Saw a post from David Murray about Juco's...

[HoopsDawg]

the gist of it said that Jucos in MS are no where near as strong as they were in the Jackie Sherrill days b/c MS high schools, their counselors and college coaches are much better about making sure the most talented players get qualified. This logic makes sense to me. So that leaves you with overlooked guys and guys with rough pasts or transfers playing Juco.

With that in mind, it seems like a big gamble at best, or desperation at worst to go after as many jucos as we are this year. Does anyone know how many committable offers we have out there? I count 10.

[gtowndawg]

Last Chance U really opened my eyes. I'm not comfortable loading up on jucos. We've had some great ones no doubt, but we have others that simply never pan out or don't help until their senior year (so one year of good production for a scholarship player). I just don't see how it can be a consistent strategy but time will tell.

[HancockCountyDog]

Im not sure we have a choice.

Three starters on the OL, plus a backup senior. We need Jucos so we can have some sort of depth otherwise we will have true freshman on the two deep by my count.

Defensively, AJ, Nelson, James, Dale, Calvin, and Coleman are all in the two deep. We need bodies that can play, and it's not like we are competing for five star HS DL, so the Juco route is the only option.

By my count we've got Thomas and Simmons that will have played extensively. That's not enough on the DL next year. We need bodies.

Even if Kobe and Fletcher are ready to contribute, you need at least 6-7 guys that can play on the DL, and I don't see those guys on the roster yet.

We could also use another corner, but it's not as pressing as the DL/OL.

[Big4Dawg]

Our commits:
Pope - grades
Autry - grades
Champion - grades
Pierce - grades
Philips - looked over
Sweat - kicked off Michigan State

[dawgday166]

Im not sure we have a choice.

Three starters on the OL, plus a backup senior. We need Jucos so we can have some sort of depth otherwise we will have true freshman on the two deep by my count.

Defensively, AJ, Nelson, James, Dale, Calvin, and Coleman are all in the two deep. We need bodies that can play, and it's not like we are competing for five star HS DL, so the Juco route is the only option.

By my count we've got Thomas and Simmons that will have played extensively. That's not enough on the DL next year. We need bodies.

Even if Kobe and Fletcher are ready to contribute, you need at least 6-7 guys that can play on the DL, and I don't see those guys on the roster yet.

We could also use another corner, but it's not as pressing as the DL/OL.

This is why I haven't bought into "we'll compete next year for SEC". Not even sure we'll compete much at all as thin as we are on OL & DL. I sorta thought we might compete well within SECW some this year with the seniority on our lines. Maybe can compete in 18 tho. That's if all the OL & DL develop well. Actually, that's if everyone develops well. And we don't lose any coaches to speak of (unless it's OL coach ... that might could help us *****)

[msstate7]

If you were gonna make an all Mullen team, slay, Ballard, Chris white, and McPhee would be on it. There's still some talent in juco

[HoopsDawg]

Our commits:
Pope - grades
Autry - grades
Champion - grades
Pierce - grades
Philips - looked over
Sweat - kicked off Michigan State

That's true, I think the point is, if you can't make the grades to get into D1 these days, then it's a pretty big problem.

[HoopsDawg]

Im not sure we have a choice.

Three starters on the OL, plus a backup senior. We need Jucos so we can have some sort of depth otherwise we will have true freshman on the two deep by my count.

Defensively, AJ, Nelson, James, Dale, Calvin, and Coleman are all in the two deep. We need bodies that can play, and it's not like we are competing for five star HS DL, so the Juco route is the only option.

By my count we've got Thomas and Simmons that will have played extensively. That's not enough on the DL next year. We need bodies.

Even if Kobe and Fletcher are ready to contribute, you need at least 6-7 guys that can play on the DL, and I don't see those guys on the roster yet.

We could also use another corner, but it's not as pressing as the DL/OL.

I agree with everything in the post, but you could also sum up that post by saying we are in big trouble next year. If I had to wager on it, I would say 5-7 this year, and no better than 6-6 next year so I'm not sure if Mullen can survive.

[Johnson85]

If you were gonna make an all Mullen team, slay, Ballard, Chris white, and McPhee would be on it. There's still some talent in juco

There's definitely still talent and as many players as we redshirt, we can take strategic risks on JUCO players without it causing a numbers problem. But it's definitely concerning the number of JUCOs we need this year, although on the flipside it seems like they are pretty desirable JUCOs, with at least Champion, Pierce being people we wanted out of high school. I assume some others were too?

[Johnson85]

I agree with everything in the post, but you could also sum up that post by saying we are in big trouble next year. If I had to wager on it, I would say 5-7 this year, and no better than 6-6 next year so I'm not sure if Mullen can survive.
If Mullen gets to 5-7 and 6-6, and it looks like he has fixed his recruiting problems, I think he will be safe. People might as well accept that he has dug himself a multiyear hole to climb out of. If he's not going to be fired this year (and he's not), it's not going to make sense to fire him next year if it looks like he has addressed recruiting.

[HancockCountyDog]

I agree with everything in the post, but you could also sum up that post by saying we are in big trouble next year. If I had to wager on it, I would say 5-7 this year, and no better than 6-6 next year so I'm not sure if Mullen can survive.

If he is 6-6 with a win over the bears, he will be fine.

I fully believe that his fate is decided on Thanksgiving in 2017, unless we rally.

[NCDawg]

If he is 6-6 with a win over the bears, he will be fine.

I fully believe that his fate is decided on Thanksgiving in 2017, unless we rally.

If we go 4-8 and get clobbered by Ole Miss this year, his fate could be decided this year. Letting Ole Miss beat us 3 straight years is not conducive to staying on as coach.

[RocketDawg]

If we go 4-8 and get clobbered by Ole Miss this year, his fate could be decided this year. Letting Ole Miss beat us 3 straight years is not conducive to staying on as coach.

I guess I don't understand the ultimate importance of beating the Bears. Of course, we want to win it, but why should that be the one make or break game? Granted, is 5-7 with an OM win that much better than 4-8 with an OM loss? Honestly, I think there are some who would have wanted him fired when he lost the first game to them 2 years ago, regardless of other accomplishments.

[Todd4State]

We have never had a coach lose three in a row to Ole Miss and keep their job going back to the 50's.

[msstate7]

I guess I don't understand the ultimate importance of beating the Bears. Of course, we want to win it, but why should that be the one make or break game? Granted, is 5-7 with an OM win that much better than 4-8 with an OM loss? Honestly, I think there are some who would have wanted him fired when he lost the first game to them 2 years ago, regardless of other accomplishments.

Unfortunately, it's pretty much everything... if we were 10-3 if '14 and 9-4 last year, but we beat om this board wouldn't be near as upset with Dan

[Todd4State]

I guess I don't understand the ultimate importance of beating the Bears. Of course, we want to win it, but why should that be the one make or break game? Granted, is 5-7 with an OM win that much better than 4-8 with an OM loss? Honestly, I think there are some who would have wanted him fired when he lost the first game to them 2 years ago, regardless of other accomplishments.

We have to win the Egg Bowl to establish in state dominance. If we proclaim that this is Our State but lose the Egg Bowl every year that is very hollow. The fact that they have to cheat excessively is in our favor long term.

[msstate7]

We have to win the Egg Bowl to establish in state dominance. If we proclaim that this is Our State but lose the Egg Bowl every year that is very hollow. The fact that they have to cheat excessively is in our favor long term.

You admit om has cheated excessively to gain the upper hand on us, but hold Mullen accountable for not beating them too. That kinda seems contridictory

[dawgday166]

To add something: Losing to OM isn't as bad as laying down to OM, which is what happened the last 2 years and in 2012. With our best team under Mullen (and better than OM) and probably our 3rd best team under Mullen (in Starkville). Losing in Starkville is bad, that's very bad.

That kinda stuff happened under Croom plus to Croom the #1 rivalry wasn't OM but Bama.

[Jack Lambert]

It has to do with the 10 point grading scale. Hell in the 90's a 69 was an F. Today 59 is a F and 60 is a D. 90 was a B and now it's an A.

[NCDawg]

We're somewhat lucky we haven't lost to Ole Miss 4 straight years. We won in OT in 2013 by the hair of our chinny chin. We were blown out 3 of the last 4 years.

[RocketDawg]

To add something: Losing to OM isn't as bad as laying down to OM, which is what happened the last 2 years and in 2012. With our best team under Mullen (and better than OM) and probably our 3rd best team under Mullen (in Starkville). Losing in Starkville is bad, that's very bad.

That kinda stuff happened under Croom plus to Croom the #1 rivalry wasn't OM but Bama.

I suppose I agree with Croom. For one thing, I live in Alabama and have to put up with Tide fans daily (like most of you guys do the Bears/Bear fans). But more important, beating Alabama is a more meaningful thing to do ... they're good. The Bears are irrelevant most of the time, but they're trying to achieve relevancy by cheating.

[Todd4State]

You admit om has cheated excessively to gain the upper hand on us, but hold Mullen accountable for not beating them too. That kinda seems contridictory

Why is that contradictory? Dan still has to beat them and it's not like they were that much better than us. It's his job to figure out how to beat them like starting with maybe having someone cover their tight end.

The thing that bothers me the most about it is Dan's attitude which seems to be "I don't care". And if the rumors are true about him giving up because of their cheating that's just as bad because that's being a bitch.

[Todd4State]

To add something: Losing to OM isn't as bad as laying down to OM, which is what happened the last 2 years and in 2012. With our best team under Mullen (and better than OM) and probably our 3rd best team under Mullen (in Starkville). Losing in Starkville is bad, that's very bad.

That kinda stuff happened under Croom plus to Croom the #1 rivalry wasn't OM but Bama.

Actually Croom never lost to Ole Miss in Starkville. Let that sink in for a minute.

[Jack Lambert]

Actually Croom never lost to Ole Miss in Starkville. Let that sink in for a minute.

On the flip side he never won at Ole Miss.

[Todd4State]

On the flip side he never won at Ole Miss.

True but I can tolerate that a lot more than losing in Starkville. The home team has won over 70% of the time since 1991.

[RocketDawg]

Probably one reason losing to them doesn't bother me any more than losing to anybody else is that, when I was in school, we never beat them. It was just a given we would lose. That was back just after their glory days.

[blacklistedbully]

I guess I don't understand the ultimate importance of beating the Bears. Of course, we want to win it, but why should that be the one make or break game? Granted, is 5-7 with an OM win that much better than 4-8 with an OM loss? Honestly, I think there are some who would have wanted him fired when he lost the first game to them 2 years ago, regardless of other accomplishments.

:rolleyes: C'mon, mane!

