Mullen vs. Croom based on records and facts

[The Croom Diaries]

This was both eye-opening and depressing research for me. But I think it needs to be read to realize just how close these two eras have been, but it's been masked by the bowl games. Check it out: http://maroonandwhitenation.com/2013/11/19/comparing-mullen-croom-eras-theyre-different/




/waits for Goat to tell me how misleading the stats are

[Coach34]

but it's been masked by the bowl games.



well, that does tend to make fans happier- going to bowl games doesnt suck

[Gordon Gekko]

I didn't look at the stats and don't care what they say. I'm not very happy with the state of the football team now but it in no way shape or form does it compare to the terribleness that was the Croom error.

I remember games where we didn't even get a first down until the fourth quarter, losing to Maine, Tulane telling us thanks for the check, LA Tech debacle, etc

[Coach34]

the State-Tulane game moved to Shreveport is still to this day the worst game I've seen in person- including pee-wee football. The 3-2 game is the worst I've watch on TV


I'll look at the stats later- but the brand of football we play now is light years ahead of where we were

[ShotgunDawg]

Yea, regardless of what the stats say, the brand football we play now is exponentially better.

[The Croom Diaries]

Obviously we are better now. That is not the comparison. It's record-wise and the 'stats' include doubling our budget and much better facilities (thanks, SEC) that factor into being able to recruit better. This isn't a comparison of who would you rather have as your coach, it's that Mullen hasn't done anything more than Croom did other than beat the crappy teams we should've been beating in the first place.

[stateskills]

Any analysis that starts with "let's throw out the outcome of a bunch of games that don't support my argument" shouldn't be considered actual analysis. C'mon man. You can do better than that.

"Masked by bowl games" doesn't even begin to cover the differences in these two coaching eras. As you wrote, "Mullen has never lost to a team that finished the season with a losing record." If Croom could say that - he'd still be here coaching.

Give up these ridiculous comparisons to Croom. First, it's insulting to Mullen. Second, it's insulting to anyone with any kind of football intelligence. Third, it makes you look like a moron.

[PMDawg]

yeah. Everyone knows I'm not a huge fan of Mullen, but I find this ridiculous. you cherry picked the one stat you listed that suited your agenda. I generally like your stuff, but this is a reach at best. I'll just leave it at that b/c I think you generally do pretty good work.

[stateskills]

it's that Mullen hasn't done anything more than Croom did other than beat the crappy teams we should've been beating in the first place.

That's the problem with your whole analysis. Croom didn't beat the crappy teams we should've been beating. Hell, no coach in our school's illustrious history in the past 60 years has beat the crappy teams he was supposed to beat throughout the course of his tenure...except Mullen. How about we start the conversation there?

[Ronny]

..prove Mullen is a far better coach than Croom, if you are looking strictly at the stats for empirical evidence.

The thing is, when Mullen arrived @ MSU, he was coming from Florida when he had just coached Tim Tebow to a Heisman trophy. Croom boasted no such credentials.

There were tremendous expectations put on Mullen when he arrived at MSU. He was supposed to be the savior of MSU football.

And things were looking like they going as planned in 2010 when MUllen coached up Chris Relf.

But since Relf graduated things have gone to shit.

Statistics will not measure the mutitude of ****-ups that have occurred in our football program since 2010. And to drag Croom into Mullen's implosion is unfair.

[bluelightstar]

Are y'all serious? He provided the records without Kentucky/Ole Miss and with Kentucky/Ole Miss.

I think it's very interesting that the only thing Mullen has done is beat Kentucky and bad non-conference teams. The thing is, I don't find that alone very impressive.

[Political Hack]

The Maine problem here is obvious.

[DownwardDawg]

The Maine problem here is obvious.

Lol!! Well played!

[DownwardDawg]

well, that does tend to make fans happier- going to bowl games doesnt suck

^^^This^^^^

It's not even close to the same.

[The Croom Diaries]

Any analysis that starts with "let's throw out the outcome of a bunch of games that don't support my argument" shouldn't be considered actual analysis. C'mon man. You can do better than that.

"Masked by bowl games" doesn't even begin to cover the differences in these two coaching eras. As you wrote, "Mullen has never lost to a team that finished the season with a losing record." If Croom could say that - he'd still be here coaching.

Give up these ridiculous comparisons to Croom. First, it's insulting to Mullen. Second, it's insulting to anyone with any kind of football intelligence. Third, it makes you look like a moron.

I didn't throw out the records, I included overall records. The reason I threw out UK and OM was to show that the only thing Mullen has done better than Croom is beat teams that suck. Yes, Mullen is a better coach. We are also paying him 3x the salary and have 2-3x the resources and haven't gotten much of a return on that investment with this mediocrity. If nothing else, look at his 28-29 record vs. FBS teams. That is mediocrity at it's finest.

[Goat Holder]

This didn't quite go as well as you thought, did it?

Number one, when you are trying to compare things, then you "take 4 games out" or whatever to err on your side of the argument, it renders your point invalid. Even still, that stats show marked differences in Mullen and Croom. And you also can't use the budget argument, because our competition's budget has increased just as much.

