Rebuilding Year?

[Coach34]

When did this new mantra start?

We started 11 Sr's and 6 Jr's Saturday. How are we rebuilding? Whats next year going to be when we only have 10-11 starters returning?

[BeastMan]

Somehow it will be Mullen’s fault

[gtowndawg]

When did this new mantra start?

We started 11 Sr's and 6 Jr's Saturday. How are we rebuilding? Whats next year going to be when we only have 10-11 starters returning?

It started when Joe was told his job is in jeopardy if we go 4-8.

[Homedawg]

When 007 needed some new excuses.

[Coursesuper]

When did this new mantra start?

We started 11 Sr's and 6 Jr's Saturday. How are we rebuilding? Whats next year going to be when we only have 10-11 starters returning?

In all of my interaction with MSU alumni and fans I have heard exactly 1 person say this was a rebuilding year 1. You're up Double Naught. And you still haven't told us who "confirmed " the coach will unequivocally be retained for next year no matter what goes down the rest of this season.

[ShotgunDawg]

On paper we don't have a rebuilding team by age, but we had some significant holes that at very least made this season a transition year.

Should've won at least 8 games though

[bluelightstar]

The craziest part of the rebuilding year mantra is that it's the offense--with two "Joe" QBs, an experienced O-line, two upperclass RBs, and experienced guys at WR--that is the worst part of the team. "Oh, well, the starting QB is a true freshman who should have gotten to redshirt." you say. Well, Joe caused that problem too.

The defense is where the "holes" from the previous regime are, but it's not like the guru is losing 45-38 games.

[Cooterpoot]

We are rebuilding on defense. The talent level there is subpar in the upper classes minus a couple guys. Lots of FR playing.

[Dawgology]

We are rebuilding on defense. The talent level there is subpar in the upper classes minus a couple guys. Lots of FR playing.

Yet they are playing better than our offense...

[Tbonewannabe]

We are rebuilding on defense. The talent level there is subpar in the upper classes minus a couple guys. Lots of FR playing.

Correct which is why we are giving up almost as much as we did in 2016 with Sirmon as DC. Now it wasn't a talent problem then so it was easier to fix immediately. We also averaged a TD more per game that year on offense also.

[Liverpooldawg]

When did this new mantra start?

We started 11 Sr's and 6 Jr's Saturday. How are we rebuilding? Whats next year going to be when we only have 10-11 starters returning?

It's a transition year. We DID lose a lot off of last year's team. I also think we pretty much lost all the team leaders from last year. I've seen it in high school before. When you lose all of the team leadership it sometimes takes a while for new ones to emerge. Sometimes they don't emerge period. If you have a senior class that was dominated by the class ahead of them in leadership more times than not it never emerges from that class. I think this year's class had a leader, but he is playing for the Titans now. To me the lack of effort and fire points to this being the case. Nobody on the field on either side of the ball is setting the tone.

[Dawg2003]

My sister who barely watches football asked me why it always seems like we are either rebuilding or a young team. It seems to always be an excuse.

[ShotgunDawg]

My sister who barely watches football asked me why it always seems like we are either rebuilding or a young team. It seems to always be an excuse.

I think it's because we often attract recruits based on "early playing time" & thus we end up with holes at a position every year due to an inability to stack talent.

[TrapGame]

Can't go 4-8 even in a "rebuilding" year when four other teams on your schedule are just as mediocre: K State (L), Arkansas (?), Tennessee (L) and ole miss (?).

[ShotgunDawg]

Can't go 4-8 even in a "rebuilding" year when four other teams on your schedule are just as mediocre: K State (L), Arkansas (?), Tennessee (L) and ole miss (?).

Agree with that.

No bowl, no job IMO

[Coach34]

Meh- the 2016 D gave up 60 more yards per game than this year’s D and 3 points more. And the D is getting better so those numbers could widen. Not to mention this is an uptick year for offenses around the SEC- except for us of course

We lost some talent on D for sure but returned a helluva lot also. Next year we will have lost 4/5 our old Secondary, a LB, and a DE. So we return 5 starters on D with not near the depth. That my friends- will be rebuilding

Offensively, we will lose 5 starters- returning 6. Lose half our
2 deep on the OL.

