MSU OC Probs

[War Machine Dawg]

Gents, check out the new article about offensive coordinator probs (http://www.forwhomthecowbelltolls.com/football/2013/9/5/4695032/msu-offensive-coordinator-scapegoat-and-modern-hiring-problems) at FWtCT. Enjoy the read. Feedback welcome.

[CJDAWG85]

Great article. A spelling error or two, but what really screams at me is that we pay our OC the least amount of money in the SEC or at the bottom... If we want a better offense we better start putting some money in it and really focusing on it. Collins has the D. Not worried about him.

[Coach34]

I agree we need to raise pay- but we don't feel the need because Mullen runs the offense anyway. Why pay more for a QB coach that helps gameplan and that's it?

Luke at OM is the OL coach with a title. It would be like us having Hev as a Co-OC to keep his pay up so he doesn't leave.

Until we hire a real OC- no need really to up the pay. Mullen calls the plays- it's his show

[Political Hack]

We should do this week to week.... From game 1, which assistants deserve a raise?

[engie]

Geoff Collins is still the lowest-paid DC in the SEC by about $170k... THAT is the problem...

Give him $500k -- and do it yesterday.

[FlabLoser]

Who is the OC for Spurrier, Petrino, Paul Johnson, Gundy, etc...how to those hands on offensive HCs get OCs?

[engie]

Who is the OC for Spurrier, Petrino, Paul Johnson, Gundy, etc...how to those hands on offensive HCs get OCs?

Gundy's have been Dana Holgorsen, Larry Fedora, Todd Monken, Mike Yurcich...

Anotherwords, the guys that learn under those guys are generally really good in future endeavors...

[Political Hack]

Isn't spurries his son?

Paul Johnson recruits from the international rugby league and Petrino only hires people that'll ride his hawg.

[Coach34]

Spurrier has his son as OC

Guys like Gundy and Johnson have people that want to come learn from them

Mullen might be able to find a young guy that wants to learn from him- but he prefers the older, well-traveled guy thats happy to have a job, does a good job coaching QB's, gameplans, and recruits.

I used to be on the "Fire Koenning" bandwagon- but no longer. He does his job just like Woody did. Its time for Mullen to do his as the offensive leader.

[gravedigger]

My biggest fear came when I heard that Tyler R was being given more freedom to audible.

I realize a good experienced qb has a better feel in the middle of the action to know where the pressure is coming from and how to exploit a defense IF he's experienced and savy. Problem with Tyler is that he's effective at this only when the defense we are playing is passive. If the defense is aggressive, he seems to try to only use his talented arm. That doesnt stop a blitzer, and it doesnt make his decision making any better.

I'm of the mind that in the game last saturday, his bell was rung so hard after the first hit, he continually made decisions that reduced the number of hits he'd take. So did our coaches. Dak came in and we were forced to pass and move quickly as well. Neither of these situations is the offense that we run best. It is methodical, it mixes short quick passes in when defenses are too aggressive, and runs down the throat of a defense that is too passive.

Our OC and HC might not have made the right adjustments, but I'm not completely sold on whether they were ever prepared for the contingency that we needed to go full blast into the read option game as a plan "b" when or if plan "a" didnt work. Neither did fans really expect OSU to present any real pressure defensively.

Now we are onto a different mindset or better yet, we had better be. Just because we dont have the big bruising back like Dixon, or a line that can block for 6 seconds for a qb to make a decision, doesnt mean we cannot be effective. We most certainly can. But what it is going to take is being very straightforward with Dak and limit his options to what he's good at. Take advantage of overaggressive defensive ends (like OSU did to us), and shorten the routes and get Dak out of the pocket so he can take fewer hard hits. We wont be a big play offense, but we can still control the ball and reduce mistakes. With a great punter and a great defense, we can still beat some teams this year that the first game tells us we cannot.

I just want to see Mullen take the mindset he had in 2010 when he was working with a raw Chris Relf. I dont care WHO is calling the plays. JUST SO the person that is doing it isnt telegraphing. All those coordinators you mention in your article, at one time or another, got to comfortable in running the mules we had into the ground and we couldnt control the clock and flip the field. Even Arians. Even Watson Brown at times.