Grind that axe, pal.

[The Croom Diaries]

yeah. Everyone knows I'm not a huge fan of Mullen, but I find this ridiculous. you cherry picked the one stat you listed that suited your agenda. I generally like your stuff, but this is a reach at best. I'll just leave it at that b/c I think you generally do pretty good work.

I also said: Croom’s 24 SEC losses were against teams that had a combined 237-138 record (.632) and Mullen’s 23 SEC losses were against teams that had a combined 244-59 record (.805). I'd say I gave them both a fair shake. The entire basis of my argument is that aside from beating the weak that we should be beating with the kind of resources we have Mullen has performed about the same as Croom. Therefore, he is achieving the minimum. Croom was below the minimum....but even despite how awful of a coach Croom was he was at least able to get our team up a few times and upset some teams. I have to pick some stat to support the argument otherwise I'm pissing in the wind.

[The Croom Diaries]

This didn't quite go as well as you thought, did it?

Number one, when you are trying to compare things, then you "take 4 games out" or whatever to err on your side of the argument, it renders your point invalid. Even still, that stats show marked differences in Mullen and Croom. And you also can't use the budget argument, because our competition's budget has increased just as much.

Grind that axe, pal.

The budget argument is not a comparison to other SEC schools - although our budget has increased by over 100% while other SEC schools are around 30-60% so it's been more beneficial to us. The budget has to do with the gap it creates from us to the lower-tier conference schools, i.e. Troy, Bowling Green, UAB, etc. Our resources were once near their level, now we have blown them by, plus we have the benefit of offering players a chance to play in the best conference in America. There is no excuse to not only beat these teams, but beat them handily. Being able to beat them means nothing other than we are accomplishing what we are supposed to accomplish. It's not a feather in Mullen's cap. It's just a mark against Croom's inability to do so.

[sandwolf]

Give up these ridiculous comparisons to Croom. First, it's insulting to Mullen. Second, it's insulting to anyone with any kind of football intelligence. Third, it makes you look like a moron.

This is spades. There are some legitimate issues that you could write articles about, regarding Mullen, recruiting, the administration, use of the Dawgzillatron, etc........but trying to compare the Mullen era to the Croom era is just flat out ridiculous and it really calls your credibility into question.

[bluelightstar]

In one ear, out the other in this thread.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Mullen hasn't done anything more than Croom did other than beat the crappy teams we should've been beating in the first place.

So we no longer lose to shitty teams? I'm pretty happy about not losing to Maine these days, but maybe that's just me. Sure I want to do better, but to even attempt to compare the two regimes is just comical.

[HunterDawg]

Everyone acknowledges that Mullen stumbled in recruiting for a couple of years but no one ever actually faces why. We just talk around it. We have just erased it from our memories.

There was this really big NCAA thing with Cam Newton that implicated us badly. We had a former player and booster heavily involved. Just did. The whole thing really hurt our recruiting. "Turning in" a recruit is not viewed as favorably by other recruits as some think. Then there were other NCAA investigations. The threat of probation hurts as much as the actual probation. We were under a cloud for quite some time. Others used it against us.

Then Dan kept trying to get another job and publically denying it all the time. The Miami thing was bad. Others used it against us.

Now, there is all this hot seat talk. Others will use it against us.

Some of it is self inflicted. Some is not, but there are obvious factors that have caused us to lose recruiting battles we should have won. We just ignore all that stuff and blame it on Mullen for not "being a good recruiter". Pretty simplistic.

[Dawgtini]

" beat the crappy teams we should've been beating in the first place"

Exactly the point an Mullen is doing it. We are light years better, but so I the competition. Your salary envy is showing.

[MadDawg]

There was a time when a succesful coach at MSU was one that would win the games they are supposed to (something we have never had consistently) and occasionally win an upset or two and take us to a NYD bowl.

Now, this isn't good enough. Now we want wins over top 25 teams consistently and challenging for the SECW against national championship contenders. Anything less shows the program is in shambles and we should be looking at wholesale changes from the head coach to the staff to the AD to the game-day and stadium management.

[Barking 13]

Everyone acknowledges that Mullen stumbled in recruiting for a couple of years but no one ever actually faces why. We just talk around it. We have just erased it from our memories.

There was this really big NCAA thing with Cam Newton that implicated us badly. We had a former player and booster heavily involved. Just did. The whole thing really hurt our recruiting. "Turning in" a recruit is not viewed as favorably by other recruits as some think. Then there were other NCAA investigations. The threat of probation hurts as much as the actual probation. We were under a cloud for quite some time. Others used it against us.

Then Dan kept trying to get another job and publically denying it all the time. The Miami thing was bad. Others used it against us.

Now, there is all this hot seat talk. Others will use it against us.

Some of it is self inflicted. Some is not, but there are obvious factors that have caused us to lose recruiting battles we should have won. We just ignore all that stuff and blame it on Mullen for not "being a good recruiter". Pretty simplistic.

BOOM!

[Goat Holder]

I personally feel like we should do this:


There was a time when a succesful coach at MSU was one that would win the games they are supposed to (something we have never had consistently) and occasionally win an upset or two and take us to a NYD bowl.

