkins in a situation that isn't necessarily using him to his maximum potential- that's the kind of thing that should be easy to fix.

It would certainly help, Todd. But to me, the real problem is Tyler's skill set. For him to be effective, he has to throw it 30+ times a game. When you do that, you become a finesse offense. You ask your OL to pass block too much and they become passive. You really want to tell me that Gabe Jackson, Dillon Day, and Justin Malone aren't capable of bringing some SERIOUS thump in the run game? I call BS. Jackson might be one of the strongest players in the SEC, but he isn't mauling people in the run game the way you'd expect a guy with his tools to do. We've always been known for nasty, physical offensive lines. That's a mentality that is developed from a run-first philosophy. To me, the loss of that is a result of the passivity of the pass-first approach we have to use to fit Tyler.

And you're spot on about how we should use Perk. Unfortunately, he wouldn't be as effective in that role now because of how he's bulked up and changed his body in this ridiculous attempt to be an every down SEC RB. I've been saying for at least a year that the "super athlete" role would be the best use of his skills.

Also, I'd redshirt Shumpert. Even if we used Perk as the super athlete, we're still 3-deep at RB with J-Rob, Griffin, and Milton. I'm not as big on Milton as most, but he's still good enough that it would be a damn waste to not RS Shumpert.

[War Machine Dawg]

Goat, the problem is not Tyler.... it is the offensive scheme not matching his skill set.

Why did we half ass change the scheme last year when we knew Tyler was zero threat to run on the shotgun read option? We should have made all of these changes before LAST season. And I'm still not convinced that we have made the necessary changes to make our offense more productive this season. We should have JRob or Griffin as our every down back, or a FB leading from a pro set, etc.

And yes, I DO think that Mullen did some things despite them not being the best for the offense. BUT, he did it because in the long run it is better for the program.

In other words, I think Mullen started Tyler last year and this year for a multiple of reasons....
1) Tyler is our first highly rated QB recruit, so it would look bad to bench him
2) Tyler broke all of our passing records last year so again, it would look bad.
3) We didn't have any experience behind him at QB last year, so he didn't have any choice really.
4) Dak had the toe issue this year so it would have been risky
5) Recruits don't want to go somewhere that a coach benches a fifth year Senior 4 star QB

So I'm not saying that he SHOULD bench him....I'm saying I wish he could. But I know it would have too many negative effects on the program. There is 100% no doubt in my mind that Mullen would much rather have Dak under center this year behind this O-Line and with our inexperience at WR....but he can't for other reasons that I listed above.

Again, if you're going to go with the passing QB, go all the **** in with him...not half assed. And last year was a half assed patchwork scheme on offense and that pisses me off. If Mullen knew Russell was starting last year, then he damn sure knew he would start this year as a Senior....so we are a year and a half late making these changes to the offense in my opinion. That is where my frustration comes from.

And nobody blames Russell for e offense last year. You totally make that shit up every time we discuss this. It has nothing to do with Russell or his skill set. It is that Mullen didn't make the changes necessary for Our offense to succeed last year with Russell under center.

Give it up, Cadaver. Goat clearly skipped his meds and is on the :( side today. Hell, Goat is still the only one incapable of admitting that the offense being unable to move the ****ing ball against even an average defense last year was a bigger problem than the terrible defense. While most other college teams are scoring points and gaining yards at record paces, dear ol' Em State is still struggling to crack the Top 70 in offense. But Goat say "offense isn't a problem!!!!1!!1!!!111!!!!"

[engie]

Also, I'd redshirt Shumpert. Even if we used Perk as the super athlete, we're still 3-deep at RB with J-Rob, Griffin, and Milton. I'm not as big on Milton as most, but he's still good enough that it would be a damn waste to not RS Shumpert.

I agree with everything you said.

Other than(maybe) this part. On the surface it seems obvious to redshirt Shump, I agree. But practice reports are telling something a bit different. Paul Jones is saying that he's been ridiculously impressive thusfar in drills -- is way further along in pass blocking and footwork than he expected -- and that it may be really hard to keep him off the field. Again, I haven't watched a single snap of these practices -- but that's coming from Paul and others...

[gravedigger]

I see what you are saying.

I think it boils down to two things. Our o line will not be successful if required to hold blocks in a passing situation without at a minimum the threat of the qb running. It's a weakness. Not glaring. But one if the qb makes throws to avoid running the ball.

Mullen needs to be able to force defenses to use a player to account for the qb on each play in order that the quick spread plays are mismatches. That means having the ability to call designed qb runs.


Tweaking the play calling to accentuate Tyler's strengths has a negative affect that goes beyond Tyler.

Tyler will and should keep his starting job as long as we do not lose a game because he forced passes in situations he should have run. Understand me on this. If we lose and that isn't the reason, I'm fine with sticking with Tyler, just like you because he is a superior passer.

