Help me understand this (Re: Tyler Russell)

[SignalToNoise]

Russell has been named to three award watch lists ... Maxwell, Walter Camp, Davey O'Brien, yet the media and most fans are fawning over Mr. Interception Bo Wallace.

I must be missing something.

EDIT: Was named to the Unitas Golden Arm watch list as of this morning.

[HancockCountyDog]

Russell has been named to three award watch lists ... Maxwell, Walter Camp, Davey O'Brien, yet the media and most fans are fawning over Mr. Interception Bo Wallace.

I must be missing something.

Its simple, people remember how you finish not how you start.

Even Goat would admit that Russell struggled down the stretch. If you throw out the Arkansas game (they quit), he threw for 5 Td's and 9 interceptions in 5 of his last 6 games. That simply won't get it done.

Now I don't understand the Wallace love because he was just as inconsistent as Russell down the stretch.

[WeWonItAll(Most)]

Dude, have you seen Bo's hair?

[Political Hack]

he can run and the new trend in football is the fancy feet QBs who excite crowds. That's the same reason RG3 gets more press than Drew Brees... it's just that the NFL analysts aren't dumb enough to name RG3 as a better QB than Brees.

He also had more passing yards, rushing yards, and higher QB rating. However, after realizing that 8 yards more per game is rated higher than a QB who threw roughly half as many INTs, I've declared the QB rating system as fundamentally flawed. Feel free to join the campaign.

[smootness]

If you throw out the Arkansas game (they quit), he threw for 5 Td's and 9 interceptions in 5 of his last 6 games. That simply won't get it done.

Well, if you throw out the last 2 games (I want to), he only threw 4 INTs all year. You can always pick and choose; the bottom line is, the second half of our schedule was more difficult (he actually played at least ok against most of the tough teams we played) and he had a bad last 2 games. That's it. He had a very good year.

[SignalToNoise]

he can run and the new trend in football is the fancy feet QBs who excite crowds. That's the same reason RG3 gets more press than Drew Brees... it's just that the NFL analysts aren't dumb enough to name RG3 as a better QB than Brees.

He also had more passing yards, rushing yards, and higher QB rating. However, after realizing that 8 yards more per game is rated higher than a QB who threw roughly half as many INTs, I've declared the QB rating system as fundamentally flawed. Feel free to join the campaign.

This is a good post. He's going to have more rushing yards as Russell is no threat to run. That's not a knock against TR but running is obviously not in his skill set. And yes, 8 more yards per game but double the INTs is offsetting at best. I realize I am biased but I'm not getting the love for Wallace.

[Behrdawg]

Im with Hack on this one.

[HancockCountyDog]

Well, if you throw out the last 2 games (I want to), he only threw for 4 INTs all year. You can always pick and choose; the bottom line is, the second half of our schedule was more difficult (he actually played at least ok against most of the tough teams we played) and he had a bad last 2 games. That's it. He had a very good year.

The Bears and NW were not tough games. We played like shit. Vandy beat NW and the bears allowed almost every team they played last year to play intramural football on offense all year.

He (along with the rest of the offense) played like shit in those last two games.

[smootness]

I didn't say those were tough games...I was talking about the stretch where we played Bama, LSU, and A&M. I acknowledged he played poorly in the last 2 games.

But against Bama, he was 15-30 for 169 and 1 INT. Not good, but it's Bama...they do this to just about everybody. Against A&M, he was 19-30 for 212; 1 TD and 1 INT. Not great, but not terrible. Against LSU, he was 26-38 for 295 with 1 TD and 1 INT. Actually very good, very efficient...we just couldn't move it enough to put many points on the board.

[smootness]

he can run and the new trend in football is the fancy feet QBs who excite crowds. That's the same reason RG3 gets more press than Drew Brees... it's just that the NFL analysts aren't dumb enough to name RG3 as a better QB than Brees.

He also had more passing yards, rushing yards, and higher QB rating. However, after realizing that 8 yards more per game is rated higher than a QB who threw roughly half as many INTs, I've declared the QB rating system as fundamentally flawed. Feel free to join the campaign.