....for at least 10 years before we should expect this:


Now, this isn't good enough. Now we want wins over top 25 teams consistently and challenging for the SECW against national championship contenders. Anything less shows the program is in shambles and we should be looking at wholesale changes from the head coach to the staff to the AD to the game-day and stadium management.

In short, yes, I agree completely.

[getatmedawg]

Croom was a horrible gameday coach, but I do think that he had better recruiters on his staff than Mullen.

[Political Hack]

Hunter nailed it, although Dan wasn't going to Miami unless they built a new stadium, new facilities, and threw up a statue of him before he arrived on campus.

[Goat Holder]

Good points. Mullen shouldn't shoulder ALL the blame for that, but he definitely deserves some of it. Sometimes I wish he would have just left after 2010 and Hudspeth would have taken over then. I mean, that's what Hudspeth was brought in to do. The stuff about Mullen looking for another job is definitely true. I think he now realizes he must win his way out.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Mediocrity > laughing stock.

[The Croom Diaries]

Well maybe I should just chalk this one up to poor presentation skills on my part because I was never trying to compare Mullen to Croom as coaches. I'm happy about Mullen beating up the little guys, but I also think he's doing the minimum. I'm still undecided on whether or not Mullen should be back for next year, and the purpose of writing these types of things is to help make that decision. If it makes you feel even better about Mullen that is fine, however, I don't feel that way. As per the last two sentences, "with this data, can you definitively say Mullen performed much better than Croom? And even if you can, are the results on the field after nearly 5 full seasons acceptable, or do you feel Mullen has accomplished the minimum MSU, or any SEC team, should achieve?" it's up to each fan to decide. I'm just trying to help put all the information out there, and yes, I do spin it....but I try to at least give both arguments a fair shake.

[The Croom Diaries]

There was a time when a succesful coach at MSU was one that would win the games they are supposed to (something we have never had consistently) and occasionally win an upset or two and take us to a NYD bowl.

Now, this isn't good enough. Now we want wins over top 25 teams consistently and challenging for the SECW against national championship contenders. Anything less shows the program is in shambles and we should be looking at wholesale changes from the head coach to the staff to the AD to the game-day and stadium management.

No, just one win would be nice. We've beaten 3 teams in the last 3 years that finished the season with a winning record: Louisiana Tech, Middle Tennessee State and Bowling Green. At some point, and it's already happening, fans become apathetic because they know the outcome of each game before it is played. Regardless of our history or where we can realistically be or whatever, this football program could use a few more variables. Even if it meant losing to Bowling Green but beating Texas A&M, it would create more excitement I think. I'm not saying I would prefer that, but it would dissipate some of the apathy.

[DownwardDawg]

The thing I do appreciate about Dan is that I feel confident we will beat Arkansas. He wins these games.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Teams that were upset when Croom "got our team up a few times":
7-5 Florida in 04
8-4 Auburn in 07
7-5 Kentucky in 07
6-6 Alabama in 07 (if you include the vacated wins)
6-6 Vandy in 08

All program changing wins right there for sure**

[smootness]

Ok, I read the article.

I looked at the records you posted at the beginning of the article and said, 'Ok, yes, as I thought, Mullen's tenure has been way better'.

Then I continued reading where you said, 'Let's start by throwing out the games against Kentucky and Ole Miss'. Then I stopped reading. It doesn't matter what comes after that, you just proved that you're trying to twist things around to fit your argument.

The answer to the question is, 'Yes, Mullen's tenure has been way better and yes, Mullen is a much better coach'. Since you essentially conceded that in your second post in this thread, I have no idea what we're actually talking about.

[Homedawg]

" beat the crappy teams we should've been beating in the first place"

Exactly the point an Mullen is doing it. We are light years better, but so I the competition. Your salary envy is showing.
^this
And yet, he's trying to convince us they are about the same????? I don't see anything the same.

[CJDAWG85]

Hunter absolutely nailed it... Completely agree


As for this thread... This shit brings nothing but bad publicity to our program. It's pretty funny how people bitch about these guys in the media that "bad mouth" us, but have no problem posting stupid ass shit on here that others use against us. We need to get out of our own damn way.

[Barking 13]

I agree with what Hunter said and just want to add, that other than the inexplicable oddball play calling and in-game decisions, we wouldn't be having this discussion... let's talk more in a couple weeks...

[cheewgumm]

Our new coaching standard.... CROOM. I long for a day when our fans expect more. That day is coming though.

Prediction

2013. 5-7
2014. 7-5
2014. 6-6

At that point a lot of the pro-mulleners will say he's plateaued and we need to move on. Granted, he would have been to 2 more bowls, and they will be 2 yrs late, but at least they will have finally have seen the light.

I have no idea of the outcome but would love to see a Mullen comparison to Jackie, Ricky, Ballard, etc. At least to see some comparison besides croom. Maybe it will look favorable to Mullen.

[smootness]

I'll take 13 wins in 2014, even if it comes with 11 losses.