Dak needs to be given the raines to execute, create with his legs, and use his instinct, but he doesnt need to be changing too many plays at the line of scrimmage. Dan had better dial the clock back to his method of coaching with a 2010 qb and not the method of having a kid that's been around.

Our defense is just fine, but if there are too many more 3 and outs in a row, you'll see them wilter. That is what happened in Sherrill's final years. We cannot just rely on the run or the pass. We'll either be smarter than the coaching staff across the field by being unpredictable or we havent seen our last qb go down with a serious injury.

Color me hopeful........but very concerned.

[Todd4State]

Good article. I will say this though- we lost Watson Brown to Oklahoma. He did get blamed for the 1992 Egg Bowl meltdown where we had the ball inside the 10 like 20 plays in a row and couldn't put it in. I don't think it cost him his job though. Plus, he had to work with Greg freaking Plump for much of 1992.

I also don't know that you could say we were anything like an Air Raid under Arians. He was the OC when we handed the ball off to Michael Davis 30 times or something like that and won the Egg Bowl, and our entire offense was pretty much built around our massive o-line (second biggest to Nebraska in 1994!) and our 300 pound TE, Kendall Watkins. Taite and Moulds were talented- but I think Taite's legal issues and the fact that he was very erratic kept him out of the NFL. Moulds is the most famous player from that era.

As far as assistant coaches salaries- that to me is the biggest issue we have at MSU right now as far as football. To me, that is the root of why we have problems on offense no matter who the coach is- whether it's because we can't keep a really good OC or DC for that matter, or we have to settle for someone like Les or Carl Torbush, or why we have some issues in recruiting to get the talent in to run Dan's offense because we aren't paying to get guys that can recruit really well.

We used to have that problem with head coaches as well- we had to take Jackie who had a lot of baggage, and part of the reason we settled for Croom in 2003. It's also why had we actually gotten Jimbo Fisher, he would have probably left as well. Now that we actually are paying our head coach competitively, we have a guy that for all of his faults is at the very least respectable in Dan Mullen looking at his overall tenure.

[War Machine Dawg]

Some good discussion and points here, gents. I'll address each of them generally.

Coach, I'm with you. Les is Woody 2.0. He's just doing what he's told. Overall, I think he's done pretty well, other than calling the plays last season. I understand that Luke's title is simply a way to get him more money without the added responsibility. Much like we did with Chris Wilson when Diaz was DC. Don't get lost in the weeds on that. The point I was attempting to make, and maybe I made it badly, was that when you combine the Co-OC pay for Mississippi, they could pay a singular OC $500K+. Of course, Bucky is the real leader of their O, but that's a different discusion.

Hack, it isn't about 1 game. It's about a trend. And for the record, I'm actually against firing Les. He isn't the real problem. Wait for Part 2 next week.

Spot on about raising Collins's pay. That better happen yesterday, if we play the way I think we will this season.

SCar & Vandy didn't disclose OC pay. But you have to assume SCar's is more, Vandy's about the same or less. Spurrier is his own OC. His son may have the title, but don't kid yourself about that. Again, wait for Part 2. You guys are thinking ahead, and I love it.

Todd, we agree about assistant salaries as a whole. It's the one thing that has to improve for us to take the next step as a program. I know Watson had to work with Plump in '92. I didn't say we were entirely Air Raid under Arians. We were just more wide open that Sherrill was comfortable with being. As I said in the article, the "look" of the offense was a direct product of the OC during The Kang's tenure, but the physical, ground-and-pound mentality was totally Sherrill.

I'm excited you guys are thinking ahead to my article next week. Apparently I did a good job laying the groundwork for it.

[DanDority]

In my opinion Mullen has an ego problem. For example, has our Offense looked very efficient since Hud left for ULL? I think Hud should have been our Offensive Coordinator, however, ego's and salary became a problem.

[blacklistedbully]

Like the article, though I think you miss the mark on combining Co-DC's salaries. If you're gonna do that, then a fairer comparison would be to add Koenning's salary to that of say Hevsey. The Co-DC thing is a title given to another coach who's gonna be on staff anyway, not an extra coach.