We a re all a bit hard headed when it comes to this subject. So many tangent examples of Chris leak at Florida etc that we all are absolutely sure we know the cure to what ails this team.

What may be the case is that we just simply need another year of experience with our mobile qb developing him and in the mean time Tyler is a pretty good alternative.

I hope Mullen sticks with what he does best and we do not have this problem ever again. We are strong in some places offensively and weak in others. One thing that could surprise us all is that a de rrunnya or a b&n Hammond or a Shelby christy could blossom this year and change the landscape of the way we look on offense. We may use the tight ends in such a way the offense clicks.

In the end the gravitational pull to the running threat qb is stronger than Tyler's talent. It is our hc and oc's foundation. It fits the stature of our rb's. it helps cover the weakness of inexperienced wr's and tackles that can't protect in pass blocking as long as Tyler needs.

Your argument isn't invalid at all. But it cannot sustain a season with so many factors working against it.

[Goat Holder]

Believe me, I see your viewpoint. I guess that's what separates you and I from a few of the other nimrods (I seen it dawg) who obviously can't comprehend anything outside the scope of their own opinion.

I get it. Mullen works best with a mobile QB. I want to see that too, it's what's best for MSU long-term.

But even going beyond that, what if Mullen leaves this year? Coaches have to be able to work with available talent. I just happen to think our offensive problems are more of a jimmy/joe deal than a coaching scheme. They are doing the best they can with what they have. We'll see in a few weeks. Main thing we're missing IMO is that stud RB.

[FlabLoser]

We are waist deep in good RBs.

[Goat Holder]

Yeah that completely showed. Nobody on our squad last year had the effect of a Dixon or Ballard. So obvious, huh? Where do some of you get this stuff?

Hopefully somebody steps up THIS season (may be Griffin) but let's not speculate. It hasn't happened yet. Perkins is a speed back, or 3rd down back, whatever cliche you want to call it. He's not an every down grinder.

[Political Hack]

it's not the backs or Tyler's inability to run the read option more than 5 times a game. It's the decision to stop using a fullback. It killed our inside runnig game and TR isn't going to pull it down. Without either of those it's not hard to stop a single A back with SEC level LBs and DLs.

We need to use the two TE set more, which I understand we will. We also need to have one TE act as an H-back and bring 260 lbs of MMF right into the chest of opposing MLBs. With that package we can go 5-wide or to a power set. It would make us very difficult to match up with.

[mic]

it's not the backs or Tyler's inability to run the read option more than 5 times a game. It's the decision to stop using a fullback. It killed our inside runnig game and TR isn't going to pull it down. Without either of those it's not hard to stop a single A back with SEC level LBs and DLs.

We need to use the two TE set more, which I understand we will. We also need to have one TE act as an H-back and bring 260 lbs of MMF right into the chest of opposing MLBs. With that package we can go 5-wide or to a power set. It would make us very difficult to match up with.

Agree 100%... See Stanford's offense.. almost always use 2 TE sets at times they used 3... also they went from Andrew Luck who was the ultimate Dual Qb to a Qb who is more Russell like. He can run but doesn't very much and their offense basically stayed the same.. We have the backs to Run the ball , run the ball well and set up TR to put himself in great passing situations..

[FlabLoser]

I don't know what was wrong with our 5 wides last year, but it was aweful.

[mic]

I had heard Quay was separating himself from James and is in pretty good shape. Now he just has to get in football shape. He's a game changer at DT- and combined with Eulls and PJ- would give us a solid inside group.

And I'm not worried about DE one bit.

If our defensive front comes to play- then our team will be what we want it to be.

Like I said we just need 2 of the reserve DT to take that next step.. Lets hope someone can follow Quay's lead.. If so we will have the best 2 deep DT rotation we have had in a long long long time..

[Todd4State]

it's not the backs or Tyler's inability to run the read option more than 5 times a game. It's the decision to stop using a fullback. It killed our inside runnig game and TR isn't going to pull it down. Without either of those it's not hard to stop a single A back with SEC level LBs and DLs.

We need to use the two TE set more, which I understand we will. We also need to have one TE act as an H-back and bring 260 lbs of MMF right into the chest of opposing MLBs. With that package we can go 5-wide or to a power set. It would make us very difficult to match up with.


I am hoping that Christian Holmes is the H-back that steps up and takes on the role that we haven't really had since Patrick Hanrahan was here.

[Coach34]

ok- I'll respond although I tried to avoid it.

It's hard to change your offense in college in just one year. That's why our staff was so reluctant to make alot of changes last year, not to mention the fact that Russell had been hurt not once, but twice in 2011. Why make a ton of changes for a QB that stays hurt? Especially to something the back-up QB really wont run well?