And yes, any comparison of Mullen vs. another coach in our history, when looking at the coach's first 5 years, will look favorable to Mullen.

[Coach34]

Teams that were upset when Croom "got our team up a few times":
7-5 Florida in 04
8-4 Auburn in 07
7-5 Kentucky in 07
6-6 Alabama in 07 (if you include the vacated wins)
6-6 Vandy in 08

All program changing wins right there for sure**\

exactly- wins by Mullen vs teams with those records arent counted as upsets by the anti-Mullen crew

[smootness]

\

exactly- wins by Mullen vs teams with those records arent counted as upsets by the anti-Mullen crew

It's like preachermatt constantly giving Charlie Weis credit for 'upsetting' West Virginia and stating that if Mullen would just do that a couple times, nobody would be talking about firing him.

So apparently beating someone with a better record than you is all it's about, regardless of what your record is. If you're 2-10 but one of those wins came against a 4-8 team, that is apparently much better than going 7-5 but only beating teams who were 5-7 or 6-6. It's asinine.

[Goat Holder]

I'm just trying to help put all the information out there, and yes, I do spin it....but I try to at least give both arguments a fair shake.

Uh, WHAT??

Good Lord, son. Just stop.

[War Machine Dawg]

For the "Mediocrity" crowd, here's a question no one has asked and none of you have bothered to answer:

With the current state of the SEC, and specificially the SEC West, name for me which of these teams you think we should/could pass to no longer be "mediocre" in your eyes:

1. Bama
2. LSU
3. Auburn
4. aTm
5. Arkansas (bad this year but historically better than us since joining the SEC)
6. SCar
7. Mizzou
8. UGA
9. Florida
10. TN (same as Arkansas)

In my mind, we're about the same or better than Vandy, UK, and the Bearz. So which of the "Big 7" or next 3 for the "Big 10" are we supposed to pass to no longer be "mediocre?" And before you go spouting off about the increase in our athletic budget, remember that the 10 schools I listed have also had their budgets increased the same amount we have.

[EAVdog]

Please compare our offensive stats between Croom's Gulf Coast Offense and Mullen's Zone Read Offense. Both coaches were hired for their offensive prowess. That comparison will tell you all you need to know. Frankly I've read a number of your articles and I don't think you are stupid. So I have to chalk this up to an agenda.

[slickdawg]

Need to look at the conference as a whole in that era, Auburn lost a home and home to USCw , Alabama lost a home and he with Oklahoma. Zook and Muschamp have identical records. The SEC is light years ahead of what it was in the 2003-2008 timeframe.

[smootness]

I think we can realistically pass Missouri, South Carolina, and Arkansas at some point long-term. The rest, with their resources and history, will be difficult to ever truly pass in terms of the program itself...we can definitely be better for a period of time, though.

[SheltonChoked]

But your Slight to mullen that he has not had an upset, stands out the most here
Mullen?s 23 SEC losses were against teams that had a combined 244-59 record (.805).

The teams Mullen should upset are AVERAGING a 10-3 season.

You say that is the same as Croom whoupset teams that were overall averaging a 8-5 season.

The truth is it is hard to be an average team right now in the SEC West. When we play 5 teams currently ranked in the top 12 teams in the BCS, it's hard to win games.

Have we missed opportunities, yes. Do I wish it was better, yes.

But really? Comparisons to Croom? an Justification by saying they have the same number of losses, but the competition is 27% tougher by record? and saying that it's only bowl games is a laughable "Difference" That's like saying I'm the same as Bill Gates, except for the money.

[Goat Holder]

That's a terrible ranking. It's simple: Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee, LSU, Florida and Georgia are the 'haves' of the SEC. They pretty much dictate their success, always have. MSU, Ole Miss, Vandy, Kentucky, South Carolina and Arkansas are the schools that are somewhat dependent on outside influences to have success. Some may want to swap Carolina and Tennessee but I don't think that's smart. I'm looking historically. Where do Texas A&M and Missouri fit into this? Good question. A&M will likely be a have in another decade but I'm not sure they are there yet. Missouri is a have-not for now.

Our goal should be to be the best of the have-nots, on a general basis.

[Homedawg]

For the "Mediocrity" crowd, here's a question no one has asked and none of you have bothered to answer:

With the current state of the SEC, and specificially the SEC West, name for me which of these teams you think we should/could pass to no longer be "mediocre" in your eyes:

1. Bama
2. LSU
3. Auburn
4. aTm
5. Arkansas (bad this year but historically better than us since joining the SEC)
6. SCar
7. Mizzou
8. UGA
9. Florida
10. TN (same as Arkansas)

In my mind, we're about the same or better than Vandy, UK, and the Bearz. So which of the "Big 7" or next 3 for the "Big 10" are we supposed to pass to no longer be "mediocre?" And before you go spouting off about the increase in our athletic budget, remember that the 10 schools I listed have also had their budgets increased the same amount we have.

This is a very good way of looking at expectations. Sort of like Tennessee hiring a baseball coach, who are they goin to pass?