Frankly, I'd expected a bigger difference than what I read. Results-wise, which of those OC's are similar and making much more money? Seems to me there are guys on there that are making about 35% more, but are doing a MUCH better job. If you're saying we can get & keep a good OC if we bump our salary by 35%, then great, that shouldn't be too hard. I can't imagine we're passing on an available quality OC for that little difference.

For all we know, Koenning has an opportunity to move into that higher earning group if he produces a good offense. Same goes for any other OC we might get.

[War Machine Dawg]

Like the article, though I think you miss the mark on combining Co-DC's salaries. If you're gonna do that, then a fairer comparison would be to add Koenning's salary to that of say Hevsey. The Co-DC thing is a title given to another coach who's gonna be on staff anyway, not an extra coach.

Frankly, I'd expected a bigger difference than what I read. Results-wise, which of those OC's are similar and making much more money? Seems to me there are guys on there that are making about 35% more, but are doing a MUCH better job. If you're saying we can get & keep a good OC if we bump our salary by 35%, then great, that shouldn't be too hard. I can't imagine we're passing on an available quality OC for that little difference.

For all we know, Koenning has an opportunity to move into that higher earning group if he produces a good offense. Same goes for any other OC we might get.

Please don't be this ignorant. Up until 5 years ago, we didn't even pay our HC competitively with the rest of the SEC. Yet you want us to believe we have an incentive based contract with our OC that could earn him more money? Sorry, it doesn't fit the facts.

And as C34 and I are saying, Koenning is simply a Yes Man. He has very little actually authority behind his OC title. This is Dan's Offense - he either has to step up or give up control. The in-between approach isn't working.

[Ghost of Hank Flick]

We need a play caller. Mullen knows his offense and the offense he wants to run, but to be honest I don't know that he is a very good play caller - setting plays up with other plays and making adjustments. There's got to be an OC out there who will run Mullen's offense with effective play calling. That may be a really young guy I don't know, but I'm sure we can find that. Although Mullen may call some great games from here on out any it's a moot point.

[Coach34]

In my opinion Mullen has an ego problem. For example, has our Offense looked very efficient since Hud left for ULL? I think Hud should have been our Offensive Coordinator, however, ego's and salary became a problem.

Ahaaaa- more "Legend of Hud"

Hud DID NOT calls plays while at State and was a WR coach. He had a title beyond WR coach because Greg Byrne wanted that for him- and that made Mullen trust him even less. All Hud did at State was what Mullen told him to do

[mic]

Can everyone PLEASE pump the brakes on Hud...

[mic]

I agree we need to get a OC.. A young OC.. Someone with similar ideas of what and how CDM wants to do.. but give him the freedom to call the game..
Example.. Sumlin with Klingsbery..

[msstate7]

Can everyone PLEASE pump the brakes on Hud...
I agree. Bring on petrino...ha

[dparker]

Ahaaaa- more "Legend of Hud"

Hud DID NOT calls plays while at State and was a WR coach. He had a title beyond WR coach because Greg Byrne wanted that for him- and that made Mullen trust him even less. All Hud did at State was what Mullen told him to do


I'll buy this but how do you explain the obvious difference between those first two years and the last 3 in play calling if Mullen has been doing it the whole time?

[mic]

I'll buy this but how do you explain the obvious difference between those first two years and the last 3 in play calling if Mullen has been doing it the whole time?

Easy...Different QB styles..

[Coach34]

I'll buy this but how do you explain the obvious difference between those first two years and the last 3 in play calling if Mullen has been doing it the whole time?

Relf playing hurt most of 2011
Tyler Russell at QB and Mullen struggling to adapt his offense to him

[War Machine Dawg]

Different QB. Injured QB. Les called the plays last year, not Mullen. There's a whole lot of explanations. Not only that, the best game our WRs have had was the '10 Gator Bowl. And Hud hadn't coached them for a month prior to that. Hud is a good coach, but he isn't the second coming of the Bear. Seriously, our fans need to calm the hell down about him. There are plenty of other coaches out there as good or better we could hire if and when Mullen leaves. If we simply anoint Hud, I'll be PISSED.

[engie]

Hud is a good coach, but he isn't the second coming of the Bear. Seriously, our fans need to calm the hell down about him. There are plenty of other coaches out there as good or better we could hire if and when Mullen leaves. If we simply anoint Hud, I'll be PISSED.