Not that Dak is more mature, Tyler proved he could hold up through a season, we have a little more athleticism at WR, and we saw that making half-assed changes didnt work- we are going to get under center some and use more TE's to be more physical on offense with Tyler in the game. It's a good move and one that has to be done if Tyler is going to be our QB.

However, it's also not surprising now that Dak is in year 3, that he is looking ready to take over. He is very talented also and brings a dimension that Tyler can't. That's a good thing for us. It's been hard for us to have one competent QB at State- much less two. Dak will be used again this year, and I wont be surprised if he takes on a bigger role. If the offense struggles this year, Mullen will have a quicker trigger to make a change because he doesnt have to worry about Russell transferring out or anything like that- and he finally has enough QB's to survive the season.

Also heard that Williams has looked pretty good also and the coaches are pleased with where he is currently.

We are in good shape at QB- especially with the two talents we have coming in.

[blacklistedbully]

Yeah that completely showed. Nobody on our squad last year had the effect of a Dixon or Ballard. So obvious, huh? Where do some of you get this stuff?

Hopefully somebody steps up THIS season (may be Griffin) but let's not speculate. It hasn't happened yet. Perkins is a speed back, or 3rd down back, whatever cliche you want to call it. He's not an every down grinder.

BS. Robinson and/or Milton were fully capable, but we used Perkins in those situations instead. Seemed to me like our coaching staff tried to get "too cute" with this play-calling, thinking along the lines of, "they'll never expect this, so we'll catch 'em off guard".

[Political Hack]

I don't doubt Dak's abilities, but I think Staley could start getting snaps early. He's more of a passing threat than Dak will ever be. That's not a knock on Dak, it's just the kind of QB he is. He will never sit in the pocket look off two outed and hit a 15 yard out route down the sidelines. TR gives us that. Staley will give us that after a year in the system.

[Coach 57]

Okay as a coach you ALWAYS play the player that gives you the best chance for success. No matter the position or skill set ESPECIALLY if you already have him on your roster. Tyler Russell is an elite level talent! Period! If this guy were at any school in the nation that runs either a traditional pro set or "mesh" look (passing offense using route combos) he would be even further along with his stats. Possibly even starting his rFS year. I believe if he were in Bama he would have a ring or two. Or the same at LSU. But he's not! He's here! He gives us the best chance RIGHT NOW over Dak for success! End of argument!

Couple of things.

1.) I have addressed this and will again. We have zone blocking/spread OLmen. Not pro set OLmen. We are asking a spread offense to run pro set plays with pro set blocking schemes. It works ok Vs mid level competition but against elites ....not so much. The only game it worked was Vs LSU. And the reason was we decided to run true designed plays. These same OLmen that look "ok" will look good next year as they will go back to quick movement shedding weight in the off-season and pulling & sealing as they did when Relf was here.


2.) Tyler has a LOT of pressure and we will learn alot about him this year. He will either fold or rise to the occasion. I think the injection of the "slot F wing" formation will benefit Tyler, Malcolm, Perk but I don't know about anybody else. The TEs we have will greatly benefit from said scheme as it is a 2 tight formation that can go from a 2 receiver look to a 5 receiver truth. As every position is a receiving threat from the WRs to the RB. Tyler's hands are in the C and based on the coverages (will require a LOT of film study by Tyler). But we'll see.

[MSUDawg4Life]

I disagree about Dak. Dak threw for 39 touchdowns and ran for 17 in his senior year of high school. I think some of you are trying to peg Dak as a Chris Relf clone, but he's not. He can throw and run the ball.

Be prepared to see Dak put the ball in the air. With the receivers he's going to have, why wouldn't he?

[I seen it dawg]

I don't doubt Dak's abilities, but I think Staley could start getting snaps early. He's more of a passing threat than Dak will ever be. That's not a knock on Dak, it's just the kind of QB he is. He will never sit in the pocket look off two outed and hit a 15 yard out route down the sidelines. TR gives us that. Staley will give us that after a year in the system.

I disagree about Dak as well. I saw him play a few times as his high school is where I live. He played in a pass first offense that incorporated runs. It's as close to Dans offense as I have seen. He ran it from middle school to now. He is a pass first QB.

[Political Hack]

Dak looked great in high school passing the ball, but he can't make all the throws. Staley can.

[I seen it dawg]

Where have we seen that Dak can't make the throws?

[FlabLoser]

He has looked bad in spring games. I've not seen fall practices, but when I read about INTs, it is Dak throwing them.

I'm not saying Dak is bad. Russell was an INT machine too when he was an underclassman. Dak will improve just like Russell did.

Its great to have a staff that can develop QBs. Can't wait to see what they do with Staley.