So next year- we return 5 starters on D and 6 on O with inferior depth. You will see rebuilding then.

[dantheman4248]

Rebuilding =/= Transition.

And at this point we can’t afford to rebuild. We should reload. This was one of the easiest years we’ve had schedule wise. 10 wins was very attainable with this roster. LSU and Alabama were the only difficult games and if we had a halfway competent offense Saturday we could have jumped out early on LSU. Alabama’s defense is weak this year especially against QB runs and Tua is nicked up again. It’s very disappointing.

But we don’t really need a thread on this because it’s one person with this narrative.

[gtowndawg]

Can't go 4-8 even in a "rebuilding" year when four other teams on your schedule are just as mediocre: K State (L), Arkansas (?), Tennessee (L) and ole miss (?).

Exactly. I knew it would be a transition year but we are playing a lot of bad teams. If we only win 4 or 5 with this schedule, see ya!

[gtowndawg]

Meh- the 2016 D gave up 60 more yards per game than this year’s D and 3 points more. And the D is getting better so those numbers could widen. Not to mention this is an uptick year for offenses around the SEC- except for us of course

We lost some talent on D for sure but returned a helluva lot also. Next year we will have lost 4/5 our old Secondary, a LB, and a DE. So we return 5 starters on D with not near the depth. That my friends- will be rebuilding

Offensively, we will lose 5 starters- returning 6. Lose half our
2 deep on the OL.

So next year- we return 5 starters on D and 6 on O with inferior depth. You will see rebuilding then.

Nest year, plus Joe, plus another year of off season softness training?? (...shutter goes thru body...)

[Cooterpoot]

Yet they are playing better than our offense...

Bingo. You can see some improvement there.

[Prediction? Pain.]

On paper we don't have a rebuilding team by age, but we had some significant holes that at very least made this season a transition year.

Agreed. I posted this in a similar thread last month and it's relevant here as well:


Going solely with "returning starters" metrics -- which aren't as predictive or informative as they should be -- and we're the second-most inexperienced team in the SEC, per Phil Steele's returning starters rankings. If you want to add Willie Gay's absence to the numbers, we'd drop to 106th nationally and even lower if you're just looking at defensive starters.

That's tough even without looking behind the numbers further. But here's a potentially more relevant number: our team's % of returning tackles. Before the season started, our returning defensive players accounted for 49% of our tackles last year. That ranked us at 11th in the SEC and 104th nationally. What happens when you take away Gay (the team's sixth leading tackler in 2018), Autry, and M. Murphy? That takes our percentage down to 41.5%. That's 122nd nationally and 13th in the conference.

Bill C.'s fancypants "returning production" stats show the same thing. Before taking into account the suspensions, he had our returning production on D at 56%, which was 90th nationally. He's been keeping track of that stat since 2014 and that's the lowest number we've had in that six-year span. I don't know how much further we drop when you take out Gay, Autry, and Murphy's 66 combined tackles, six TFLs, five sacks, two interceptions, and two pass breakups, but I'm guessing it'd be similar to the drop in Phil Steele's numbers.

(As you can imagine, losing a QB like Fitz also accounted for pretty low returning offensive production, too. Per Steele, we're 103rd in returning yards. And that doesn't include KT's ~620 yards from last year. Lop those off too and you're likely looking at 110th or worse. But so it goes when you change QBs. That's just the nature of the beast.)

. . . .

[In response to a comment by Brunswick,] I quickly looked at similar numbers for our other recent "down" years in 2011, 2013, and 2016, two of which were also marked significant upheaval at the QB position.

Returning % of tackles (and national rank)

2011: 61.5% (78th)
2013: 64.7% (66th)
2016: 69% (41st)
2019: 41.5% (122nd)

Oddly enough, the 2011 and 2013 defenses were pretty good all things considered, while the 2016 defense was hot garbage. Peter Sirmon, ladies and gents!