[CadaverDawg]

Mstate7 is right....We can't put that much importance on beating Ole Miss while also saying OM is about to get hammered for buying great players. I do agree that the preparation and effort in our last few egg bowl's has been pathetic though, and that is more concerning to me than whether we won or lost against a bunch of bought players.

When it's time for Mullen to go, we'll know it. That time isn't right now, and we sure as hell don't need to let Ole Miss's cheating beat us on AND off the field by causing us to fire our best coach ever due to games vs their soon to be under probation program. Think people.

[msstate7]

Mstate7 is right....We can't put that much importance on beating Ole Miss while also saying OM is about to get hammered for buying great players. I do agree that the preparation and effort in our last few egg bowl's has been pathetic though, and that is more concerning to me than whether we won or lost against a bunch of bought players.

When it's time for Mullen to go, we'll know it. That time isn't right now, and we sure as hell don't need to let Ole Miss's cheating beat us on AND off the field by causing us to fire our best coach ever due to games vs their soon to be under probation program. Think people.

I think om's cheating really gave them the upper hand last season and this season. In '14 though, we blew it and Dan deserves the lion's share of the blame.

[CadaverDawg]

I think om's cheating really gave them the upper hand last season and this season. In '14 though, we blew it and Dan deserves the lion share of the blame.

I agree. I just wish people would realize that yes, losing to OM sucks...but we are not a reloading program, and OM is about to go into the shitter with probation...so is losing to a heavily cheating program really worth changing the entire landscape of our program and potentially sending us back to Croom or Orgeron-ish years?? No thanks. I'll take 6-8 wins per year, with 9-10 every 4 or 5 years, and 5 wins every 7-8 years or so. All day & twice on Sunday's.

Now if we go 5-7 this year and then follow it with 5-7....that's a different story. We will never recruit at a high enough level to simply reload. Never. So we will have to accept the occasional shitburger season. OM won't ever recruit well enough to reload either....Legally.

[basedog]

Mstate7 is right....We can't put that much importance on beating Ole Miss while also saying OM is about to get hammered for buying great players. I do agree that the preparation and effort in our last few egg bowl's has been pathetic though, and that is more concerning to me than whether we won or lost against a bunch of bought players.

When it's time for Mullen to go, we'll know it. That time isn't right now, and we sure as hell don't need to let Ole Miss's cheating beat us on AND off the field by causing us to fire our best coach ever due to games vs their soon to be under probation program. Think people.

Totally agree Clint, like the saying goes, "We see the enemy and the enemy is us"! "We eat our own"

If winning is so damn easy please explain to me why after 100 years of football haven't we won more games? Mullen has done more in 8 years than most have done in the history of football at Msu.

[Todd4State]

Mstate7 is right....We can't put that much importance on beating Ole Miss while also saying OM is about to get hammered for buying great players. I do agree that the preparation and effort in our last few egg bowl's has been pathetic though, and that is more concerning to me than whether we won or lost against a bunch of bought players.

When it's time for Mullen to go, we'll know it. That time isn't right now, and we sure as hell don't need to let Ole Miss's cheating beat us on AND off the field by causing us to fire our best coach ever due to games vs their soon to be under probation program. Think people.

The question should be is Dan doing the best he can do and if not what is he doing to fix it? Just because we have a bad history in general doesn't mean we should tolerate mediocrity because of good things done in the past.

[civildawg]

If he is 6-6 with a win over the bears, he will be fine.

I fully believe that his fate is decided on Thanksgiving in 2017, unless we rally.

If he goes 6-6 next year he should be fired no matter what. Man our fan base loves mediocrity.

[Todd4State]

I agree. I just wish people would realize that yes, losing to OM sucks...but we are not a reloading program, and OM is about to go into the shitter with probation...so is losing to a heavily cheating program really worth changing the entire landscape of our program and potentially sending us back to Croom or Orgeron-ish years?? No thanks. I'll take 6-8 wins per year, with 9-10 every 4 or 5 years, and 5 wins every 7-8 years or so. All day & twice on Sunday's.

Now if we go 5-7 this year and then follow it with 5-7....that's a different story. We will never recruit at a high enough level to simply reload. Never. So we will have to accept the occasional shitburger season. OM won't ever recruit well enough to reload either....Legally.

IF we can make a change this offseason we can possibly get someone that can recruit and salvage this class and get us off to a great start next year just as Ole Miss is going on probation at the same time generating excitement and not allowing Ole Miss fans the solace of "well MSU sucks too" for the first year of their probation.

We should be proactive and not wait too see if Dan can turn it around especially when his body language says I don't care. And I will say if Dan did show that he cared I probably would be Ok with another year but generally when people don't care it's extrmely rare that they suddenly start caring again.

[Goldendawg]

Winning seasons should be easier in today's world. You schedule 4 OOC cupcakes( a little harder with the P5 now required and being upset as we were this year), beat the two hopefully bad SEC East teams (which always includes KY), and win a couple of tossup games with equally talented West foes (Arky, Auburn maybe). Still need to be competitive with LSU, aTm, and Bama and beat them every once in a while to get to the next level. UNM should be more easily beaten IF the NCAA hammer ever falls. Please, have the team ready for every game. I don't feel this was case with Bama or UNM the past two years.

[Todd4State]

If he goes 6-6 next year he should be fired no matter what. Man our fan base loves mediocrity.

It's insane. It's not like there aren't multiple examples of MSU waiting too long out there. We tend to wait until the dumpster is engulfed and on fire before going "ok I think coach x is done now". And then we wonder why we can't hire anyone because the previous coach was allowed to recruit shittily for four years trying to turn the thing around before anyone did anything.

[Todd4State]

Winning seasons should be easier in today's world. You schedule 4 OOC cupcakes( a little harder with the P5 now required and being upset as we were this year), beat the two hopefully bad SEC East teams (which always includes KY), and win a couple of tossup games with equally talented West foes (Arky, Auburn maybe). Still need to be competitive with LSU, aTm, and Bama and beat them every once in a while to get to the next level. UNM should be more easily beaten IF the NCAA hammer ever falls. Please, have the team ready for every game. I don't feel this was case with Bama or UNM the past two years.

We haven't been ready for anyone this year other than South Carolina so far. And even then we took our foot off the gas in the second half.

[basedog]

The question should be is Dan doing the best he can do and if not what is he doing to fix it? Just because we have a bad history in general doesn't mean we should tolerate mediocrity because of good things done in the past.

C'mon Todd, you are on a witch hunt! Let the games play out, Dan has done way more good than bad! Geez! You can't find anything positive to say, plus you are like a broken record with the negative comments. You must be on the damn payroll for the agenda. Surely you aren't correct with every negative comment about Dan. Dan hasn't quit, he has made mistakes, I don't think Dan has quit, that would be crazy for a coach who wants out!

[basedog]

It's insane. It's not like there aren't multiple examples of MSU waiting too long out there. We tend to wait until the dumpster is engulfed and on fire before going "ok I think coach x is done now". And then we wonder why we can't hire anyone because the previous coach was allowed to recruit shittily for four years trying to turn the thing around before anyone did anything.

Obviously you haven't looked into our history very well. How many winning coaches have we had over 100 years of football. If winning is so easy at Msu I would think we would have had a much better won/lost record, 100 plus years Todd!

[Goldendawg]

Dan has made "mistakes"? Hope he hasn't been hanging around with "Mr. Mistake" Freeze! LOL

[Really Clark?]

If he goes 6-6 next year he should be fired no matter what. Man our fan base loves mediocrity.

So you would have fired Saban at Michigan St?

[CadaverDawg]

Mediocrity?

2014 was the best season in Mississippi history for a team not going down for cheating. This is the best run in program history. We just lost the starting QB for the Cowboys. This ISNT mediocre! We will never be Bama or LSU...but with consistency we can sneak up and beat them every 4-5 years on our way to 9-10 wins from time to time.

Dan pisses me off A LOT, but we are far from mediocre for a school with our budget, size, location, & competition surrounding us. We are OVERachieving since Mullen arrived, don't kid yourselves. And this is coming from a guy that wants to punch Mullen at least a handful of times each Saturday. At MSU we don't have to settle for 6-6 or 5-7, but we have to know that's going to happen every 5-6 years give or take. Having multiple 9+ win seasons in a 7 year span is HUGE for us. Don't get greedy and send us back into the abyss unless we KNOW 100% Dan has lost it. We aren't there yet and everybody knows it.

You wanna know who takes a job at MSU if Mullen's tenure plus 5-7 or 6-6 gets him fired?? Nobody worth a damn, bc that's a death sentence. There will always be 5-7 or 6-6 at MSU. Reloading is not an option. It just isn't. Unless we want what colonel reb has comin.

I know it's aggravating watching us lose to USA & struggle with UMass, but take a deep breath, look at our situation as a whole, and at least give the man a full season to turn it around. We know he's capable. If he doesn't show signs of fixing it as of this time next season,these comments will be justified. But not now.

[dawgday166]

It has to do with the 10 point grading scale. Hell in the 90's a 69 was an F. Today 59 is a F and 60 is a D. 90 was a B and now it's an A.

THIS ^^^^ is why we lose to the Bears. Dan is recruiting kids that are graded on the 10 pt scale and have to pass the ACT to get into college. Freeze is recruiting kids that are so smart they don't have to take the ACT to get into college. They be smarter than our kids ****

[Todd4State]

C'mon Todd, you are on a witch hunt! Let the games play out, Dan has done way more good than bad! Geez! You can't find anything positive to say, plus you are like a broken record with the negative comments. You must be on the damn payroll for the agenda. Surely you aren't correct with every negative comment about Dan. Dan hasn't quit, he has made mistakes, I don't think Dan has quit, that would be crazy for a coach who wants out!

We'll see how it goes. October is very big for Dan- and potentially even bigger now that Scott is gone. I think Dan is mainly still here because of the money and the fact he couldn't find anyone to pay him what we are.

[dawgday166]

So you would have fired Saban at Michigan St?

Listened to Mike Detillier on Out of Bounds today. Was talking about how a coach at LSU owns the state of Louisiana in recruiting. He said he had many, many conversations with Nick about why he left Mich. St. Saban told him he left cause he could never be #1 in recruiting in his own state at Mich. St., and he wanted to be #1 in his own state.

So to answer your question .... YEP.

[Todd4State]

Obviously you haven't looked into our history very well. How many winning coaches have we had over 100 years of football. If winning is so easy at Msu I would think we would have had a much better won/lost record, 100 plus years Todd!

I know our history very well- better than most. I?m a history nut. And one thing about history is you can either use it as an excuse or you can use it to learn.

I think the main reason why our history has been bad is because we have mismanaged the program over the years and it has just carried over because of the prevailing attitude of ?we can?t? rather than ?how do we fix it??