[fishwater99]

Mullen has lost 15 straight games vs ranked teams... 0-15...
He is 0-19 vs Top 20 teams. He is 2-21 vs Top 25 teams.
Our last win over a ranked team was UF #22 in 2010.
What has he done for us lately???


2009
L LSU #7
L GT #25
L UF #1
L Bama #2
W Ole Miss #25

2010
L Auburn #21
L LSU #15
W UF #22
L Bama #12
L Ark #13

2011
L LSU #3
L SC #15
L Bama #3
L Arky #6

2012
L Bama #1
L A&M #16
L LSU #7
L NW #20

2013
L OSU #13
L LSU #10
L SC #14
L A&M #15
L Bama #1

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Mullen has lost 15 straight games vs ranked teams... 0-15...
He is 0-19 vs Top 20 teams. He is 2-21 vs Top 25 teams.
Our last win over a ranked team was UF #22 in 2010.
What has he done for us lately???


2009
L LSU #7
L GT #25
L UF #1
L Bama #2
W Ole Miss #25

2010
L Auburn #21
L LSU #15
W UF #22
L Bama #12
L Ark #13

2011
L LSU #3
L SC #15
L Bama #3
L Arky #6

2012
L Bama #1
L A&M #16
L LSU #7
L NW #20

2013
L OSU #13
L LSU #10
L SC #14
L A&M #15
L Bama #1

So I suppose you wouldn't really mind if we went 1-11 so long as that 1 win was over a top 25 ranked team? Because that's pretty much all you've spouted for the past several weeks/months, while ignoring every other criteria imaginable.

[The Croom Diaries]

\

exactly- wins by Mullen vs teams with those records arent counted as upsets by the anti-Mullen crew

He's only beaten three SEC teams that finished with a winning record, and none since 2010. He's done a good job of polishing off bad teams. He's a good coach, but he hasn't proven to be a very good coach. I think $2.7 million per year deserves a very good coach. Maybe he will turn into one, maybe not. Maybe $2.7 just gets you a good coach and that's it.

[The Croom Diaries]

For the "Mediocrity" crowd, here's a question no one has asked and none of you have bothered to answer:

With the current state of the SEC, and specificially the SEC West, name for me which of these teams you think we should/could pass to no longer be "mediocre" in your eyes:

1. Bama
2. LSU
3. Auburn
4. aTm
5. Arkansas (bad this year but historically better than us since joining the SEC)
6. SCar
7. Mizzou
8. UGA
9. Florida
10. TN (same as Arkansas)

In my mind, we're about the same or better than Vandy, UK, and the Bearz. So which of the "Big 7" or next 3 for the "Big 10" are we supposed to pass to no longer be "mediocre?" And before you go spouting off about the increase in our athletic budget, remember that the 10 schools I listed have also had their budgets increased the same amount we have.

You don't have to pass anyone. If we could just beat maybe one team we aren't favored against per year that would be enough to not be doing the minimum, which is: beating non-conference teams and SEC dumpster fires. Undoubtedly, folks will want more once that does come to fruition, but at least for the next 3-4 years I think that would be enough.

[was21]

I didn't bother to read it. There's simply no comparison...thx

[The Croom Diaries]

Please compare our offensive stats between Croom's Gulf Coast Offense and Mullen's Zone Read Offense. Both coaches were hired for their offensive prowess. That comparison will tell you all you need to know. Frankly I've read a number of your articles and I don't think you are stupid. So I have to chalk this up to an agenda.

Ha, yes, this was obviously a swing and a miss. I've heard it from all sides of the aisle. I've written about 1,500 articles over the past 3 years and every now and then you just screw the pooch. And this one I thought was good and so I put it on this board and got nailed. It happens. I'm okay with taking the punishment.

[fishwater99]

So I suppose you wouldn't really mind if we went 1-11 so long as that 1 win was over a top 25 ranked team? Because that's pretty much all you've spouted for the past several weeks/months, while ignoring every other criteria imaginable.

Now that's just asinine to think that way. I expect an one upset in year 3, 4, or 5.
Hell, in one week this year Ole Miss, Vandy, Tenn, Auburn, and Mizzo all beat ranked teams.
We haven't beaten one since 2010, let that sink in..

[DownwardDawg]

Hunter nailed it, although Dan wasn't going to Miami unless they built a new stadium, new facilities, and threw up a statue of him before he arrived on campus.

This. I don't think Mullen has been job searching at all. He may be now, but not before this year.

[Coach34]

I think $2.7 million per year deserves a very good coach. Maybe he will turn into one, maybe not. Maybe $2.7 just gets you a good coach and that's it.

2.7MM will be 12-13 in the SEC next season

[DownwardDawg]

2.7MM will be 12-13 in the SEC next season

Well, it's stil 2.7 million. Just sayin

[SheltonChoked]

Here is just an emphaisis, on WMD point:

Which of the following programs should we pass: Programs ranked by total athletic budget for 2012:

1) Alabama $124,899,945

2) Florida $120,772,106

3)Texas A&M $119,702,222

4)LSU $114,787,786

5)Auburn $105,951,251

6)Tennessee $102,884,286

7)Arkansas $99,757,482

8)Georgia $91,670,613

9)Kentucky $88,373,452

10)South Carolina $87,608,352

11)Mississippi State $69,828,880

12)Ole Miss $51,858,993

13) Missouri $50,719,665


Note: MSU is $19MM out of 13th place and $17MM out of 10th.