All that may be true -- but I'm not the least bit convinced that there are any better coaches "for MSU" than Hud. There are certainly better coaches out there than Hugh Freeze -- but better for Ole Miss? That's questionable and even doubtable. Just what I know from "peeking behind the veil" so to speak...

Hud has our power brokers on his side. It's just a matter of time before he gets his shot...

[gravedigger]

Because the expectation of the qb had been greater and greater. Think about it. If you are told to do something and nothing else, you do so with much greater aggressiveness than if you are told to do one of three things and pick one.

I say forget audibles. Read option is a post snap audible. Let that be enough.

Watson brown was great but his plays sometimes looked too complicated. I think that was the case. I think we
'Ve outsmarted ourselves with so much shit for a qb to think about. It's their talent and ability we want. Coach is making over 2 mil. He needs to decide what play to run unless the qb proves otherwise.

We didn't execute my ass Dan. We didn't pick a good strategy and when the titanic started sinking last Saturday we had no lifeboat.


We can turn it around. Rather, Dan can.

[Coach34]

All that may be true -- but I'm not the least bit convinced that there are any better coaches "for MSU" than Hud. There are certainly better coaches out there than Hugh Freeze -- but better for Ole Miss? That's questionable and even doubtable. Just what I know from "peeking behind the veil" so to speak...

Hud has our power brokers on his side. It's just a matter of time before he gets his shot...


I think Mark is an outstanding coach and would do well at State. I just find it funny he gets so much credit for 2009-2010 when even he has said Mullen controlled everything. Hud signalled plays in and rarely ever had his plsysheet out when he was on the sidelines. Mullen and Koenning were making the calls- they were the ones with the playsheets out- and they told Hud what to signal in.

[engie]

I think Mark is an outstanding coach and would do well at State. I just find it funny he gets so much credit for 2009-2010 when even he has said Mullen controlled everything. Hud signalled plays in and rarely ever had his plsysheet out when he was on the sidelines. Mullen and Koenning were making the calls- they were the ones with the playsheets out- and they told Hud what to signal in.

I agree with you here. His message board "legend" is setting him up to fail if/when he actually makes it... There's almost no way he can live up to expectations people are already setting for him...

Some MSU fans are in desperate need of a reality check...

[War Machine Dawg]

All that may be true -- but I'm not the least bit convinced that there are any better coaches "for MSU" than Hud. There are certainly better coaches out there than Hugh Freeze -- but better for Ole Miss? That's questionable and even doubtable. Just what I know from "peeking behind the veil" so to speak...

Hud has our power brokers on his side. It's just a matter of time before he gets his shot...

I won't necessarily disagree with that, engie. And I get that Hud has the GOB network working for him and the backing of the Cigar Boys. I just hate anointing anyone. That's how we got ****ing Crxxms. Do a real search, dammit. If Hud wins it, I'm fine with that. But if we just rubber stamp him as HC without going through the process to see if we can do better, then Stricklin should be fired on the spot. That's a LT-quality hiring practice. Especially when you consider how the basketball HC search was handled.

[KB21]

Regardless of who is hired as offensive coordinator when Les does decide to retire, the system will be Dan Mullen's system for as long as he is the head coach.

What I would like to see Dan do is bring in a young coach from a lower level that is eager to learn from him but has a track record of calling plays for an explosive offense. This is what Oklahoma State did with Mike Yurcich. Oregon also hired Chip Kelly from New Hampshire.

[engie]

That still requires Dan to relinquish control of the offense to an extent.

His ego(and loyalty to "his" guys on the offensive side) and our payment of assistant coaches is what is in our way right now. Small issues in the scheme of things that can be easily overcome. He's just got to man up and handle it... The fact that it's gone this long unchecked is NOT confidence-inspiring however.

[DogBanker]

Russell played most of last year hurt. I did not realize that until this past weekend. But that does not excuse his inability to get rid of the ball quicker. When Prescott was in the offense moved. That type of quarterback is what Mullen is comfortable with.

Another thing I want to mention is that the first three years under Mullen, Hevesy would call the running plays. It doesn't look like he does that anymore, which I think is crazy. If anyone knows where to run the ball and how to do it successfully, it would be the oline coach. He sees things and hears from his guys a little bit more then any other position on the field.