I actually don't think it has much to do with their respective running ability. I think it can basically be boiled down to the same reason Ole Miss is getting hype and we aren't...because they surprised people, they had an offense that is exciting at times (both good and bad), and they got pub from their recruiting class. And I think when people say 'Ole Miss is going to be a handful' for these reasons, because they saw some of the highlights, they also throw in at the same time, 'Watch out for Bo Wallace, that guy is really good'.

I think it boils down to the fact that a lot of fans, and even 'analysts', don't really put much thought/research into these kinds of things. They see who looks exciting and talk about those teams a lot, then talk about them so much they just assume they will be very good.

[SignalToNoise]

The Bears and NW were not tough games. We played like shit. Vandy beat NW and the bears allowed almost every team they played last year to play intramural football on offense all year.

He (along with the rest of the offense) played like shit in those last two games.

I feel like that's what he is saying. The majority of the year Tyler played very well. In the Gator Bowl he was like an ace pitcher that just didn't have his best stuff that day. Throwing that many INTs in one game is out of character for him.

[Political Hack]

I actually don't think it has much to do with their respective running ability. I think it can basically be boiled down to the same reason Ole Miss is getting hype and we aren't...because they surprised people, they had an offense that is exciting at times (both good and bad), and they got pub from their recruiting class. And I think when people say 'Ole Miss is going to be a handful' for these reasons, because they saw some of the highlights, they also throw in at the same time, 'Watch out for Bo Wallace, that guy is really good'.

I think it boils down to the fact that a lot of fans, and even 'analysts', don't really put much thought/research into these kinds of things. They see who looks exciting and talk about those teams a lot, then talk about them so much they just assume they will be very good.

I think you disagrees with me by pretty much agreeing with me.

[Bubb Rubb]

Russell is one of the best QBs we've ever had at State. He gets a lot of grief because he's not the perfect type of QB for the system we run. When you factor in that our receivers, outside of Johnson and Bumphis, were poor route runners and struggled to get open, you see that the struggles weren't all on Russell.

We will be a more dynamic offense next year with Dak at the helm, and everyone will proclaim he is a better QB, and that's just BS. He's a better fit for that scheme. But as far as pure QBs, making checks, throwing timing routes, hanging in the pocket, etc., Tyler is as good as anyone we've had at the position in a long time. I kinda think he was probably born a decade too late. I would've loved to have seen him running Sherrill's offense in 98-99.

[Coach34]

Vandy beat NW.


uhhhhh, no they didnt. NW was 2-0 vs the SEC

[Goat Holder]

If you throw out the Arkansas game (they quit)

What the f*ck? Only MSU fans.

[trob115]

Russell has the best shot of any State Qb in my lifetime of getting drafted. He is definitely SEC caliber and one of the best, if not the best in school history as a pure passer. I think he gets drafted late this year. I think he will show he is better than Wallace to the media types this year.

[CJDAWG85]

Arky didn't quit... We had a lot of things go our way in that game and we capitalized... Same with NW vs. MSU... NW benefited from a lot of self inflicted wounds and capitalized

[Coach34]

Bottom line- we made changes to the offense to suit Russell's ability. The offense needs to be better in 2013 than it was in 2012

[HancockCountyDog]

What the f*ck? Only MSU fans.

He played really well last season against teams that couldn't do shit defensively except for LSU. Don't get me wrong, that means he did what he is supposed to do, but ignoring how he performed against teams with a pulse is somewhat silly.

Nobody is saying he is not a good QB, of course he is. The question was why people are talking about Wallace as opposed to Russell, and I think it has to do with how Russell ended the season. Right or wrong, the last impression you leave on someone is what the remember. Looking at the egg bowl and gator bowl, Russell certainly didn't give people something to remember him by.

[Bubb Rubb]

He played really well last season against teams that couldn't do shit defensively except for LSU. Don't get me wrong, that means he did what he is supposed to do, but ignoring how he performed against teams with a pulse is somewhat silly.

Nobody is saying he is not a good QB, of course he is. The question was why people are talking about Wallace as opposed to Russell, and I think it has to do with how Russell ended the season. Right or wrong, the last impression you leave on someone is what the remember. Looking at the egg bowl and gator bowl, Russell certainly didn't give people something to remember him by.