We should be getting more for our money? Seems like we should be getting more money. 11 of 14.

[The Croom Diaries]

2.7MM will be 12-13 in the SEC next season

What's your point? It's still top 25 (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/salaries/ncaaf/coach/). Are there not 25 very good coaches in this country? Based on what we see on the field, with the mistakes in personnel decisions and then lack of focus at times I can't conclude that Mullen is a very good coach. He's done an excellent job in most every area of the program, and that may be enough to continue giving him a chance to prove he can become a very good coach, but I don't see much to definitively prove he is.

[SheltonChoked]

Last I checked we played 8 games in the SEC every year.

Money in the bottom 1/3rd. wins in the middle 3rd. seems a good return.

[The Croom Diaries]

Last I checked we played 8 games in the SEC every year.

Money in the bottom 1/3rd. wins in the middle 3rd. seems a good return.

Why do we even bother being fans then? Does anyone think we are going to win the West at any point? Maybe we'll win it once every 20-30 years or something. The one thing we can hope for is winning a game every now and then that we aren't supposed to - like one of the last three perhaps. We haven't done that in 3 years. Apathy is beginning to set in. Maybe we'll go 6-6 this year and go to another bowl. Then similar results next year as far as beating poor teams and losing to good ones and go to another bowl game. But fans get apathetic always knowing what will happen. Not everyone is satisfied with good enough.

[Coach34]

Why do we even bother being fans then? Does anyone think we are going to win the West at any point? .

Personally, I dont. Just like I dont see Ole Miss winning it as well. Kentucky and Vandy arent going to win the East either.

We may come close once every 15-20 years, but in the current climate of college football and the direction it's heading- it's just going to be a tough task to ask a coach at State or Ole Miss to beat 4-5 top 15 teams to win the SEC West. Especially with a 9th SEC game headed our way

Ole Miss had the recruiting class of a lifetime- and they STILL finished 3rd in the West. That tells you all you need to know

[War Machine Dawg]

Here is just an emphaisis, on WMD point:

Which of the following programs should we pass: Programs ranked by total athletic budget for 2012:

1) Alabama $124,899,945

2) Florida $120,772,106

3)Texas A&M $119,702,222

4)LSU $114,787,786

5)Auburn $105,951,251

6)Tennessee $102,884,286

7)Arkansas $99,757,482

8)Georgia $91,670,613

9)Kentucky $88,373,452

10)South Carolina $87,608,352

11)Mississippi State $69,828,880

12)Ole Miss $51,858,993

13) Missouri $50,719,665


Note: MSU is $19MM out of 13th place and $17MM out of 10th.

We should be getting more for our money? Seems like we should be getting more money. 11 of 14.

It's eye-opening to look at the disparity between the "haves" and the "have nots" within the conference. Two things that jumped out to me: Auburn has more money then TN. And 7 schools have more money than UGA. I'd have never believed that. Until we're willing to get rid of LT 2.0 and go outside "the family" and get a ball busting AD, we can't really expect much more than what we're getting.

[The Croom Diaries]

Personally, I dont. Just like I dont see Ole Miss winning it as well. Kentucky and Vandy arent going to win the East either.

We may come close once every 15-20 years, but in the current climate of college football and the direction it's heading- it's just going to be a tough task to ask a coach at State or Ole Miss to beat 4-5 top 15 teams to win the SEC West. Especially with a 9th SEC game headed our way

Ole Miss had the recruiting class of a lifetime- and they STILL finished 3rd in the West. That tells you all you need to know

That was my point if you would have included my next sentence. We aren't going to win the west so all we have to get excited about is the occasional upset and the Egg Bowl. We haven't had an upset in 3 years and if we lose the Egg Bowl that will be taken away for the second straight year. Then comes the apathy among the fans. We need the Egg Bowl in the worst way.

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

What's your point? It's still top 25 (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/salaries/ncaaf/coach/). Are there not 25 very good coaches in this country? Based on what we see on the field, with the mistakes in personnel decisions and then lack of focus at times I can't conclude that Mullen is a very good coach. He's done an excellent job in most every area of the program, and that may be enough to continue giving him a chance to prove he can become a very good coach, but I don't see much to definitively prove he is.

Why do you want to compare our coaches' salary nationally, while at the same time holding the coach to the standard of "doing the minimum" because he's not beating coaches in the SEC making more than him? Who gives a shit what we pay nationally, if we can only pay 11th most in the conference. Last I checked we don't have Baylor's schedule.

[War Machine Dawg]

Why do you want to compare our coaches' salary nationally, while at the same time holding the coach to the standard of "doing the minimum" because he's not beating coaches in the SEC making more than him? Who gives a shit what we pay nationally, if we can only pay 11th most in the conference. Last I checked we don't have Baylor's schedule.

+1 It's talking out of both sides of your mouth.