Again my opinion on HUD. It's the Northeast MS guys who are pushing this. If the guy is so good, why didn't he put up more then 14 points on Arkansas this past weekend? We had more passing and rushing yards then his team this weekend. His high school connections that he supposedly has, haven't really helped him much.

We as a fan base need to cool on this shit, especially after the first game. Markell Pack was on twitter talking about how bad of fans we were after one bad game. Chill the hell out. Mullen has taken us further then any other coach has in a long time and now you guys want to run off one of the best we've ever had. Ridiculous.

[Todd4State]

I won't necessarily disagree with that, engie. And I get that Hud has the GOB network working for him and the backing of the Cigar Boys. I just hate anointing anyone. That's how we got ****ing Crxxms. Do a real search, dammit. If Hud wins it, I'm fine with that. But if we just rubber stamp him as HC without going through the process to see if we can do better, then Stricklin should be fired on the spot. That's a LT-quality hiring practice. Especially when you consider how the basketball HC search was handled.

The difference is Hud is actually qualified now as a head coach. Byrne could very easily have hired Hud to replace Croom- but he chose not to while Hud moved through the ranks. If Hud had been at ULL in 2008, he would be our head coach now. Croom was basically a career running backs coach. There is a reason why a lot of people like/want Hud- and it's not just because he "wants to be here". He's a very good coach.

But that said, I'm OK with a search, but if we do that, we better make sure we hire someone at least as good as Hud.

[Todd4State]

I agree with you here. His message board "legend" is setting him up to fail if/when he actually makes it... There's almost no way he can live up to expectations people are already setting for him...

Some MSU fans are in desperate need of a reality check...

It could sort of be like Cohen. It seemed like everyone on sixpack wanted John and then when we actually got him and he had two losing seasons, some people were ready to run him off. It's all about patience, having foresight to see what the long range plan is, and having realistic expectations. In other words- things most MSU message board fans severely lack.

[PendingTransaction]

Hevesy needs to be calling some D-II school looking for a job not calling plays. Mullen's only chance to be a successful HC is to stop trying to be a coach. Hire a damn OC and be the HC. If he does learn to relinquish control, he will fail. And that goes for both sides of the ball.

[War Machine Dawg]

The difference is Hud is actually qualified now as a head coach. Byrne could very easily have hired Hud to replace Croom- but he chose not to while Hud moved through the ranks. If Hud had been at ULL in 2008, he would be our head coach now. Croom was basically a career running backs coach. There is a reason why a lot of people like/want Hud- and it's not just because he "wants to be here". He's a very good coach.

But that said, I'm OK with a search, but if we do that, we better make sure we hire someone at least as good as Hud.

You missed the point, Todd. I wasn't comparing Hud to Crxxms. He's about 1,000 times more qualified than Crxxms was. My personal opinion is that he's a good coach and hiring him would be a solid hire. But the point was, you're a lot more likely to **** it up when you just rubber stamp someone and don't go through the process. You're a baseball guy, so riddle me this: Would you have rather done a search and hired Manieri, Cohen, etc. back in 2002 or what LT did and rubber stamp Polk? Same idea is in play here. But at least make Hud win the search.

[KB21]

You missed the point, Todd. I wasn't comparing Hud to Crxxms. He's about 1,000 times more qualified than Crxxms was. My personal opinion is that he's a good coach and hiring him would be a solid hire. But the point was, you're a lot more likely to **** it up when you just rubber stamp someone and don't go through the process. You're a baseball guy, so riddle me this: Would you have rather done a search and hired Manieri, Cohen, etc. back in 2002 or what LT did and rubber stamp Polk? Same idea is in play here. But at least make Hud win the search.

IMO, that is a bad comparison. Rubber stamping Mark Hudspeth for this coaching job would have been more similar to MSU's 2001 baseball coaching search had they went ahead and hired John Cohen back then. Cohen had just finished his 4th season as head coach at NW Louisiana State and was a guy many in the MSU Family had their eyes on at that time.

You do have to wonder how different things would have been had we hired Cohen back then instead of 7 years later.

Now, if Jackie Sherrill decided that he wanted to coach again, and MSU hired him, that would be more comparable to the rehiring of Ron Polk.