When judging how a QB looks, you have to take a lot into account. People criticize Russell for holding on the ball too long, for example, and they don't take into account that he is waiting for a receiver to come out of his break, or to come open, or whatever. He throws a pass that gets batted down at the line, but people don't realize that a lineman missed a chip block that was supposed to open that passing lane. He gets sacked but people don't realize that the tackle on the left side got beat like he stole something.

Russell isn't perfect, but there's a lot that goes into how he performed down the stretch. Evaluating him by only how he did "against teams with a pulse," as you put it, is a very, very selective and shitty thing to do, for the reasons I mentioned above.

[Goat Holder]

The question was why people are talking about Wallace as opposed to Russell, and I think it has to do with how Russell ended the season. Right or wrong, the last impression you leave on someone is what the remember. Looking at the egg bowl and gator bowl, Russell certainly didn't give people something to remember him by.

Of course, we all agree on this. The Egg Bowl is why Wallace is hyped and Russell is not. And it'll be opposite of that this November, most likely.

But YOU said throw out the Arkansas game. That's ludicrous. And that's why I commented on it. If you're going to criticize Russell's bad games, give credit for the good ones. Can't throw anything out, that's silly.

[Goat Holder]

It's the MSU QB curse. Our fans are not knowledgeable on this, and never have been. We've crucified our best QBs over the years, and routinely booed them out of the stadium, to the point that their confidence was shot and they wanted nothing to do with the University after that.

[Bubb Rubb]

Bottom line- we made changes to the offense to suit Russell's ability. The offense needs to be better in 2013 than it was in 2012

If you truly coached, you know better than this. Putting TR under center and dropping him back instead of running the option is not the same thing as changing the offense to suit his ability. Our WRs still run the same shitty routes, and the personnel around him are suited for other schemes. It is what it is. I know you love Dak and have been beating the "he's better than Tyler" drum for a long time now. But the fact is if Dak was better, or if Mullen felt the offense would be more productive with Dak in there and us running the offense we had with Relf, then Mullen would be doing that. He's not going to sacrifice wins and offensive productivity for the sake of playing a fifth year senior. We as fans need to stop the practice of killing our own and always thinking the backup QB is the better one.

[HancockCountyDog]

Of course, we all agree on this. The Egg Bowl is why Wallace is hyped and Russell is not. And it'll be opposite of that this November, most likely.

But YOU said throw out the Arkansas game. That's ludicrous. And that's why I commented on it. If you're going to criticize Russell's bad games, give credit for the good ones. Can't throw anything out, that's silly.

If Russell plays great against the SWAC and like shit against good teams, yes you can throw out those games. Now Arkansas wasn't the SWAC, but your comment that you can't throw out performances against bad teams is just silly.

Our QB's should always be judged on how they do against teams we are trying to pass in the hierachy of the SEC. Last year I thought Russell was on his way to establishing himself as an upper tier QB with Murray, McCarron and Manziel. Then the Bama game happened. Then A&M. Then egg bowl, and the worse was the gator bowl.

To me the bigger issue is how is he trending? It certainly isn't up, but luckily for him and us, he gets to play a team that couldn't play defense with 13 guys. Its really the perfect opponent for him to get his head right and really get back on the path he blazed the first half of the season.

[bocfarm]

Dak is a black Tebow with a better arm and Staley is the perfect combination of Randal Cunningham & Cam Newton

Nick Fitzgerald (probably 3rd on the depth chart) is a taller version of Drew Brees

[Goat Holder]

Disagree. He's trending upwards over the long term. He's gotten better every year he's been here, and he's poised for a breakout season.

And comparing him to Murray, McCarron and Manziel is friggin' stupid and you know it. They advantages they have around them are not even comparable to what Russell is working with. Give Russell ONE Amari Cooper type talent and he'd be an All-American. This viewpoint is what I've never understood about our fans. Do you want our QBs to be miracle workers?

You need to temper your expectations. Root them in reality.

[Goat Holder]

Very well said.

[bocfarm]

Disagree. He's trending upwards over the long term. He's gotten better every year he's been here, and he's poised for a breakout season.