Returning yardage (and national rank)

2011: 95.7% (5th)
2013: 70.9% (61st)
2016: 39.5% (113th)
2019: 45.7% (103rd)

After botching things early on (and against Alabama, of course), Mullen did good work with our offense in 2016 under the circumstances. 2011, on the other hand, maybe not so much.

Whether you dub this a "transition" year or a "rebuilding" year, I don't know. But relative to our peers, we're inexperienced overall and very inexperienced on defense. Now, that doesn't excuse anything, of course, especially the O-line's performance. The pass blocking sucked last year and it's sucking this year. Scheme, coaching, lollygagging, whatever. It's BS and needs to improve.

Also, this may mean nothing, but check out these weird stats that I just noticed: In SEC games only, our team QB rating is 6th in the league and our yards per passing attempt rank is 4th. Those have gotta be inflated due to garbage time, right? In the past decade, we've finished higher than 7th in yards per attempt twice, Dak's junior and senior years. And the only times we finished better than 6th in team QB rating were Dak's junior and senior years and Russel's junior year in 2012. (We were last in QB Rating and yards per attempt in 2017 and second to last in both in 2018.)

[Coach34]

So- after we lose all these Sr starters and depth guys- next year wont be labeled a rebuilding year- the excuse is going to be that we are "young" I guess.

I have just never considered a season when half your starters are Sr's as "rebuilding". We returned 3 starters on the OL, all our WR's plus added more, and our starting TB. Defense returned all the LB'ers and what everyone said were our best CB's. Cole was supposed to be Abram Part 2.

We will be reminded next year what rebuilding really is.


2011 and 2013 were rebuilding

[trojandawg]

that's what you say when things aren't going well. Mullen said we were young a lot in 2016 when we really weren't at a lot of positions. That's become Moorheads thing, blame the last guy even though he left you in a great situation. If he can't win and the offense isn't working, he just thinks he can say it was crap and wasn't a championship standard so he has to tear it down and built it his way like a kid in sand box.

[Lord McBuckethead]

When did this new mantra start?

We started 11 Sr's and 6 Jr's Saturday. How are we rebuilding? Whats next year going to be when we only have 10-11 starters returning?

Hell I guess you can have a rebuilding year if you are starting 22 Srs and Jrs when they are not very good or have gotten fat and slow.
I would take 8 sophs if they are producers like Simmons was. Better 17 returning upper classmen that were actual producers at a high level the previous year.

[Prediction? Pain.]

So- after we lose all these Sr starters and depth guys- next year wont be labeled a rebuilding year- the excuse is going to be that we are "young" I guess.

I have just never considered a season when half your starters are Sr's as "rebuilding". We returned 3 starters on the OL, all our WR's plus added more, and our starting TB. Defense returned all the LB'ers and what everyone said were our best CB's. Cole was supposed to be Abram Part 2.

We will be reminded next year what rebuilding really is.


2011 and 2013 were rebuilding

Oh, I definitely agree that using the team's lack of experience (again, mostly on D) as a crutch or justification is bogus. But if we're going to take our guys' ages into account -- and I agree we should for lots of reasons (weight room experience, experience in the system (though that cuts both ways after a recent coaching transition), etc.) -- we should probably also account for lack of in-game experience. The fact that our post-suspension defense came into the year with less returning tackles than 121 other teams in college football seems to indicate a relative lack of experience.

Also, I'm not sure I see 2011 as more of "rebuilding" year than this one. That year we returned 96% of our offensive yards from 2010 (which was 5th most nationally), 8 or 9 starters on offense, 61% of our tackles from 2010 (78th most nationally, which is quite a bit different from 122nd), and 7 starters on D. If you go by age, the results were the same. Phil Steele kept up with players' ages (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2011/Jun11/DBJune07.html) at the time by looking at the years the players on the two-deep had been in the system. By that metric, we had the 32nd "oldest" team in the nation (and 1st in the SEC) in 2011. And if you use Steele's comprehensive experience chart (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2011/Jun11/DBJune08.html) from that year (which combines age with experience) we were 16th most experienced team nationally. (In 2013 we were 38th nationally (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2013/JUN13/DBJune15.html) and 2nd in the SEC in that metric and had the 53rd "oldest" team nationally (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2013/JUN13/DBJune14.html).)