[The Croom Diaries]

Why do you want to compare our coaches' salary nationally, while at the same time holding the coach to the standard of "doing the minimum" because he's not beating coaches in the SEC making more than him? Who gives a shit what we pay nationally, if we can only pay 11th most in the conference. Last I checked we don't have Baylor's schedule.

Well my point was that I don't thing Mullen has proven to be worthy of being an SEC coach, and that for $2.7 million we should be able to find a coach that is. But that's just my opinion and I could very well be wrong. Over the last 3 years we have played 20 teams who ended the season with a winning record and we've only beaten 3 of them - all non-conference, non-BCS teams. No other school outside of Kentucky has performed that poorly over the last 3 years. Maybe that's going to change, I don't know. I give Mullen much credit for building the program, I just question his ability to take the next step. I think he's a good coach, and only a good coach would be able to beat every bad team we play - but this is the SEC and not only should everyone have a good coach, but a very good coach.

[Percho]

Just remember all things are not equal. We could win the SEC 13-0 and if we did it would be a better than equal chance two one loss teams would play for the NC. For us to be above mediocre in the west we would need to finish 3rd, however if we were 3rd for three years then we would have to move to 2nd to be above mediocre.

Perception.

[Percho]

Well my point was that I don't thing Mullen has proven to be worthy of being an SEC coach, and that for $2.7 million we should be able to find a coach that is. But that's just my opinion and I could very well be wrong. Over the last 3 years we have played 20 teams who ended the season with a winning record and we've only beaten 3 of them - all non-conference, non-BCS teams. No other school outside of Kentucky has performed that poorly over the last 3 years. Maybe that's going to change, I don't know. I give Mullen much credit for building the program, I just question his ability to take the next step. I think he's a good coach, and only a good coach would be able to beat every bad team we play - but this is the SEC and not only should everyone have a good coach, but a very good coach.

Realistically how long do you think it would have taken Saban coming from the Dolphins to MSU to win a NC given our history in football? Or would he?

[Homedawg]

Personally, I dont. Just like I dont see Ole Miss winning it as well. Kentucky and Vandy arent going to win the East either.

We may come close once every 15-20 years, but in the current climate of college football and the direction it's heading- it's just going to be a tough task to ask a coach at State or Ole Miss to beat 4-5 top 15 teams to win the SEC West. Especially with a 9th SEC game headed our way

Ole Miss had the recruiting class of a lifetime- and they STILL finished 3rd in the West. That tells you all you need to know

Unfortunately I agree w all of this. It doesn't mean I don't want us to or to quit trying or that I'll be happy after losses. Just that the odds aren't on our side. Just how I see it.

[smootness]

We could win the SEC 13-0 and if we did it would be a better than equal chance two one loss teams would play for the NC.

Uh, no.

[preachermatt83]

Give croom diaries a break. He is one of the few writers/bloggers out there that is tolerable. I enjoy reading his stuff more than any msu beat writer or blogger out there.

[BrunswickDawg]

As hard as it is in this instant gratification world, I still think the key thing is patience. It is obvious to everyone that some people have it and some don't. Just because you are patient doesn't mean you accept mediocrity. It means that you understand the long game and that real accomplishments and building something is a process. People with a lack of patience demand immediate results regardless of the situation - and the results never meet their expectations.

With our history on the field, our resources, the current state of the SECW, our off-field history with always being nailed for recruiting stupidity (let alone the stink Camgate gave us) we have to look long game if we really want to build a program. To me, even with the 5 game flop last season, this is the first truly mediocre season under Dan. 7-5 is well above the MSU norm. The bar has been raised to he point that a Bowl Game is the standard. We don't make a Bowl Game this year, then we need to see corrective changes in the coaching staff to fix glaring weaknesses (SPECIAL TEAMS COACH!!!!), and if the trend continues next year then we have a a real argument to began about having topped out because we have not reached that minimum bar.

5 years ago, almost everyone believed we needed 7-10 years to build up to that steady 8-10 win program. Most thought it would take 3-5 years to get beyond 6-6. I still think that way. Long game guys. It sucks, but we are in the long game.

[The Croom Diaries]

Realistically how long do you think it would have taken Saban coming from the Dolphins to MSU to win a NC given our history in football? Or would he?

I'm not really sure where this question comes from. I don't think we will ever win a national title. But to play this game I guess if you gave Saban 7 years like he's had at Bama with the reputation that proceeded him and his coaching prowess I'd say we would have at least won the SEC by now - for one we wouldn't have had to get past the Alabama machine. As far as natty title, I guess if you gave him 10 years at State I'd assume he'd win one.

[PassInterference]

I like the point Croom Diaries was making. It is too easy for people to say "more bowl games in X years than we've been to in Y years prior". This isn't your father's SEC. For a lot of you, this isn't even the same SEC you attended a several years ago or more. We are almost at the "everybody gets a trophy" level of bowling.

Just bowling doesn't cut it. Six wins should be the floor for any SEC school that isn't in major rebuilding mode.

6 wins is a D.

7 wins is a C.

8 wins is a B

9-10 wins is an A.