[engie]

You missed the point, Todd. I wasn't comparing Hud to Crxxms. He's about 1,000 times more qualified than Crxxms was. My personal opinion is that he's a good coach and hiring him would be a solid hire. But the point was, you're a lot more likely to **** it up when you just rubber stamp someone and don't go through the process. You're a baseball guy, so riddle me this: Would you have rather done a search and hired Manieri, Cohen, etc. back in 2002 or what LT did and rubber stamp Polk? Same idea is in play here. But at least make Hud win the search.

Could that not also be turned around on you since we essentially "rubber stamped" Cohen? That one seems to be working out just fine...

If the boosters, fans, etc are in almost unanimous support behind an idea -- like they seem to be about Hud eventually -- I don't have a problem with it. Barring unforeseen circumstances, the guy is simply going to be the first choice. Why go through a long "process" when you nail your initial target? We did with Cohen -- and we probably would with Hud...

[It_Could_Happen]

Who is the OC for Spurrier, Petrino, Paul Johnson, Gundy, etc...how to those hands on offensive HCs get OCs?

Petrino's was his brother... Then it was Garrick McGee who is now the coach at UAB... Then he rehired his brother. But the year without Bobby P showed his brother is an idiot.

[It_Could_Happen]

I'm gonna throw my opinion in here. If we don't hire Bobby Petrino ill be upset. The guy is a genius. Hell let him be assistant volleyball coach too. Bobby Petrino at state basically guarantees going back to the Jackie Sherrill days

[SallyStansbury]

Look at Torbush the first year, we sucked, he was fired.

Bring in HUD for 2010 and we were les predictable, ran more misdirection, and sprinkled in some very efficient passes, even with Relf, in short we were good on offense. I don't know HUD or Mullen or any of the coaches, but looking at this objectively HUD is the primary variable that explains our success in 2010. Then Mullen flexes nuts, HUD leaves and we become very predictable and we go back to sucking......

I am not against Mullen, he is who he is, he is OUR Yankee asshole control freak which is almost charming when we are winning, but far from charming when we put up 3 against OSU.

Bringing in another koenning wouldn't change shit. We need Mullen to step away from the offense, but is he strong enough to realize this and actually do it? I suspect not.

Could we just put Mullen and Hevesy in a room off somewhere and let them talk about the good old days?

[Political Hack]

Ahaaaa- more "Legend of Hud"

Hud DID NOT calls plays while at State and was a WR coach. He had a title beyond WR coach because Greg Byrne wanted that for him- and that made Mullen trust him even less. All Hud did at State was what Mullen told him to do

that's not completely accurate. they fought all the time. lol.

[Barking 13]

I just think Mullen needs a wake up call.... another thing that nobody has mentioned, why is it we never can have a complete team under any coaches? One year the offense / OL line is good, the next they suck, and the defense is good, special teams inconsistent from year to year... vice-versa and mix-and-match... if we ever got everybody on the same page, I think we would be successful. I thought we were on the right track... we now have the talent on both sides of the ball.

[dparker]

Easy...Different QB styles..

I just don't know. I don't see (I'm not an expert) where different QB's fully explain what we've seen on the field. I don't think anyone would argue we have much more all around talent than the 2009 team which was fun to watch. Different QB's don't explain why you try to run out of the shotgun on 3rd and short? Not call screen passes? Not stretch the field? Not use Perkins on the edges? Run up the middle on 2 and 23?

I think we are putting too much into this whole QB style thing. Good coaches should still be less predictable even if the QB isn't their 'dream' person.

[KB21]

I'm gonna throw my opinion in here. If we don't hire Bobby Petrino ill be upset. The guy is a genius. Hell let him be assistant volleyball coach too. Bobby Petrino at state basically guarantees going back to the Jackie Sherrill days

I thought we wanted to take a step forward, not backwards.

[engie]

Look at Torbush the first year, we sucked, he was fired.

Bring in HUD for 2010 and we were les predictable, ran more misdirection, and sprinkled in some very efficient passes, even with Relf, in short we were good on offense.

What does Torbush, the DC, have to do with anything? Hud wasn't brought in in 2010 -- he was the first coach hired in by Byrne late 2008 prior to the hiring of Dan Mullen -- another reason they butted heads. He was a WR coach for us. That's it.