And comparing him to Murray, McCarron and Manziel is friggin' stupid and you know it. They advantages they have around them are not even comparable to what Russell is working with. Give Russell ONE Amari Cooper type talent and he'd be an All-American. This viewpoint is what I've never understood about our fans. Do you want our QBs to be miracle workers?

You need to temper your expectations. Root them in reality.

And their NFL offensive line

[Johnson85]

If Russell plays great against the SWAC and like shit against good teams, yes you can throw out those games. Now Arkansas wasn't the SWAC, but your comment that you can't throw out performances against bad teams is just silly.


It's perfectly reasonable to throw out our qb's stats against average competition and compare him to other qb's with their stats against all their competition.**

Holy shit. Show me another qb that does what Russell does when DB's don't have to cover the whole field because there is no deep threat. And it blows my mind that we are criticizing our qb for voluntarily taking shots from 290 lb freaks to give our subpar WRs a little more time to get open. If he threw the ball away to avoid those hits people would call him a p$##%. If he tried to force it when the receivers hadn't created space, we'd claim he made bad decisions. He can't 17ing win.

Russell obviously played like shit his last two games, but damn. It's not like Mullen has better qb's begging to play for him. I'm excited about Dak, but if Dak gets injured next year, is anybody excited about our qb situation? People might ought to appreciate that Russell (1) even considered MSU when the Slytanic was here, (2) put in his time (3) stuck around to play for an offense not tailored for his abilities.

[Coach34]

If you truly coached, you know better than this. Putting TR under center and dropping him back instead of running the option is not the same thing as changing the offense to suit his ability.- sure it is. We have added some new sets, put him under center to help the run game as well as enhance play action passing, and eliminated any need for him to run the football. We dont have to be in the damn I-formation for Tyler to be successful.
Our WRs still run the same shitty routes, and the personnel around him are suited for other schemes. It is what it is.- I disagree aGAIN. We have a completely different looking WR corp this year. We have bigger, more athletic WR's. This is also one of the big fallacies of the Spread vs other offenses- the Spread uses the same type of WR's as any other offense. Mullen and Meyer just had a guy named Percy Harvin that they could do added things with other than running pass routes. Every offense in the country wants slot WR's than are quick as lightning- not just Spread teams.
I know you love Dak and have been beating the "he's better than Tyler" drum for a long time now. But the fact is if Dak was better, or if Mullen felt the offense would be more productive with Dak in there and us running the offense we had with Relf, then Mullen would be doing that.- I did think Dakota would be farther along last year than he was. I was certainly wrong about that. Russell played well at times last year- but the offensive system we ran certainly didnt maximize his strengths. I think we will do more of that this season. The offense in 2013 needs to be better than it was last year. You can whine all you want- but the Relf offense of 2010 was better than our offense last season- even with Russell breaking school records.
He's not going to sacrifice wins and offensive productivity for the sake of playing a fifth year senior. We as fans need to stop the practice of killing our own and always thinking the backup QB is the better one.- Our QB history has been so bad- it's pretty easy to see why some of our fanbase is like that. Especially when Jackie held on to Madkin when Fant was clearly better. Russell is the starter and it's his show to run. He needs to perform and become the draft pick many think he can be. I'm confident he will. I think he can have a helluva season this year. BUT...BUT...if he does falter out the gate vs OK State and then Auburn- we have a competent back-up that can be inserted to run the offense. We have that luxury for a change. I hope Dakota does not end up being the starting QB this year- because that means Russell will have failed miserably and our season will have tanked early on sans injury. But aGAIN- the bottom line is that Russell has got to perform and not throw 4 picks vs a solid but unspectacular Big Ten level team. Him throwing 3 picks in our last scrimmage in concerning. Our D will be vastly improved- but Russell cant be turning the ball over. Thats the bottom line and you know it- we all know it.


response in bold

[HancockCountyDog]

Disagree. He's trending upwards over the long term. He's gotten better every year he's been here, and he's poised for a breakout season.

And comparing him to Murray, McCarron and Manziel is friggin' stupid and you know it. They advantages they have around them are not even comparable to what Russell is working with. Give Russell ONE Amari Cooper type talent and he'd be an All-American. This viewpoint is what I've never understood about our fans. Do you want our QBs to be miracle workers?

You need to temper your expectations. Root them in reality.