We should look at our mistakes and then learn from them and improve them. Two major themes stick out if you look at our history- poor scheduling decision especially selling off home games to people like LSU and Florida forcing us to play them on the road and the other one is??hanging on to a failing coach too long.

We?ve corrected the scheduling issue for the most part. We?ll see if we learn from our past mistake of holding on to coaches too long. From what it appears for the most part we haven?t. Which is sad.

[Todd4State]

Mediocrity?

2014 was the best season in Mississippi history for a team not going down for cheating. This is the best run in program history. We just lost the starting QB for the Cowboys. This ISNT mediocre! We will never be Bama or LSU...but with consistency we can sneak up and beat them every 4-5 years on our way to 9-10 wins from time to time.

Dan pisses me off A LOT, but we are far from mediocre for a school with our budget, size, location, & competition surrounding us. We are OVERachieving since Mullen arrived, don't kid yourselves. And this is coming from a guy that wants to punch Mullen at least a handful of times each Saturday. At MSU we don't have to settle for 6-6 or 5-7, but we have to know that's going to happen every 5-6 years give or take. Having multiple 9+ win seasons in a 7 year span is HUGE for us. Don't get greedy and send us back into the abyss unless we KNOW 100% Dan has lost it. We aren't there yet and everybody knows it.

You wanna know who takes a job at MSU if Mullen's tenure plus 5-7 or 6-6 gets him fired?? Nobody worth a damn, bc that's a death sentence. There will always be 5-7 or 6-6 at MSU. Reloading is not an option. It just isn't. Unless we want what colonel reb has comin.

I know it's aggravating watching us lose to USA & struggle with UMass, but take a deep breath, look at our situation as a whole, and at least give the man a full season to turn it around. We know he's capable. If he doesn't show signs of fixing it as of this time next season,these comments will be justified. But not now.

Here's the thing.

We had a team that should have won 11 games last year including the bowl. We won 9. Dak masked a LOT of things last year that aren’t getting masked now. Without Dak we’re probably 6-6 at best last year.

So, essentially because of Dak, Dan is getting a pass on last year from most of our fans. Unfortunately that is only going to likely end up tacking on a year of misery if our “rational” fans get their way.

I don’t see how anyone can look at our team and how they have performed and objectively say that things look like they are going to get better. We haven’t even really played a good team yet aside from LSU and despite the score they dominated us.

We'll worry about getting a coach when the time comes. I think we'll be OK because of what we can offer. There aren't very many SEC jobs that come open every year.

[Really Clark?]

Listened to Mike Detillier on Out of Bounds today. Was talking about how a coach at LSU owns the state of Louisiana in recruiting. He said he had many, many conversations with Nick about why he left Mich. St. Saban told him he left cause he could never be #1 in recruiting in his own state at Mich. St., and he wanted to be #1 in his own state.

So to answer your question .... YEP.

Glad you are honest about it and history is glad the Michigan St AD had more sense.

[dawgday166]

Glad you are honest about it and history is glad the Michigan St AD had more sense.

Saban didn't want to be there (sound familiar). I think they're pretty happy with Dantonio. He's done far better than Saban did there. And he seems to like it there pretty good too. Not saying he won't leave.

ETA: Not everyone is the right fit for a particular job.

[Really Clark?]

Saban didn't want to be there (sound familiar). I think they're pretty happy with Dantonio. He's done far better than Saban did there. And he seems to like it there pretty good too. Not saying he won't leave.

Saban did leave after his 5th year of one 9 win season. His prior 4 he won 6, 6, 7, and 6 games. It then took them 7 years to get to Dantonio. He didn't follow Saban and picked up where he left off. They had 2 winning seasons afterward. Unless a coach losses the team or has a scandal, the stats show that changing coaches in that circumstance at poor or especially average schools the new guy fails even worse. You back to your historic average or worse more times than not. The AD understood and trusted he had the right guy in Saban even though he was hard to work with (none of his coaches wanted to go with him to LSU even though he sent a plane for the ones who wanted to).

[Boya]

Mullen's roster mgt is his weak linl

[dawgday166]

Saban did leave after his 5th year of one 9 win season. His prior 4 he won 6, 6, 7, and 6 games. It then took them 7 years to get to Dantonio. He didn't follow Saban and picked up where he left off. They had 2 winning seasons afterward. Unless a coach losses the team or has a scandal, the stats show that changing coaches in that circumstance at poor or especially average schools the new guy fails even worse. You back to your historic average or worse more times than not. The AD understood and trusted he had the right guy in Saban even though he was hard to work with (none of his coaches wanted to go with him to LSU even though he sent a plane for the ones who wanted to).

I will defer to your knowledge on this.

So here's where I'm coming to for right now (unless the season really tanks ... and I'm not sure what that is at the moment ha). Since the CFB coaching landscape will more than likely be littered with has been or never was coaches next year that are fired after this year, I'm leaning toward giving Mullen another year. Maybe 2 unless we can get a quality proven head coach (sorta like an Urban Meyer was before FL ... Someone like Herman would work too, although he be either gone or staying at Houston I'm thinking). A lot of good coaches are gonna get snatched up next year by other teams, and some historic powers at that.

Now if we lose another DC, Dan would be on borrowed time with me until I could find said type of coach mentioned above.

[basedog]

We'll see how it goes. October is very big for Dan- and potentially even bigger now that Scott is gone. I think Dan is mainly still here because of the money and the fact he couldn't find anyone to pay him what we are.

Thank you!

[basedog]

Here's the thing.

We had a team that should have won 11 games last year including the bowl. We won 9. Dak masked a LOT of things last year that aren’t getting masked now. Without Dak we’re probably 6-6 at best last year.

So, essentially because of Dak, Dan is getting a pass on last year from most of our fans. Unfortunately that is only going to likely end up tacking on a year of misery if our “rational” fans get their way.

I don’t see how anyone can look at our team and how they have performed and objectively say that things look like they are going to get better. We haven’t even really played a good team yet aside from LSU and despite the score they dominated us.

We'll worry about getting a coach when the time comes. I think we'll be OK because of what we can offer. There aren't very many SEC jobs that come open every year.

There you go again, all negative. Shoulda coulda is just talk, 9 wins are good and winning a bowl. The Lsu game is or was a 60 minute contest, I don't think they scored in the second half, no they did not dominate us, they won cause they were more talented. Shoulda coulda is also by two terrible calls.
We are 2-2, isn't always pretty but we lost 2 games by 4 points total, that tells me one more play on either game and we are 4-0. That's how it looks on the positive side, but just like your negative witch hunt the reality is we are even at this point.
As for as history, you again don't get it all correct, fact again is we have had over 100 years to get thing right, seems Mullen is one of a very few to know how to do it and you keep saying we need a change and we aren't even half way done with this season. As Mr Wonderful likes to say Todd, "Stop the madness".
Way too much negative talk!

[Todd4State]

There you go again, all negative. Shoulda coulda is just talk, 9 wins are good and winning a bowl. The Lsu game is or was a 60 minute contest, I don't think they scored in the second half, no they did not dominate us, they won cause they were more talented. Shoulda coulda is also by two terrible calls.
We are 2-2, isn't always pretty but we lost 2 games by 4 points total, that tells me one more play on either game and we are 4-0. That's how it looks on the positive side, but just like your negative witch hunt the reality is we are even at this point.
As for as history, you again don't get it all correct, fact again is we have had over 100 years to get thing right, seems Mullen is one of a very few to know how to do it and you keep saying we need a change and we aren't even half way done with this season. As Mr Wonderful likes to say Todd, "Stop the madness".
Way too much negative talk!

LSU dominated us. The score doesn't indicate that but anyone that actually watched the game that is honest with themselves knows that is the case. We scored on their prevent defense, recovered an onside kick and scored again on their prevent defense. After we stopped them they turned up the heat again and we went three and out. I'm being honest based on what I saw. And that was a team with a lame duck coach and a QB telling other players to leave on twitter.

We've actually had a lot more "right" than a lot of people realize. Paul Davis went to a Liberty Bowl and had his DC poached by Bear Bryant and Ken Donahue was a big reason for Bama's success while the Bear was there. Shira was pretty bad but still managed to go 6-5. I'd say he is the worst coach we had the past 50 years. Tyler won 9 games twice. Bellard won 9 and 8 and scored our biggest win in school history, Felker went 6-5, Jackie's success is well documented including a SEC West Title and the 1999 season where we won 10, Croom even went to and won 8 with a Liberty Bowl title, and Dan has had several 8-9 win seasons.

What's negative is saying "well, we're MSU and we're going to have down seasons. At least it's not 1969- I remember how bad that was." We need more fans holding our coaches accountable instead of giving them passes and hoping that maybe they can turn it around because Frank Beamer did it once and we might have the next Frank Beamer. What's also negative is saying "Well we won't be able to hire anyone good if we fire Dan because it will look bad if we fire him". For all we know Keenum might have someone Ben Howland esque lined up and we don't know about it yet.

And if Dan actually makes changes- I'll give him all the credit in the world for doing so. I gave him full credit for the first half of South Carolina. And if this season ends up 5-7 or 6-6 there better be some changes- and I'm not talking about Sirmon. I am talking about Hevesy being gone.

[dawgday166]

Mullen's roster mgt is his weak linl

Close game management sux too. Don't think we'll have to worry about that much this year tho ******

[basedog]

[QUOTE=Todd4State;621435]LSU dominated us. The score doesn't indicate that but anyone that actually watched the game that is honest with themselves knows that is the case. We scored on their prevent defense, recovered an onside kick and scored again on their prevent defense. After we stopped them they turned up the heat again and we went three and out. I'm being honest based on what I saw. And that was a team with a lame duck coach and a QB telling other players to leave on twitter.

We've actually had a lot more "right" than a lot of people realize. Paul Davis went to a Liberty Bowl and had his DC poached by Bear Bryant and Ken Donahue was a big reason for Bama's success while the Bear was there. Shira was pretty bad but still managed to go 6-5. I'd say he is the worst coach we had the past 50 years. Tyler won 9 games twice. Bellard won 9 and 8 and scored our biggest win in school history, Felker went 6-5, Jackie's success is well documented including a SEC West Title and the 1999 season where we won 10, Croom even went to and won 8 with a Liberty Bowl title, and Dan has had several 8-9 win seasons.

What's negative is saying "well, we're MSU and we're going to have down seasons. At least it's not 1969- I remember how bad that was." We need more fans holding our coaches accountable instead of giving them passes and hoping that maybe they can turn it around because Frank Beamer did it once and we might have the next Frank Beamer. What's also negative is saying "Well we won't be able to hire anyone good if we fire Dan because it will look bad if we fire him". For all we know Keenum might have someone Ben Howland esque lined up and we don't know about it yet.