Watch Auburn 2011 or Gator Bowl 2011 and tell me that our "creativity" was gone at that point. It wasn't... What has happened to it now is ANYONE'S guess... but it did not leave here with Mark Hudspeth regardless of how much a portion of our fanbase wants to project that onto him.

[HancockCountyDog]

What does Torbush, the DC, have to do with anything? Hud wasn't brought in in 2010 -- he was the first coach hired in by Byrne late 2008 prior to the hiring of Dan Mullen -- another reason they butted heads. He was a WR coach for us. That's it.

Watch Auburn 2011 or Gator Bowl 2011 and tell me that our "creativity" was gone at that point. It wasn't... What has happened to it now is ANYONE'S guess... but it did not leave here with Mark Hudspeth regardless of how much a portion of our fanbase wants to project that onto him.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that Mullen is simply not calling games the way he would normally with a mobile QB. Its the only thing that makes sense.

Here he is a coach that has been successful at Utah, FL and at MSU, all with a simple formula on offense. Stay out of 3rd and long, keep the defense honest with a strong physical mobile QB that can move the chains and create mismatches.

He knows this offense can work, but he also knows that he has a QB this season that can't really run that offense. He is simply not built to run it. The same way Phillip Rivers or Drew Brees wouldn't be built to run it, so instead of creating an entirely new offense (No coach would do this), he has basically skimmed down the playbook to plays that severely limit the QB's running ability. I think this really puts a chokehold on his creativity and he simply gets into bad patterns when picking plays. Its almost like he is running the offense with a governor on because in the back of his head he is constantly reminding himself "don't run Russell". The reason may be simple, if Russell runs, he throws picks after he gets hit.

Now, Im going to be interested to see what he runs with Dak, because on this past saturday, he was running Russell's offense, not his.

Alex Smith ran the ball for 284 times in two seasons at Utah.
Tim Tebow ran the ball 692 times in four seasons at UF, Averaging almost 200 carries a year (Soph - Sr)

In four seasons at MSU, Russell has run the ball 96 times.

If you don't think Mullen is coaching with one arm tied behind his back, Im not sure I will be able to convince you otherwise. Now, why he is going in this direction? Im not sure. There is a part of me that thinks he is trying to prove he can put a round peg in a square hole. Maybe he is trying to prove that his offense doesn't need a mobile QB. Whatever the reason, it really doesn't matter. He needs to have one of those, "**** it" moments and not care what anyone thinks, and just runs the offense that he knows he wants to run, not the offense he needs to run to fit certain personnel.

#TeamDak

[KB21]

The only thing that makes sense to me is that Mullen is simply not calling games the way he would normally with a mobile QB. Its the only thing that makes sense.

Here he is a coach that has been successful at Utah, FL and at MSU, all with a simple formula on offense. Stay out of 3rd and long, keep the defense honest with a strong physical mobile QB that can move the chains and create mismatches.

He knows this offense can work, but he also knows that he has a QB this season that can't really run that offense. He is simply not built to run it. The same way Phillip Rivers or Drew Brees wouldn't be built to run it, so instead of creating an entirely new offense (No coach would do this), he has basically skimmed down the playbook to plays that severely limit the QB's running ability. I think this really puts a chokehold on his creativity and he simply gets into bad patterns when picking plays. Its almost like he is running the offense with a governor on because in the back of his head he is constantly reminding himself "don't run Russell". The reason may be simple, if Russell runs, he throws picks after he gets hit.

Now, Im going to be interested to see what he runs with Dak, because on this past saturday, he was running Russell's offense, not his.

Alex Smith ran the ball for 284 times in two seasons at Utah.
Tim Tebow ran the ball 692 times in four seasons at UF, Averaging almost 200 carries a year (Soph - Sr)

In four seasons at MSU, Russell has run the ball 96 times.

If you don't think Mullen is coaching with one arm tied behind his back, Im not sure I will be able to convince you otherwise. Now, why he is going in this direction? Im not sure. There is a part of me that thinks he is trying to prove he can put a round peg in a square hole. Maybe he is trying to prove that his offense doesn't need a mobile QB. Whatever the reason, it really doesn't matter. He needs to have one of those, "**** it" moments and not care what anyone thinks, and just runs the offense that he knows he wants to run, not the offense he needs to run to fit certain personnel.