This is exactly why Im on TeamDak. You just said it, we don't have capable WR's we don't have an elite OL, trying to run a pro style offense with a slow footed QB is silly in the SEC with these limitations. Its Croomesque. That is my entire point.

I think if you put Russell on GA or Bama, he would put up similar stats as those two guys. I really think his skill set is that good. The problem is that our offense isn't built for that type of offense. Its built for the Chris Relf offense. The road grader, get ready to get run over by our extra man, our 230 lb QB.

It sounds like you want to play it straight, even though you are admitting our talent doesn't provide for success in this offense. That is pure lunacy. The way we should be playing is taking advantage of having a running QB that can throw and put the defense at a disadvantage numbers wise. This worked in 2009, it worked in 2010. It didn't work in 2011 because Croom left us absolute garbage on the OL and it didn't work in 2012 because our QB can't run the ball.

The quickest way to get back to offensive success like 2009 and 2010 is to have a running QB.

Just like you said, Murray, McCarron and Manziel have advantages that Russell doesn't, so why should we put MSU at a disadvantage right out of the gate. If we have a running threat at QB, we would at least have one advantage on offense.

Im not sure how this detoured into this discussion, but oh well. #TeamDak.

[HancockCountyDog]

response in bold

+1;

We all want Russell to be successful, I just think some of us see warning signs that we could be trying to wedge a square peg into a round hole.

[Coach34]

This is exactly why Im on TeamDak. You just said it, we don't have capable WR's we don't have an elite OL, trying to run a pro style offense with a slow footed QB is silly in the SEC with these limitations. Its Croomesque. That is my entire point.
.

This is the crux of the whole thing. We wont have the OL or WR's that the elite SEC teams have- so it would be stupid for us to get back in the damn I full-time and slam it at SEC defenses. We need to do it a little differently.

We can have a solid offense this season- but a great offense? No- not with Russell at QB and the personnel we have. For State to have an upper-level SEC offense- we have to spread it out and have a mobile QB that can make some throws. Relf just couldnt throw it well enough to keep the elite defenses honest. Hopefully Dak, Staley, Williams, Fitzgerald can

[Goat Holder]

This is exactly why Im on TeamDak. You just said it, we don't have capable WR's we don't have an elite OL, trying to run a pro style offense with a slow footed QB is silly in the SEC with these limitations. Its Croomesque. That is my entire point.

I think if you put Russell on GA or Bama, he would put up similar stats as those two guys. I really think his skill set is that good. The problem is that our offense isn't built for that type of offense. Its built for the Chris Relf offense. The road grader, get ready to get run over by our extra man, our 230 lb QB.

It sounds like you want to play it straight, even though you are admitting our talent doesn't provide for success in this offense. That is pure lunacy. The way we should be playing is taking advantage of having a running QB that can throw and put the defense at a disadvantage numbers wise. This worked in 2009, it worked in 2010. It didn't work in 2011 because Croom left us absolute garbage on the OL and it didn't work in 2012 because our QB can't run the ball.

The quickest way to get back to offensive success like 2009 and 2010 is to have a running QB.

Just like you said, Murray, McCarron and Manziel have advantages that Russell doesn't, so why should we put MSU at a disadvantage right out of the gate. If we have a running threat at QB, we would at least have one advantage on offense.

Im not sure how this detoured into this discussion, but oh well. #TeamDak.

Dak will not solve the problems you mention. See the difference in Chris Relf from 2010 and 2011. People seem to forget this.

[smootness]

If Russell plays great against the SWAC and like shit against good teams, yes you can throw out those games. Now Arkansas wasn't the SWAC, but your comment that you can't throw out performances against bad teams is just silly.

Our QB's should always be judged on how they do against teams we are trying to pass in the hierachy of the SEC. Last year I thought Russell was on his way to establishing himself as an upper tier QB with Murray, McCarron and Manziel. Then the Bama game happened. Then A&M. Then egg bowl, and the worse was the gator bowl.

To me the bigger issue is how is he trending? It certainly isn't up, but luckily for him and us, he gets to play a team that couldn't play defense with 13 guys. Its really the perfect opponent for him to get his head right and really get back on the path he blazed the first half of the season.