And if Dan actually makes changes- I'll give him all the credit in the world for doing so. I gave him full credit for the first half of South Carolina. And if this season ends up 5-7 or 6-6 there better be some changes- and I'm not talking about Sirmon. I am talking about Hevesy being gone.[/QUOTE


Lsu was being Lsu Todd. They weren't preventing nothing on offense. They were held to 122 yards, total. Football is a game of 60 minutes not 56, we lost by 3 points. You are wrong
Tyler got fired because he went crazy, he deserved it. Davis was a one hit wonder, JWS was burn out no doubt. But it was time to go.
Mullen is in a different league compared to our past
Put the play station down, u are pretty good at baseball, but football ain't your thing. You obviously didn't play the game long enough and I know you never coached. Being a so called arm chair is no expert.
All this negative stuff because we are 2 plays from being 4-0.

[Todd4State]

[QUOTE=Todd4State;621435]LSU dominated us. The score doesn't indicate that but anyone that actually watched the game that is honest with themselves knows that is the case. We scored on their prevent defense, recovered an onside kick and scored again on their prevent defense. After we stopped them they turned up the heat again and we went three and out. I'm being honest based on what I saw. And that was a team with a lame duck coach and a QB telling other players to leave on twitter.

We've actually had a lot more "right" than a lot of people realize. Paul Davis went to a Liberty Bowl and had his DC poached by Bear Bryant and Ken Donahue was a big reason for Bama's success while the Bear was there. Shira was pretty bad but still managed to go 6-5. I'd say he is the worst coach we had the past 50 years. Tyler won 9 games twice. Bellard won 9 and 8 and scored our biggest win in school history, Felker went 6-5, Jackie's success is well documented including a SEC West Title and the 1999 season where we won 10, Croom even went to and won 8 with a Liberty Bowl title, and Dan has had several 8-9 win seasons.

What's negative is saying "well, we're MSU and we're going to have down seasons. At least it's not 1969- I remember how bad that was." We need more fans holding our coaches accountable instead of giving them passes and hoping that maybe they can turn it around because Frank Beamer did it once and we might have the next Frank Beamer. What's also negative is saying "Well we won't be able to hire anyone good if we fire Dan because it will look bad if we fire him". For all we know Keenum might have someone Ben Howland esque lined up and we don't know about it yet.

And if Dan actually makes changes- I'll give him all the credit in the world for doing so. I gave him full credit for the first half of South Carolina. And if this season ends up 5-7 or 6-6 there better be some changes- and I'm not talking about Sirmon. I am talking about Hevesy being gone.[/QUOTE


Lsu was being Lsu Todd. They weren't preventing nothing on offense. They were held to 122 yards, total. Football is a game of 60 minutes not 56, we lost by 3 points. You are wrong
Tyler got fired because he went crazy, he deserved it. Davis was a one hit wonder, JWS was burn out no doubt. But it was time to go.
Mullen is in a different league compared to our past
Put the play station down, u are pretty good at baseball, but football ain't your thing. You obviously didn't play the game long enough and I know you never coached. Being a so called arm chair is no expert.
All this negative stuff because we are 2 plays from being 4-0.

Tyler was fired because we were on probation. You telling me that us keeping it close against LSU counts but the success of our coaches doesn't count is ironic at best. I'm pretty sure some of the former coaches on here will back up my assessment of the LSU game.

Again, time will tell if I am right or not. I do remember saying last year that Dan likely wouldn't start caring again- and so far I have been mostly right about that. Mostly as in other than one half this year.

[CadaverDawg]

Here's the thing.

We had a team that should have won 11 games last year including the bowl. We won 9. Dak masked a LOT of things last year that aren’t getting masked now. Without Dak we’re probably 6-6 at best last year.

So, essentially because of Dak, Dan is getting a pass on last year from most of our fans. Unfortunately that is only going to likely end up tacking on a year of misery if our “rational” fans get their way.

I don’t see how anyone can look at our team and how they have performed and objectively say that things look like they are going to get better. We haven’t even really played a good team yet aside from LSU and despite the score they dominated us.

We'll worry about getting a coach when the time comes. I think we'll be OK because of what we can offer. There aren't very many SEC jobs that come open every year.

How about the fact that without Dan we wouldn't have ever seen Dak Prescott at MSU. And because of Dan's ability to develop QB's, Dak was what he was at MSU and is now a NFL QB instead of a business man that played TE at a P5 school but never amounted to much.

You want to say "without Dak, Dan sucks"....but want to ignore the "without Dan, who is Dak?"

Plus, Mullen has always developed QB's well....wanna give him more than 3-4 games into Fitz's soph year before giving up on him this time?

I'm not saying Mullen won't earn the hot seat. I'm saying he is not close to it yet, nor should he be. Teams have down years and rebuilding years after losing a transcendent player....especially teams like MSU. We can't just scrap every coach that has a losing season or loses to Ole Miss.

You wanna say Hev & Knox should be gone? Sallach maybe? I can start joining you in your thinking......but Mullen? No. It is nowhere near time to force Mullen out.

[Todd4State]

How about the fact that without Dan we wouldn't have ever seen Dak Prescott at MSU. And because of Dan's ability to develop QB's, Dak was what he was at MSU and is now a NFL QB instead of a business man that played TE at a P5 school but never amounted to much.

You want to say "without Dak, Dan sucks"....but want to ignore the "without Dan, who is Dak?"

Plus, Mullen has always developed QB's well....wanna give him more than 3-4 games into Fitz's soph year before giving up on him this time?

I'm not saying Mullen won't earn the hot seat. I'm saying he is not close to it yet, nor should he be. Teams have down years and rebuilding years after losing a transcendent player....especially teams like MSU. We can't just scrap every coach that has a losing season or loses to Ole Miss.

Good job by Dan with Dak. What about the rest of the team? Running backs, o-line, etc.? It still doesn't mean he should get a total pass on this year.

What was the comment about Fitzgerald about? I haven't said anything bad about him this year and he should clearly start. That just seems random.

As I have said several times on here, you have to look at the big picture and not just solely at wins and losses. I don't like the way we're trending. And I don't need nor do I want to deal with 20+ games of Dan not caring to prove me right.

[basedog]

Good job by Dan with Dak. What about the rest of the team? Running backs, o-line, etc.? It still doesn't mean he should get a total pass on this year.

What was the comment about Fitzgerald about? I haven't said anything bad about him this year and he should clearly start. That just seems random.

As I have said several times on here, you have to look at the big picture and not just solely at wins and losses. I don't like the way we're trending. And I don't need nor do I want to deal with 20+ games of Dan not caring to prove me right.

Damn Todd, did you just say don't look at the wins and losses and look at the big picture? Now I know you don't understand football. Dude, Mullen's big picture is the best we have had in our modern time of history.
You are one of the worse negative witch hunters on your dislike for Mullen. You said you know more about our history of football but you failed badly!
That is insane thinking it I should say statement.
Damn!

[Todd4State]

Damn Todd, did you just say don't look at the wins and losses and look at the big picture? Now I know you don't understand football. Dude, Mullen's big picture is the best we have had in our modern time of history.
You are one of the worse negative witch hunters on your dislike for Mullen. You said you know more about our history of football but you failed badly!
That is insane thinking it I should say statement.
Damn!

No. I clearly said you can't look SOLELY at the wins and losses. Wins and losses are part of the big picture- but they aren't the only thing.

[basedog]

No. I clearly said you can't look SOLELY at the wins and losses. Wins and losses are part of the big picture- but they aren't the only thing.

LOL, the agenda lives in you Todd. Winning is the most important thing, losing gets your ass fired. Our overall football history sucks! JWS gave us life and hope, sustained 12 years which is tops. Mullen has taken over a much worse situation than JWS, his big picture is clear as the sky is blue.
I could kick Mullen in the ass, but he is a proven winner and we are one of the worse all time losing programs in the SEC. There is no way and the other agenda guys should be on your witch hunt when we have only played a third of the season.
You are so for off it makes me laugh with you thinking you know such much about our history and the things you say about Mullen. With your thinking we should throw in the towel.
I laugh with your way off statement about winning/losing and the big picture. It's right up there with 34 saying Cohen should be fired after he bunted in the first inning. All Cohen did is win the Sec didn't he. And know back to you and your witch hunt.

[Todd4State]

LOL, the agenda lives in you Todd. Winning is the most important thing, losing gets your ass fired. Our overall football history sucks! JWS gave us life and hope, sustained 12 years which is tops. Mullen has taken over a much worse situation than JWS, his big picture is clear as the sky is blue.
I could kick Mullen in the ass, but he is a proven winner and we are one of the worse all time losing programs in the SEC. There is no way and the other agenda guys should be on your witch hunt when we have only played a third of the season.
You are so for off it makes me laugh with you thinking you know such much about our history and the things you say about Mullen. With your thinking we should throw in the towel.
I laugh with your way off statement about winning/losing and the big picture. It's right up there with 34 saying Cohen should be fired after he bunted in the first inning. All Cohen did is win the Sec didn't he. And know back to you and your witch hunt.

I know our history. I also have perspective on where we are now and what we could be/should be. It should be better than it is now. It's more than just about the past. Just because we were winning the past few years doesn't mean we are reaching our potential. Just like Polk in the 2000's in baseball was winning but not at the level we could and should have been. He had some recruiting issues just like Dan as well.

You'll never understand that because you just look at our history and think that we should suck because "we always have"- yet you call me negative.

[basedog]

I know our history. I also have perspective on where we are now and what we could be/should be. It should be better than it is now. It's more than just about the past. Just because we were winning the past few years doesn't mean we are reaching our potential. Just like Polk in the 2000's in baseball was winning but not at the level we could and should have been. He had some recruiting issues just like Dan as well.

You'll never understand that because you just look at our history and think that we should suck because "we always have"- yet you call me negative.

Not only are you negative, unless u walked the beach and found a bottle and made a wish with Jenny popping out. You sure don't have a clue about our history as you say nor can you predict the future. Pretty arrogant for you to say or think you know what is best. Like I told you earlier, obviously you didn't play a lot of football except your play station as I recall you played in the band. Also you never coached a day in your life so you could never be a Dan Mullen.
As I keep reading your negative post and not giving Mullen any credit, it is so plain you missed your calling with at the Clariin Ledger. U and Fat Boy have a bunch in common!
I've played more sports, I've coached more sports, both at the college level. I will give you credit for playing more play station football as I never have pretended to be a player or coach.

Learn to be more positive when dealing with my school. 4 games isn't the future, 6 straight bowl games is a bright history moment. Some of the few bright moments.

[Really Clark?]