#TeamDak

I think that is precisely it. His ego is trying to prove that he can adjust his offense to a drop back guy. He's seen Greg Brandon fail with it at Bowling Green and Urban fail with it at Florida, but he wants to prove he can do it with a drop back guy. Dan Mullen is the coach that told Tim Tebow on a recruiting visit that his offense can make any quarterback look good.

[engie]

Both great posts right there... Agree completely...

[blacklistedbully]

Please don't be this ignorant. Up until 5 years ago, we didn't even pay our HC competitively with the rest of the SEC. Yet you want us to believe we have an incentive based contract with our OC that could earn him more money? Sorry, it doesn't fit the facts.

And as C34 and I are saying, Koenning is simply a Yes Man. He has very little actually authority behind his OC title. This is Dan's Offense - he either has to step up or give up control. The in-between approach isn't working.

Dude, I am most definitely not ignorant, but you may well be. You need to read my post again before you continue to put your foot in your mouth. I NEVER said we have an incentive-based contract in place. I said "For all we know, Koenning has an opportunity to move into that higher earning group if he produces a good offense". That's NOTHING like an incentive based contract. It's quite simply saying that if we do well on offense and he EARNS it, I can't imagine we wouldn't be able to bump the OC salary up another 35% to make it competitive with other SEC OC's who are performing at a higher level.

[War Machine Dawg]

Dude, I am most definitely not ignorant, but you may well be. You need to read my post again before you continue to put your foot in your mouth. I NEVER said we have an incentive-based contract in place. I said "For all we know, Koenning has an opportunity to move into that higher earning group if he produces a good offense". That's NOTHING like an incentive based contract. It's quite simply saying that if we do well on offense and he EARNS it, I can't imagine we wouldn't be able to bump the OC salary up another 35% to make it competitive with other SEC OC's who are performing at a higher level.

Ummm.....maybe you need to go to the dictionary. That's exactly what an incentive is. An increase in a benefit (pay in this example) based upon an increase in performance (here, an improvement in the offensive play.) And perhaps you've missed the entire point: Koenning isn't the one running the show at this point. "This is Mullen's Offense." Koenning is just a "Yes Man" following orders. I'm not in favor of firing the guy for doing his job or bumping his pay for not doing the job of a real OC. The argument here is to competitively bump the pay for an OC who is actually running the show. That isn't Koenning.

[blacklistedbully]

Ummm.....maybe you need to go to the dictionary. That's exactly what an incentive is. An increase in a benefit (pay in this example) based upon an increase in performance (here, an improvement in the offensive play.) And perhaps you've missed the entire point: Koenning isn't the one running the show at this point. "This is Mullen's Offense." Koenning is just a "Yes Man" following orders. I'm not in favor of firing the guy for doing his job or bumping his pay for not doing the job of a real OC. The argument here is to competitively bump the pay for an OC who is actually running the show. That isn't Koenning.

No dude, YOU need to take another look. I know what an incentive-laden deal is. What I said DOES NOT BY DEFINITION mean "incentive based". If I'd meant "incentive-based" I'd have been more specific. Perhaps you're not familiar with the concept of a person getting a raise for a job well done.

You're just being an asshole right out the chute because YOU misunderstood what I posted. Had you not been a complete dick about it, I'd have explained it to you politely.

FWIW, the post was more "in general". I'm not debating whether or not Koenning is calling plays or is just a "yes man". Frankly, since Coach 34 & 57 seem to think so I'm inclined to believe it's true. But I'll tell you this, I don;t give a damn if it's Koenning or Mullen as the puppet-master, I want better play-calling, and I don't care who the hell gets paid as long as it happens. If Mullen is pulling the strings and is fine with Koenning getting a nice raise for Mullen's improved effort, that's fine by me.

I think I've been pretty damned consistent in saying I'm disappointed in Mullen's performance with our O, whether it's his play-calling or Koenning's. because as far as I'm concerned the buck stops with Dan either way. He either needs to improve his play-calling, let somebody else do it, or make personnel changes to help us get better in that department.