The issue you're having is that you're only looking at his #'s against the best teams on our schedule, then comparing those with the overall numbers of the other QBs. Go look at Murray's career numbers against the best teams on their schedule and get back to me.

Everyone is going to suffer some statistically when they face better competition.

[Coach34]

Dak will not solve the problems you mention. See the difference in Chris Relf from 2010 and 2011. People seem to forget this.

2011 was different because Relf had cracked ribs and we kept getting offensive linemen hurt- and we didnt have any experienced depth. We simply had the injuries in 2011 that we didnt have in 2010

[Goat Holder]

I disagree on Relf, especially since Russell seemed to run the offense better in 2011. I obviously agree that injuries and depth hampered us, just like they do everybody. But this whole argument is a year old, we all know which side we're on regarding it. It's now time to let the season play out.

[Coach34]

Everyone is going to suffer some statistically when they face better competition.

meh- Mett, Manziel, and Murray all had pretty good numbers vs Bama last year. Shit, Mett threw for 300 yards against them. Those QB's played on teams that could match-up with Bama for the most part. State is not going to have that year in and year out

[smootness]

Murray was ok last year, a little better than Russell against Bama: 18-33, 265, 1-1

Let's look at his other games against good competition last year:
SC: 11-31, 109, 0-1
UF: 12-24, 150, 1-3

Let's look at 2011, his 2nd year as starter:
SC: 19-29, 248, 4-1 very nice
UF: 15-34, 169, 2-1
LSU: 16-40, 163, 1-2
BTW, against State: 13-25, 160, 2-3

So how should Murray be judged? Solely on these games? Because if so, don't try to elevate him to some great level above Russell.

I'm here in Georgia, and believe me, UGA fans were all over talk radio blasting Murray through 2011 and for much of last year, too, for not showing up in big games. They just happened to beat Florida, so it got masked some, and then he didn't embarrass himself against Bama. But to try to insinuate that Russell needs to play better against the top teams in the country in order to reach Murray's status is ludicrous.

It's just that college football fans are extremely short-sighted and fickle. They always assume everyone else's QB (and their own backup) is better than theirs.

[Bubb Rubb]

response in bold

The scheme hasn't changed much at all. We are still a spread offense. We still spread our receivers out and have single back sets. The only thing they are doing differently is putting Russell under center and not asking him to run read-option as much. That Mullen has dramatically changed the offense to suit Russell's strengths is one of the biggest myths perpetrated on message boards. It's the same offense and the same playbook. He's just using different pages of it.

You are talking about the WR corps for THIS year and you know as well as I do that they are all UNPROVEN. The fact that we are looking to rely on Wilson and Ross tells you all you need to know. Morrow has been a disappointment to the coaching staff so far. We have a couple of jitterbugs that play in the slot but we don't have that deep threat. Last year was as experience a WR corps as we've had in a long time and they still sucked for the most part, outside of Johnson and Bumphis, and none of them were deep threats.

These are facts no matter how you want to argue otherwise. If we gave Russell just one deep threat, simplified our pass routes, and gave him a little more time to throw the ball, he'd be mentioned in the same breath as Murray, let alone Wallace. You make it sound like Russell is so limited that we have to dumb down the playbook to suit him, but the fact is that we are doing more with him than we would do with Dak. aGAIN, you are a coach, you should know this stuff. I think your love of "Dakota" doesn't allow you to be objective in this argument. I really like Dak too and I'm excited about his future, but not at the expense of the more skilled, more experienced starter we have now.

[Coach34]

Everybody spreads WR's out and runs one back sets- teams like Bama and LSU just do it less often
Robert Johnson is a deep threat- shit, anybody is a deep threat. You tell that mf'er to run deep. Somebody has to cover them
Also, unproven does not mean incapable, Just means hasnt done it yet


Stop making excuses for Russell before we play a snap.

[Bubb Rubb]

Everybody spreads WR's out and runs one back sets- teams like Bama and LSU just do it less often
Robert Johnson is a deep threat- shit, anybody is a deep threat. You tell that mf'er to run deep. Somebody has to cover them
Also, unproven does not mean incapable, Just means hasnt done it yet


Stop making excuses for Russell before we play a snap.

No excuses. All undisputable facts.