I know our history. I also have perspective on where we are now and what we could be/should be. It should be better than it is now. It's more than just about the past. Just because we were winning the past few years doesn't mean we are reaching our potential. Just like Polk in the 2000's in baseball was winning but not at the level we could and should have been. He had some recruiting issues just like Dan as well.

You'll never understand that because you just look at our history and think that we should suck because "we always have"- yet you call me negative.

So you know more than Byrne? Who told several of us that the pieces are coming together but it was going to take a full generation, the right HC hire and for us to get to $75 MIL annual budget for a decade. If we were lucky we could get there in 10 years. This was to raise our floor to legitimate solid program. If we got a once a lifetime coach help push us to a consistent Top 15 team. And this was before Mullen was hired.

[Cooterpoot]

No. I clearly said you can't look SOLELY at the wins and losses. Wins and losses are part of the big picture- but they aren't the only thing.

Yes they are. Otherwise going 10-0 with a natty could get you fired. See how stupid that sounds? You need to step away from the interwebs for awhile. Mullen isn't getting fired this year. Unless he's caught cracking little kids or something, we aren't going to fire him.

[basedog]

Yes they are. Otherwise going 10-0 with a natty could get you fired. See how stupid that sounds? You need to step away from the interwebs for awhile. Mullen isn't getting fired this year. Unless he's caught cracking little kids or something, we aren't going to fire him.

He just reboots his play station, so losing want eliminate his game.

[basedog]

So you know more than Byrne? Who told several of us that the pieces are coming together but it was going to take a full generation, the right HC hire and for us to get to $75 MIL annual budget for a decade. If we were lucky we could get there in 10 years. This was to raise our floor to legitimate solid program. If we got a once a lifetime coach help push us to a consistent Top 15 team. And this was before Mullen was hired.

He mentioned history of coaches. He went back to the 60's.

Davis was famous for his great line "Catch us if you can" after a 4-0 start, we finished losing 6 straight. Losing record overall.

Shira who I knew very well, good man, bad HC. Losing record overall.

Tyler, may be the craziest coach in our history. Stole the "slush fund mone" then told everyone to turn him in. Put us on probation.

Bellard, won on Tyler's cheating, didn't recruit, may be the most hard headed coach in our history. Losing record overall.

Rocky, way to in-experienced to be a HC, started to recruit at the end but it was to late, loosing record overall.

JWS, The Kang, gave credit to Rocky for leaving him talent, gave our program life, enough said, even overall record.

Croom, let's just leave it at loosing record overall.

Mullen, his record speaks for itself, to be continued.

Looking back even further it's not much better. In saying that, Todd has the answers to solve our problems, go figure?

[Johnson85]

Yes they are. Otherwise going 10-0 with a natty could get you fired. See how stupid that sounds? You need to step away from the interwebs for awhile. Mullen isn't getting fired this year. Unless he's caught cracking little kids or something, we aren't going to fire him.

That doesn't make sense (aside from the part about getting a natty while only playing 10 games). Going undefeated and winning a natty is enough to trump everything else in teh big picture, but the way to show that wins and losses are the only thing is to show that nothing is looked at other than wins and losses, which is obviously wrong. There are lots of situations where the wins aren't there, but there other signs that things are improving or good that justify a coach keeping his job. Bert didn't have the wins his first few years, but the program was doing ok otherwise, and he was on a good trend. Stansbury wouldn't have gotten fired solely for wins and losses, but he had significant discipline problesm with his team and didn't really have a feasible path to fix it.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

He mentioned history of coaches. He went back to the 60's.

Davis was famous for his great line "Catch us if you can" after a 4-0 start, we finished losing 6 straight. Losing record overall.

Shira who I knew very well, good man, bad HC. Losing record overall.

Tyler, may be the craziest coach in our history. Stole the "slush fund mone" then told everyone to turn him in. Put us on probation.

Bellard, won on Tyler's cheating, didn't recruit, may be the most hard headed coach in our history. Losing record overall.

Rocky, way to in-experienced to be a HC, started to recruit at the end but it was to late, loosing record overall.

JWS, The Kang, gave credit to Rocky for leaving him talent, gave our program life, enough said, even overall record.

Croom, let's just leave it at loosing record overall.

Mullen, his record speaks for itself, to be continued.

Looking back even further it's not much better. In saying that, Todd has the answers to solve our problems, go figure?


So were those just bad hires or did we trip over our own dicks for 40 years or both?

[basedog]

So were those just bad hires or did we trip over our own dicks for 40 years or both?

I think the records and what I said speaks volumes. When Mullen is done we will open up a new chapter, but for now he is the best over this time frame but yet some think we can do better. When we get to the point we can hire a AD for $1.06 million, and weight and conditioning Coach $600K, wake me up. Bottom line, whether Mullen is burn out or wants out, he still is our Coach, I'm for letting the season play out as I don't have a Jenny in the bottle like someone else. But I do know winning is good and running a clean program is good. He also handles discipline very well, very seldom do you read about our players in trouble, it happens not much compared to most.

[Cooterpoot]

That doesn't make sense (aside from the part about getting a natty while only playing 10 games). Going undefeated and winning a natty is enough to trump everything else in teh big picture, but the way to show that wins and losses are the only thing is to show that nothing is looked at other than wins and losses, which is obviously wrong. There are lots of situations where the wins aren't there, but there other signs that things are improving or good that justify a coach keeping his job. Bert didn't have the wins his first few years, but the program was doing ok otherwise, and he was on a good trend. Stansbury wouldn't have gotten fired solely for wins and losses, but he had significant discipline problesm with his team and didn't really have a feasible path to fix it.


How long was Stansbury here? He was given a very long time and he wasn't making the NCAA tournament. That's a crazy argument.
Wins are all that matter. It's whether or not 8 wins are good enough or 10 wins are required etc. And having one bad season isn't grounds for firing Mullen. Now if next year sucks, we can talk. But this year, he's not getting fired. Hell, Briles almost survived the problems at Baylor because of the wins. Just got to be too much. UM isn't firing Freeze for cheating unless the NCAA basically requires them to. Why? because of the wins.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

I think the records and what I said speaks volumes. When Mullen is done we will open up a new chapter, but for now he is the best over this time frame but yet some think we can do better. When we get to the point we can hire a AD for $1.06 million, and weight and conditioning Coach $600K, wake me up. Bottom line, whether Mullen is burn out or wants out, he still is our Coach, I'm for letting the season play out as I don't have a Jenny in the bottle like someone else. But I do know winning is good and running a clean program is good. He also handles discipline very well, very seldom do you read about our players in trouble, it happens not much compared to most.

I agree with most of that, but I still think we handicapped ourselves a good bit too. I really hope with the influx of Juco's that your last sentence doesn't change.

[basedog]

I agree with most of that, but I still think we handicapped ourselves a good bit too. I really hope with the influx of Juco's that your last sentence doesn't change.

And I agree, we have handicapped ourselves.

[maroonmania]

He mentioned history of coaches. He went back to the 60's.

Davis was famous for his great line "Catch us if you can" after a 4-0 start, we finished losing 6 straight. Losing record overall.

Shira who I knew very well, good man, bad HC. Losing record overall.

Tyler, may be the craziest coach in our history. Stole the "slush fund mone" then told everyone to turn him in. Put us on probation.

Bellard, won on Tyler's cheating, didn't recruit, may be the most hard headed coach in our history. Losing record overall.

Rocky, way to in-experienced to be a HC, started to recruit at the end but it was to late, loosing record overall.

JWS, The Kang, gave credit to Rocky for leaving him talent, gave our program life, enough said, even overall record.

Croom, let's just leave it at loosing record overall.

Mullen, his record speaks for itself, to be continued.

Looking back even further it's not much better. In saying that, Todd has the answers to solve our problems, go figure?

The only thing I will mention that has helped Mullen during this period in the SEC that gives him a slight advantage (over other coaches we've had in our history) is that it is now absolutely easier to win OOC games than it has ever been. Still as hard as ever to win in the conference but now you have a really great shot to be 4-0 OOC. It certainly didn't used to be that way at MSU but rising tides in the SEC lifts all boats and has given us advantages over regional teams not in the SEC that we have never had. Now the rule that is forcing us to play one P5 team OOC is certainly going to hurt in that area going forward but we've had a couple of years where Mullen has been able to use a 4-0 OOC record to go along with a 2-6 SEC record and still make a bowl. In years past those would have been 5-6 seasons or worse before the 12 game schedule and the extra advantages we have against OOC teams.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

The only thing I will mention that has helped Mullen during this period in the SEC that gives him a slight advantage (over other coaches we've had in our history) is that it is now absolutely easier to win OOC games than it has ever been. Still as hard as ever to win in the conference but now you have a really great shot to be 4-0 OOC. It certainly didn't used to be that way at MSU but rising tides in the SEC lifts all boats and has given us advantages over regional teams not in the SEC that we have never had. Now the rule that is forcing us to play one P5 team OOC is certainly going to hurt in that area going forward but we've had a couple of years where Mullen has been able to use a 4-0 OOC record to go along with a 2-6 SEC record and still make a bowl. In years past those would have been 5-6 seasons or worse before the 12 game schedule and the extra advantages we have against OOC teams.

Something else I just thought about to add...we went from November 3, 1962 to November 1, 1986 without playing Bama in Starkville. That's almost 25 years without an on campus home game!!! From 1960 to 1992, we played in Baton Rouge 21 times, with 7 straight in the 60's. We stopped playing them on campus in 1923 and didn't return to Starkville until 1982. I could go on and on with examples of this....

[Really Clark?]

The only thing I will mention that has helped Mullen during this period in the SEC that gives him a slight advantage (over other coaches we've had in our history) is that it is now absolutely easier to win OOC games than it has ever been. Still as hard as ever to win in the conference but now you have a really great shot to be 4-0 OOC. It certainly didn't used to be that way at MSU but rising tides in the SEC lifts all boats and has given us advantages over regional teams not in the SEC that we have never had. Now the rule that is forcing us to play one P5 team OOC is certainly going to hurt in that area going forward but we've had a couple of years where Mullen has been able to use a 4-0 OOC record to go along with a 2-6 SEC record and still make a bowl. In years past those would have been 5-6 seasons or worse before the 12 game schedule and the extra advantages we have against OOC teams.

So tired of this OOC argument. Before 1970 we played 10 reg season games a year (I know earlier it was less but for time sake). Only 5-6 of those games were SEC for the bulk of the 60's, twice played 7 SEC games I think Tulane was the SEC team. We played non majors like Richmond, La Tech, Tampa, Samford, and Arkansas St and a weak Ind USM, nearly every year we had those type of teams on schedule.