It's interesting to compare those other down years to this one (at least I think it's interesting), but it doesn't make this year's failures any more palatable. The offense isn't working, the defense has sucked, and our kick coverage is schizophrenic. Whether Mullen sucked it up every few years too doesn't excuse anything. (And when he did drop off offensively, at at least he had a solid D to help keep things competitive.) The bumbling jackassedry needs to stop but most importantly we just need to win.

(For what it's worth, I think the concept of "rebuilding" this year's roster is less offensive than Moorhead's references to "rebuilding" or "building" a "culture" here. He himself said from day 1 that he didn't need to tear down the foundation or base of the structure that Mullen built but instead needed to make it better. Well, so far, he's failed at that by a long shot. But regardless, how does that jive with needing to "build" a new "culture" here? But maybe that's just semantics . . . . )

[DogsofAnarchy]

When did this new mantra start?

We started 11 Sr's and 6 Jr's Saturday. How are we rebuilding? Whats next year going to be when we only have 10-11 starters returning?

I knew we were in trouble when the company line “change the culture” started popping up. Why in the name of hades do we need to change the culture of a team that had been to 8 straight Bowl Games? This guy is so full of shit it isn’t even funny. What a total bust and you have to wonder how long this peg leg administration will let it go? Why are they hell bent to tear this down? New Culture....change of culture.....spare my ass. Sold us out is what they did...

[Really Clark?]

Oh, I definitely agree that using the team's lack of experience (again, mostly on D) as a crutch or justification is bogus. But if we're going to take our guys' ages into account -- and I agree we should for lots of reasons (weight room experience, experience in the system (though that cuts both ways after a recent coaching transition), etc.) -- we should probably also account for lack of in-game experience. The fact that our post-suspension defense came into the year with less returning tackles than 121 other teams in college football seems to indicate a relative lack of experience.

Also, I'm not sure I see 2011 as more of "rebuilding" year than this one. That we returned 96% of our offensive yards from 2010 (which was 5th most nationally), 8 or 9 starters on offense, 61% of our tackles from 2010 (78th most nationally, which is quite a bit different from 122nd), and 7 starters on D. If you go by age, the results were the same. Phil Steele kept up with players' ages (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2011/Jun11/DBJune07.html) at the time by looking at the years the players on the two-deep had been in the system. By that metric, we had the 32nd "oldest" team in the nation (and 1st in the SEC) in 2011. And if you use Steele's comprehensive experience chart (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2011/Jun11/DBJune08.html) from that year (which combines age with experience) we were 16th most experienced team nationally. (In 2013 we were 38th nationally (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2013/JUN13/DBJune15.html) and 2nd in the SEC in that metric and had the 53rd "oldest" team nationally (http://plus.philsteele.com/Blogs/2013/JUN13/DBJune14.html).)

It's interesting to compare those other down years to this one (at least I think it's interesting), but it doesn't make this year's failures any more palatable. The offense isn't working, the defense has sucked, and our kick coverage is schizophrenic. Whether Mullen sucked it up every few years too doesn't excuse anything. (And when he did drop off offensively, at at least he had a solid D to help keep things competitive.) The bumbling jackassedry needs to stop but most importantly we just need to win.

(For what it's worth, I think the concept of "rebuilding" this year's roster is less offensive than Moorhead's references to "rebuilding" or "building" a "culture" here. He himself said from day 1 that he didn't need to tear down the foundation or base of the structure that Mullen built but instead needed to make it better. Well, so far, he's failed at that by a long shot. But regardless, how does that jive with needing to "build" a new "culture" here? But maybe that's just semantics . . . . )

The bold portion is Solid Gold!!