Then from 1970-1991 we went to an 11 game reg season. Only 6-7 of those were SEC games. So again, 4-5 OOC. Nearly every season in the 1970's and for several of the 80's we played a non major or extremely weak DI. Sometimes both.

1992 started the 8 SEC game seasons. We still had weak OOC games. Ark State, ULM, East Tenn, etc. So I don't see the advantage Mullen has had getting to play 8 conference teams a season when some years we only played 5. The going to a 12 game schedule vs 10 didn't add OOC games, it added conference games.

[Jarius]

So tired of this OOC argument. Before 1970 we played 10 reg season games a year (I know earlier it was less but for time sake). Only 5-6 of those games were SEC for the bulk of the 60's, twice played 7 SEC games I think Tulane was the SEC team. We played non majors like Richmond, La Tech, Tampa, Samford, and Arkansas St and a weak Ind USM, nearly every year we had those type of teams on schedule.

Then from 1970-1991 we went to an 11 game reg season. Only 6-7 of those were SEC games. So again, 4-5 OOC. Nearly every season in the 1970's and for several of the 80's we played a non major or extremely weak DI. Sometimes both.

1992 started the 8 SEC game seasons. We still had weak OOC games. Ark State, ULM, East Tenn, etc. So I don't see the advantage Mullen has had getting to play 8 conference teams a season when some years we only played 5. The going to a 12 game schedule vs 10 didn't add OOC games, it added conference games.


We now have huge advantages over those non power 5 teams that we are playing whereas we used to have some advantages over them but it wasn't as big. When we play any team that isn't power 5 in 2016 and we should skull drag them. We have a much bigger budget, much better facilities, and coaches that should be way out of their league and that should cause us to have way better players. It hasn't always been that way.

Also, money is becoming less and less of a factor between us and the rest of the conference, even though we are still at the bottom of the league money wise. Once you get to the point to where the entire conference is income wise, money should not be a crutch argument that we use to accept mediocrity. Prestige? Yea that is still an issue. Our 120 yeas of sucking? Yea that still haunts us. Our small state with 2 SEC schools? Yea that's a factor. Money really isn't that huge of a deal right now. We have great facilities, great coaches, and great stadiums.

[basedog]

I can tell you when things started getting somewhat better, the hiring of Dr Z, then we went down some with the next few Prez. Now with Keenum we have gotten up again.

Also, the Sec back in the early years wasn't the power house it is today. I could care less how or who we beat, winning trumps losing everyday, all day and everytime. Mullen has probably the best all time record in Msu history for victories against OOC foes. He probably has close to the most Sec wins, he is the only one to take us to 6 straight bowls. His record speaks for itself, period, you haters can twist all you want but it is what it is, facts!

P.S. very soon Mullen will either be fired or get another job, when he does, the agenda will be, I told you so. Mark it down.

[Really Clark?]

We now have huge advantages over those non power 5 teams that we are playing whereas we used to have some advantages over them but it wasn't as big. When we play any team that isn't power 5 in 2016 and we should skull drag them. We have a much bigger budget, much better facilities, and coaches that should be way out of their league and that should cause us to have way better players. It hasn't always been that way.

Also, money is becoming less and less of a factor between us and the rest of the conference, even though we are still at the bottom of the league money wise. Once you get to the point to where the entire conference is income wise, money should not be a crutch argument that we use to accept mediocrity. Prestige? Yea that is still an issue. Our 120 yeas of sucking? Yea that still haunts us. Our small state with 2 SEC schools? Yea that's a factor. Money really isn't that huge of a deal right now. We have great facilities, great coaches, and great stadiums.

But those advantages are just now coming into play. Our budget has grown tremendously in recent years. But the gap over the last 5 years in total still has us $200-300 MIL behind the SEC average. The gap between us and some of those non Power 5 schools you are talking about is $100-150 MIL at best and that just jumped in the last few years. USA and Troy for example are just a little below what our budget was when Mullen arrived. We are just now really able to start to really separate ourselves significantly from those schools. But not his first 4-5 years.

[Todd4State]

So you know more than Byrne? Who told several of us that the pieces are coming together but it was going to take a full generation, the right HC hire and for us to get to $75 MIL annual budget for a decade. If we were lucky we could get there in 10 years. This was to raise our floor to legitimate solid program. If we got a once a lifetime coach help push us to a consistent Top 15 team. And this was before Mullen was hired.

I agree with Byrne. And we have made progress as an athletic dept. The question is whether Dan is a "once in a lifetime coach" and I don't think he is and I believe we can do better than what we are getting.

If you think Dan is a once in a lifetime coach you're way off.

[Todd4State]

Yes they are. Otherwise going 10-0 with a natty could get you fired. See how stupid that sounds? You need to step away from the interwebs for awhile. Mullen isn't getting fired this year. Unless he's caught cracking little kids or something, we aren't going to fire him.

What if we go 10-0 and then our coach pulls a Petrino? Or gets us on probation?

Yeah there are more things than just wins and losses.

[Really Clark?]

I agree with Byrne. And we have made progress as an athletic dept. The question is whether Dan is a "once in a lifetime coach" and I don't think he is and I believe we can do better than what we are getting.

If you think Dan is a once in a lifetime coach you're way off.

I didn't say Dan was. He was saying that the only way it happens sooner than in a generation is IF you got a once in a lifetime coach. Then you might get to that point in 10 years WITH all the other things helping as well. But in all fairness for the majority of our lives of the posters on this board he is pretty close to once in a lifetime guy. At a minimum he was hoping for someone to raise the floor over the first 5 years. Dan exceeded that to a good degree. In fact, looking at weak schools in Power 5 conferences there are not many better over his first 7 years. Very few.

He also knew we had to completely reboot our brand and restructure how we can attack positioning ourselves through the first decade as an average to above average program. Dan has done that and I have said this to you before it was going to take a min of a decade to get the structure right. I don't know if Dan is going to be the guy to lead us entering the second phase but he has far exceeded the first phase of what we are trying to accomplish.

[basedog]

I agree with Byrne. And we have made progress as an athletic dept. The question is whether Dan is a "once in a lifetime coach" and I don't think he is and I believe we can do better than what we are getting.

If you think Dan is a once in a lifetime coach you're way off.

Nobody is saying he is a lifetime Coach Todd, what we all or most are saying he has done good things and let this year play out. Pay more attention, I think most don't care right now about what you or I think about Mullen and who can do better. Just wait and see you keep posting the same ole stuff over and over. We all know you want him gone and fine, but not now!

[Todd4State]

I didn't say Dan was. He was saying that the only way it happens sooner than in a generation is IF you got a once in a lifetime coach. Then you might get to that point in 10 years WITH all the other things helping as well. But in all fairness for the majority of our lives of the posters on this board he is pretty close to once in a lifetime guy. At a minimum he was hoping for someone to raise the floor over the first 5 years. Dan exceeded that to a good degree. In fact, looking at weak schools in Power 5 conferences there are not many better over his first 7 years. Very few.

He also knew we had to completely reboot our brand and restructure how we can attack positioning ourselves through the first decade as an average to above average program. Dan has done that and I have said this to you before it was going to take a min of a decade to get the structure right. I don't know if Dan is going to be the guy to lead us entering the second phase but he has far exceeded the first phase of what we are trying to accomplish.

Ok so let's go try to get a one in a lifetime coach then.

[Todd4State]

Nobody is saying he is a lifetime Coach Todd, what we all or most are saying he has done good things and let this year play out. Pay more attention, I think most don't care right now about what you or I think about Mullen and who can do better. Just wait and see you keep posting the same ole stuff over and over. We all know you want him gone and fine, but not now!

Really Clark was perfectly capable of telling me that he didn't say that but I'm sure he appreciates your help.**

Ironic that you keep posting over and over that I keep saying the same things ove and over.

[Really Clark?]

Ok so let's go try to get a one in a lifetime coach then.

Would love to. No where as simple as it sounds as you can't ever know at the time of the hire.

[basedog]

Really Clark was perfectly capable of telling me that he didn't say that but I'm sure he appreciates your help.**

Ironic that you keep posting over and over that I keep saying the same things ove and over.

LOL, I'm pretty sure you need a whole lot help Todd, I think the play station game has messed your thinking on real life football.

I'm tired of listen to your play station comments, so I will ask, have you updated to the newest and latest version of play station. You most definitely have way more experience with play station than I, so +1.

P.S., Mullen has been our lifetime Coach. I can only pray and hope the next one can at least be as good and hopefully better, but that's gonna be several more games before the next chapter. We eat our own!

[shannondawg]

I'm intrigued , you would get rid of a winning coach, in hope of getting a once in a lifetime coach? How many hires do we have to go through to get him? And when will we know we got him or not? And who's lifetime?

[pilldawg]

Why is that contradictory? Dan still has to beat them and it's not like they were that much better than us. It's his job to figure out how to beat them like starting with maybe having someone cover their tight end.

The thing that bothers me the most about it is Dan's attitude which seems to be "I don't care". And if the rumors are true about him giving up because of their cheating that's just as bad because that's being a bitch.

The Mullen doesn't care narrative is ridiculous. He is just getting beat. He cares.

[bulldawg28]

Ok so let's go try to get a one in a lifetime coach then.

Lol...Dude this isn't highschool football

[Todd4State]

Would love to. No where as simple as it sounds as you can't ever know at the time of the hire.

We know the one we have currently isn't so why hold on to him? We can't find a lifetime coach holding on to the average one.

And never said it was easy. That's why we should hire someone with head coaching experience next time as I would imagine if we knew about Hevesy and Dan's recruiting and revolving door DC's I doubt we would hire him given hindsight.

[Todd4State]

LOL, I'm pretty sure you need a whole lot help Todd, I think the play station game has messed your thinking on real life football.

I'm tired of listen to your play station comments, so I will ask, have you updated to the newest and latest version of play station. You most definitely have way more experience with play station than I, so +1.

P.S., Mullen has been our lifetime Coach. I can only pray and hope the next one can at least be as good and hopefully better, but that's gonna be several more games before the next chapter. We eat our own!

If you don't like what I have to say you can always kiss my ass and not read it. You have options. And you aren't totally our own anymore paying tuition in Oxford.

[Todd4State]

The Mullen doesn't care narrative is ridiculous. He is just getting beat. He cares.

He cares- but very obviously not like he should.

[basedog]

If you don't like what I have to say you can always kiss my ass and not read it. You have options. And you aren't totally our own anymore paying tuition in Oxford.

LOL again. Now you want to get nasty with ass kissing. You are making a fool of yourself Todd.

Obviously you don't have kids, I may love Msu and hate Ole Miss, but I love my family a whole lot more than where she attends her choice of colleges. Not bad for a free education either.

Do band members get slobber knocked and have snot bubbles come out their nose when they miss a note or can't keep a straight line? Let me know when u update your play station, I'm hoping it helps and makes you a lifetime arm chair wanna be know it all what's best for Msu athletics.

Mr Play Station.

[Activated Alpha]

I say we throw a cool 4 million and some sacrificial co-eds in front of Petrino to lure, I mean persuade, him to come here

[Todd4State]

LOL again. Now you want to get nasty with ass kissing. You are making a fool of yourself Todd.

Obviously you don't have kids, I may love Msu and hate Ole Miss, but I love my family a whole lot more than where she attends her choice of colleges. Not bad for a free education either.

Do band members get slobber knocked and have snot bubbles come out their nose when they miss a note or can't keep a straight line? Let me know when u update your play station, I'm hoping it helps and makes you a lifetime arm chair wanna be know it all what's best for Msu athletics.

Mr Play Station.

How much rent do I owe you for living in your head? I feel bad for living rent free.

And I find it very ironic that you think you know what is best for MSU. Does that not make you an arm chair wanna be too?

[Todd4State]

Oh and one other thing... The ONLY reason I did band was so I could get a free education at the college of my dreams. And at least that's Mississippi State University while we're talking about free education here.

[basedog]

How much rent do I owe you for living in your head? I feel bad for living rent free.

And I find it very ironic that you think you know what is best for MSU. Does that not make you an arm chair wanna be too?

Not my head, my ass. I outgrew folks like you a long time ago. I have never said I know what is best for Msu future, but you have over and over again. Never arm chair for me, I've coached at the high school and college level. Did you coach band? Mr Play Station.

[Really Clark?]

We know the one we have currently isn't so why hold on to him? We can't find a lifetime coach holding on to the average one.

And never said it was easy. That's why we should hire someone with head coaching experience next time as I would imagine if we knew about Hevesy and Dan's recruiting and revolving door DC's I doubt we would hire him given hindsight.

And that's the disconnect I think we have he is not average. You believe he is average while he has one of the better win percentages above the school's history in the league. That is a major barometer in determining how successful a coach is at that school. Let's try this who is a good coach in your mind? Not once in a lifetime type but just a good coach

[dawgday166]

I say we throw a cool 4 million and some sacrificial co-eds in front of Petrino to lure, I mean persuade, him to come here

You might be onto something here ****

[basedog]

Oh and one other thing... The ONLY reason I did band was so I could get a free education at the college of my dreams. And at least that's Mississippi State University while we're talking about free education here.

That's great! Your best post in a while, something positive.

+1

[Todd4State]

Not my head, my ass. I outgrew folks like you a long time ago. I have never said I know what is best for Msu future, but you have over and over again. Never arm chair for me, I've coached at the high school and college level. Did you coach band? Mr Play Station.

Please. I'm old enough.

You absolutely are telling me what you think is best for MSU you're just too hypocritical to even see it.

Congrats on being a coach. I'm still entitled to my opinion and that doesn't make you right.

And being a coach doesn't make you an expert on administration. Ask Scott Stricklin former cheerleader.

[Todd4State]

That's great! Your best post in a while, something positive.

+1

**** off

[Todd4State]

And that's the disconnect I think we have he is not average. You believe he is average while he has one of the better win percentages above the school's history in the league. That is a major barometer in determining how successful a coach is at that school. Let's try this who is a good coach in your mind? Not once in a lifetime type but just a good coach

Look at who you are comparing him too- Shira, Felker, Croom.

I'm comparing him to Herman, Fuente, Fleck etc.

But yes agree that's the disconnect.

[basedog]

**** off

Stay classy Mr Play Station.

[Really Clark?]

Look at who you are comparing him too- Shira, Felker, Croom.

I'm comparing him to Herman, Fuente, Fleck etc.

But yes agree that's the disconnect.

I believe I said I was comparing him to the rest of the league vs their school's history. But you are being obtuse to think we don't have to over come that history. But fine, don't know why you only choose guys with short track records and not in Power 5 conferences, Fleck I think of a good coach as of today is a .500 coach at a school who has won .519 of their games in history, so he is in the negative still. Fuente .531 win percentage at Memphis, their history is .475. Mullen is .606 vs our history of .472. For comparison as well with Fleck and Fuente, Mullen was .566 his first 4 years. In the SEC. Mullen has raised our historic avg from .472 to almost .500 in less than 8 years. He is a good coach.

Herman I think may end up being great but he isn't ranked yet because he doesn't have enough games. He is like .944 which will never last

[Todd4State]

Stay classy Mr Play Station.

Sorry about that. I'll focus on your lack of sports knowledge next time.

[oldtrickdawg]

How badly is winning trumping ideology ? Every opportunity I have had in my travels in recent years I questioned Auburn fans about their Cam Newton national championship...The common thread was their offering that nothing was proven...Now, we all know there was criminal activity there, most likely, lying there ,most likely, and some sort of grade manipulation there, most likely...Still the Auburn fans ,with whom I have spoken, clung to their nothing proven mantra...The poster child for vice and corruption, the NCAA, actually facilitated Auburn's winning the title by doing their FBI impersonation and the four monkey act...You know, see no evil, hear no evil,etc...In fairness to the NCAA, I can't imagine how many staff they must employ just to spin the truck load of indiscretions which are occurring at any moment..Anyone who believes college football is operating within the published rules is either living under a rock or uninformed...Generally, the JC recruits are suffering from grade stress, criminal stress, personality stress, or some other wart...Having said all that, Auburn won the national title with with a guy of about a tenth grader's maturity, didn't appear to be too bright, and turned down,allegedly, I don't actually know, 130 K from us to play at Auburn...

[Todd4State]

I believe I said I was comparing him to the rest of the league vs their school's history. But you are being obtuse to think we don't have to over come that history. But fine, don't know why you only choose guys with short track records and not in Power 5 conferences, Fleck I think of a good coach as of today is a .500 coach at a school who has won .519 of their games in history, so he is in the negative still. Fuente .531 win percentage at Memphis, their history is .475. Mullen is .606 vs our history of .472. For comparison as well with Fleck and Fuente, Mullen was .566 his first 4 years. In the SEC. Mullen has raised our historic avg from .472 to almost .500 in less than 8 years. He is a good coach.

Herman I think may end up being great but he isn't ranked yet because he doesn't have enough games. He is like .944 which will never last

I think Dan was/is a good coach, but I just think he's ready to move on. Dan himself has said that 10 years is a long time to be at school and has talked about that a few times over the year. I think he said something about it regarding Miles recently. We're in year eight. I LIKE 2010 Dan. I don't like 2016 Dan. I recognize what Dan has done BUT I'm very concerned that we are about to hang on to him too long and they're we're back to a multi year rebuilding project. We've never lost to a school like South Alabama under Dan until this year. That's NOT a good sign. Our offense and defense are currently both in middle/bottom of the SEC right now.

The thing about it with finding the next coach is you have to consider their situation as well. Dan should be better than PJ Fleck. We've been better than Western Michigan for awhile now- probably even as far back as the 60's. When you look at coaches you have to ask yourself how would this guy do with our resources? For example- staying with Fleck, he is one of the best recruiters in the MAC. His record is skewed heavily by his first season there but he turned them around in year two. And no I'm not advocating for Fleck to be clear just to give you an example.

I look at us right now and I think most of us agree right now that we have three main issues that is sticking with us- recruiting, offensive line play, and defensive performance.

Can we find a coach that can recruit better than Dan? I think we can.

Can we find a coach that can put together a better offensive line? I think we can.

Can we find a coach that will not have a revolving door at DC every year? I think we can.

Can we find a coach that can keep doing the good things that Dan does do? I would say probably although I could see the QB development possibly if not probably being as good.

How much would those three things being improved alone improve us? It's OK to look at the past, but we have to also consider and look at the present and the future as well.

And I'm not saying that we can't screw up the next coaching hire. That possibility is out there. But the way I see it, odds are also good or better that we won't screw it up and even if we do, we can always fire that coach. People bring up Rick Ray- well hell, we ended up with Ben Howland after that. And I never would have ever thought we would get someone like that for basketball. And yes, I would of course like to get it right the first time but even if we screw it up we can still fix it.

[Really Clark?]

I think Dan was/is a good coach, but I just think he's ready to move on. Dan himself has said that 10 years is a long time to be at school and has talked about that a few times over the year. I think he said something about it regarding Miles recently. We're in year eight. I LIKE 2010 Dan. I don't like 2016 Dan. I recognize what Dan has done BUT I'm very concerned that we are about to hang on to him too long and they're we're back to a multi year rebuilding project. We've never lost to a school like South Alabama under Dan until this year. That's NOT a good sign. Our offense and defense are currently both in middle/bottom of the SEC right now.

The thing about it with finding the next coach is you have to consider their situation as well. Dan should be better than PJ Fleck. We've been better than Western Michigan for awhile now- probably even as far back as the 60's. When you look at coaches you have to ask yourself how would this guy do with our resources? For example- staying with Fleck, he is one of the best recruiters in the MAC. His record is skewed heavily by his first season there but he turned them around in year two. And no I'm not advocating for Fleck to be clear just to give you an example.

I look at us right now and I think most of us agree right now that we have three main issues that is sticking with us- recruiting, offensive line play, and defensive performance.

Can we find a coach that can recruit better than Dan? I think we can.

Can we find a coach that can put together a better offensive line? I think we can.

Can we find a coach that will not have a revolving door at DC every year? I think we can.

Can we find a coach that can keep doing the good things that Dan does do? I would say probably although I could see the QB development possibly if not probably being as good.

How much would those three things being improved alone improve us? It's OK to look at the past, but we have to also consider and look at the present and the future as well.

And I'm not saying that we can't screw up the next coaching hire. That possibility is out there. But the way I see it, odds are also good or better that we won't screw it up and even if we do, we can always fire that coach. People bring up Rick Ray- well hell, we ended up with Ben Howland after that. And I never would have ever thought we would get someone like that for basketball. And yes, I would of course like to get it right the first time but even if we screw it up we can still fix it.

I can see a lot of that and agree with some. The only part I caution is the idea that the odds are better that we wouldn't screw up the next hire. That just doesn't hold water. Studies do show that the odds are greater that you will not met the present coaches record when dealing with some one who has surpassed your norm. Especially traditionally poor or average schools. The transition just doesn't work more times than not in these cases. Even schools who lose a coach to a better job often times struggle to equal their production. Weaker schools find it even more difficult and I think it takes on average a little over two coaching cycles to match that winning. Even elite schools have struggled at times going 1-2 sometimes more cycles to get back to their average or above. I'm not saying there may not be a time we have to part ways but it is not even close to simple. The schools who have done it best are the ones who have a clear vision of their foundation and what it takes to continue building. And they still miss in a cycle.

[Todd4State]

I can see a lot of that and agree with some. The only part I caution is the idea that the odds are better that we wouldn't screw up the next hire. That just doesn't hold water. Studies do show that the odds are greater that you will not met the present coaches record when dealing with some one who has surpassed your norm. Especially traditionally poor or average schools. The transition just doesn't work more times than not in these cases. Even schools who lose a coach to a better job often times struggle to equal their production. Weaker schools find it even more difficult and I think it takes on average a little over two coaching cycles to match that winning. Even elite schools have struggled at times going 1-2 sometimes more cycles to get back to their average or above. I'm not saying there may not be a time we have to part ways but it is not even close to simple. The schools who have done it best are the ones who have a clear vision of their foundation and what it takes to continue building. And they still miss in a cycle.

The reason I think we have a good chance of improving is because of our University leadership. Of course, that's Keenum essentially at least for a month or two.

We've hired in our major sports the past 10 years- Cohen, Mullen, Ray, Shafer, and Howland. We've been successful 80% of the time which is about as good as you can hope for. That doesn't include the hiring of Byrne and Stricklin which were both good IMO as well. And if Cohen had a losing season last year, I would have wanted him replaced in case you are wondering. And as I have often said about Dan- if he makes changes I would be fine with that. But he doesn't appear to be willing to make those. We'll let the season play out of course and see if I am right but it's not looking good right now.

[NCDawg]

Problem is I think Dan really want out, but nobody will hire him at the salary we pay him. I think he wanted the Miami job last year very badly, but Mark Richt was chosen. I think Dan is a good offensive coach, but as Todd4State mentioned, he has lots of negatives-no. 1 being too loyal to his offensive line coach who is clearly not getting the job done. No. 2 is his recruiting is not very good, especially for offensive linemen, and I think the primary reason is that they do not want to play for the offensive line coach. No. 3, and this matters very much to most State people, Ole Miss has blown us out 3 of the last 4 years, and will probably do so again this year. He was adamant about getting better after the loss 2 years ago, and said he couldn't wait until we played them last year. After they beat us very badly last year, it was like, ho hum, just another loss. It is clear to me and a lot of State people that he has lost the fire he once had, and if he refuses to get rid of the OL coach, I agree the time has come to consider going in another direction.

[tcdog70]

The reason I think we have a good chance of improving is because of our University leadership. Of course, that's Keenum essentially at least for a month or two.

We've hired in our major sports the past 10 years- Cohen, Mullen, Ray, Shafer, and Howland. We've been successful 80% of the time which is about as good as you can hope for. That doesn't include the hiring of Byrne and Stricklin which were both good IMO as well. And if Cohen had a losing season last year, I would have wanted him replaced in case you are wondering. And as I have often said about Dan- if he makes changes I would be fine with that. But he doesn't appear to be willing to make those. We'll let the season play out of course and see if I am right but it's not looking good right now.

the real drawback to any Coach coming to MSU and doing better that Dan is the Fact that we play in the SEC West. that would be 6 games a year that would a loss probability. Now the SEC east would be different--if We had Vandy-Ky-SC-Mizzou to deal with every year then things would be all shits and giggles. Even Ga-Fla and Tenn are pretty beatable. the SEC West is the football hall of terror.

[NCDawg]

the real drawback to any Coach coming to MSU and doing better that Dan is the Fact that we play in the SEC West. that would be 6 games a year that would a loss probability. Now the SEC east would be different--if We had Vandy-Ky-SC-Mizzou to deal with every year then things would be all shits and giggles. Even Ga-Fla and Tenn are pretty beatable. the SEC West is the football hall of terror.

If that is what most State fans think-that we can't be competitive in the SEC West, maybe the time has come to consider getting out of the SEC, joining a lower conference, and let the SEC West bring in some school that can be competitive, such as Florida State. Personally, I think we can be competitive if our coach will do what is necessary to make us competitive.

[maroonmania]

So tired of this OOC argument. Before 1970 we played 10 reg season games a year (I know earlier it was less but for time sake). Only 5-6 of those games were SEC for the bulk of the 60's, twice played 7 SEC games I think Tulane was the SEC team. We played non majors like Richmond, La Tech, Tampa, Samford, and Arkansas St and a weak Ind USM, nearly every year we had those type of teams on schedule.

Then from 1970-1991 we went to an 11 game reg season. Only 6-7 of those were SEC games. So again, 4-5 OOC. Nearly every season in the 1970's and for several of the 80's we played a non major or extremely weak DI. Sometimes both.

1992 started the 8 SEC game seasons. We still had weak OOC games. Ark State, ULM, East Tenn, etc. So I don't see the advantage Mullen has had getting to play 8 conference teams a season when some years we only played 5. The going to a 12 game schedule vs 10 didn't add OOC games, it added conference games.

The point of the argument is that, at least at MSU, we are MUCH more likely to win our non-conference games than back in the past. The days of getting routinely beat by CUSA type teams is over for the most part.

[Really Clark?]

The point of the argument is that, at least at MSU, we are MUCH more likely to win our non-conference games than back in the past. The days of getting routinely beat by CUSA type teams is over for the most part.

And who is to thank for that? Croom and JWS sure struggled with those teams. That's why the point doesn't work, they had the same type of scheduling and couldnt get it done. Our SOS on average is harder under Mullen than is was under JWS. And when Mullen got here we only had a what? $30-35 MIL budget. The money part hasn't come into play until the last few years. That's why it's a tired argument that statistically isn't true. The narrative is we added an incredibly weak OOC and that's part of why it has been for Dan to win than in the past. It's not true for the vast majority of the years.

[HoopsDawg]

And who is to thank for that? Croom and JWS sure struggled with those teams. That's why the point doesn't work, they had the same type of scheduling and couldnt get it done. Our SOS on average is harder under Mullen than is was under JWS. And when Mullen got here we only had a what? $30-35 MIL budget. The money part hasn't come into play until the last few years. That's why it's a tired argument that statistically isn't true. The narrative is we added an incredibly weak OOC and that's part of why it has been for Dan to win than in the past. It's not true for the vast majority of the years.

We only played 3 non conference for most of Jackies tenure. Anything that happened under croom is irrelevant.

[basedog]

We only played 3 non conference for most of Jackies tenure. Anything that happened under croom is irrelevant.

I would give you rep points for the title of your post, as I look back this post is all over the place from Juco's, recruiting, Mullen, past history, OOC games and others. I have received rep points so I shall share with you Hoops, here you go!

[maroonmania]

And who is to thank for that? Croom and JWS sure struggled with those teams. That's why the point doesn't work, they had the same type of scheduling and couldnt get it done. Our SOS on average is harder under Mullen than is was under JWS. And when Mullen got here we only had a what? $30-35 MIL budget. The money part hasn't come into play until the last few years. That's why it's a tired argument that statistically isn't true. The narrative is we added an incredibly weak OOC and that's part of why it has been for Dan to win than in the past. It's not true for the vast majority of the years.

The point absolutely works because this really has only changed in the last 10 years with the rise of the SEC and the budget, facility and exposure change at MSU due to the rise of the SEC in revenues and the SEC network. Of course I will say a Croom coached team would still have trouble with anyone. You are free to have a different opinion but from being a student in the early 80s, OOC games at that time were just as worrisome to try to win as conference games for us. I think USA was Mullen's first loss to a non-P5 team since playing the Houston team with Keenum at QB back in 09.

[Really Clark?]

We only played 3 non conference for most of Jackies tenure. Anything that happened under croom is irrelevant.

And that's the only time period it was like that. For much of our history we only played 5-7 SEC games a year. That was what I was alluding to. The JWS comment was that he and Croom struggled with weak OOC opponents. It wasn't scheduling that made it easier to win more games. It was a change in coaches that has helped overcome that in large part.

[Really Clark?]

The point absolutely works because this really has only changed in the last 10 years with the rise of the SEC and the budget, facility and exposure change at MSU due to the rise of the SEC in revenues and the SEC network. Of course I will say a Croom coached team would still have trouble with anyone. You are free to have a different opinion but from being a student in the early 80s, OOC games at that time were just as worrisome to try to win as conference games for us. I think USA was Mullen's first loss to a non-P5 team since playing the Houston team with Keenum at QB back in 09.

But the money wasn't that much greater for us for the past decade. We were like 75-80th in country when Mullen arrived. We have grown a lot but it's really been the last 3 years or so that we have made a move to separate us from the lower conference schools. And if the numbers are right we are just now getting to that $90 MIL mark that really puts us into that Top 30ish range

[Taog Redloh]

Todd4State - it's about time for you to take a few months off from posting. You are nearing engie levels of desperation and emotion.

[FISHDAWG]

THIS ^^^^ is why we lose to the Bears. Dan is recruiting kids that are graded on the 10 pt scale and have to pass the ACT to get into college. Freeze is recruiting kids that are so smart they don't have to take the ACT to get into college. They be smarter than our kids ****

forget the bears ... we still have to get by Samford

[maroonmania]

We only played 3 non conference for most of Jackies tenure. Anything that happened under croom is irrelevant.

Exactly, the 6-6 records that we made bowl games under Mullen would have been a 5-6 record sitting at home prior to the 12 game schedule because it would have been one less OOC game at least for most of the recent past where we have been playing 8 conference games.

[Really Clark?]

Exactly, the 6-6 records that we made bowl games under Mullen would have been a 5-6 record sitting at home prior to the 12 game schedule because it would have been one less OOC game at least for most of the recent past where we have been playing 8 conference games.

Really? So you just completely disregard that during that decade of 8 SEC games and 3 OOC games that LSU had 2, 5, 4, 7, 10, 9, 4, 3 and 8 win seasons. There's a bunch of games Mullen wins against those teams. Alabama had 5 season of 8 wins or less, 8, 7, 7(includes bowl win), 4, 3. Auburn 6 years of 8 wins or less including 3 losing seasons, Arkansas starting in 1992 3, 5, 4, 8, 4, 4, 9, 8, 6, 7, 9 wins. And how many of these years overlap where you had multiple teams with losing records or just average. The 4 game OOC being the reason Mullen has won 6 instead of 5 if he had played the 1992-2002 schedule idea is a farce. This idea doesn't match history of what those teams were back then.

ETA. In 2011 5 of our 6 losses were all 10+ game winners and Bama and LSU were 1,2 in the country. 8-5 Auburn was our worse loss.

In 2013 5 of our 6 losses were to teams who won 10 games that year, A & M was 9-4 and ranked 18th. That's the weakest team we loss to that year.

[Todd4State]

Todd4State - it's about time for you to take a few months off from posting. You are nearing engie levels of desperation and emotion.

Thanks for your concern. How many times have you been banned again?