More than that is an A+.


We got a C last year and we're scratching and clawing this year for a D.

[The Croom Diaries]

Give croom diaries a break. He is one of the few writers/bloggers out there that is tolerable. I enjoy reading his stuff more than any msu beat writer or blogger out there.

Ha, it's alright I can take it. What most don't seem to understand is that I'm a fan just like all of y'all are fans. I just prefer the blogging format to strictly message boards. I like both because I like interacting with y'all - the hardcore fans, but also I like taking things to a broader audience and letting my take stand at the forefront. People seem to think that I'm trying to be a journalist or make a career out of writing, but I'm not. I did major in sports communication but I'm just a metal building contractor and do this as a hobby, just like y'all. I'm not trying to be objective and I'm not trying to get people to like me. I hope that people do like me and I hope they care about what I have to say, but I'm fine taking one on the chin if I come at things the wrong way.

Thanks for the kind words. Always enjoy the feedback!

[MadDawg]

I think $2.7 million per year deserves a very good coach.

2.7 million in the SEC gets you a coach. Period. It's what the market bears. You want a $800k coach? Join CUSA.

[The Croom Diaries]

2.7 million in the SEC gets you a coach. Period. It's what the market bears. You want a $800k coach? Join CUSA.

Don't know where that came from but I don't want a $800K coach. My point is there are plenty of coaches who would love to make $2.7 million to coach an SEC team and they may be able to take us to the next level because they will be a better coach than Mullen. But maybe not. Maybe Mullen is the best we can do for that amount of money. Maybe he will get better. I don't know, we'll just have to see. But right now he's not cutting it. He's a CUSA level head coach based on what I've seen in 5 years.

[MadDawg]

He's a CUSA level head coach based on what I've seen in 5 years.

And you base this off the common knowledge that typically CUSA coaches ONLY lose to top 20 teams?

[fishwater99]

And you base this off the common knowledge that typically CUSA coaches ONLY lose to top 20 teams?

Well Mullen sure hasn't beaten a Top 20 team in 5 years....

We can definitely get a better coach than Mullen for $2.7 million...

[HancockCountyDog]

There has to be some middle ground here;

We all agree that Mullen is better than Croom, all we are debating is how much better. I think a lot will depend on how we finish up, and how we do next year. Ive really start to think that Mullen will win 6 this year, and then 8-9 next year.

He still does some things that drive me insane, but overall our program is healthy. We don't have a lot of transfers, or booted out of school for drugs. By and large the recruiting has been average to great. We simply need more great classses;

Ive thought about this long and hard, and I just think that its in the best interests of our football program to stay behind Mullen.

I need to add a footnote that if he gets blown out in the last two games, I reserve the right to change my mind.

[The Croom Diaries]

And you base this off the common knowledge that typically CUSA coaches ONLY lose to top 20 teams?

Here's a list of all the teams Mullen has lost to that did not finish in the top 20:
Auburn, 09
Houston, 09
Arkansas, 09
Auburn, 11
Ole Miss, 12

Here's a list of team's he's beaten that finished the year with a winning record:
Kentucky 09
Ole Miss 09
MTSU 09
Florida 10
Michigan 10
La Tech 11
MTSU 12

We've lost to every single team we've played that finished in the top 20 except OM in 2009 (#20). We've beaten every single team that has finished the year with a losing record. Among the teams in the middle (above) we are 7-5. Meh.

I don't know why it's so hard to understand this but being in the SEC elevates Mississippi State. The argument of "if we were in the Big 12 or C-USA...." holds no water because the only reason we, at MSU, get any recruits and win recruiting battles against lower-tier conference schools is because of the SEC. The only reason we have the facilities and money is because of the SEC. It's not because of our winning tradition or 100K seat stadium.

C-USA coaches are C-USA coaches because they are up-and-comers or retreads. Mullen will eventually be a retread C-USA type of coach. He is a good coach, but not good enough for the SEC. I hope I'm proven wrong, but we will eventually fire him for mediocrity whether it be now or in 3-5 years. He will then land a gig at a lower-tier conference school.

[cheewgumm]

Funny that a coach that came and told us to expect championship now has a fanbase that expects absolutely nothing, or the equivalent of it.

It's pretty apparent Stricklin agrees with the majority of our fans. If he fire Mullen in 2 years if we 6-6 a couple of time. Then he should also be fired. What he doesn't see
Is that when people stop expecting they stop caring. I know for me listening to our fans make
Me envy ole miss fans, even though they are delusional. They'll get a lot further by having expectations than we will with none.

It's sad the attitude that is overtaking our fans, which is basically " we are
Miss state. We are losers. If you don't like it, follow another team."

Hey rebels... Mission accomplished !

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Funny that a coach that came and told us to expect championship now has a fanbase that expects absolutely nothing, or the equivalent of it.

It's pretty apparent Stricklin agrees with the majority of our fans. If he fire Mullen in 2 years if we 6-6 a couple of time. Then he should also be fired. What he doesn't see
Is that when people stop expecting they stop caring. I know for me listening to our fans make
Me envy ole miss fans, even though they are delusional. They'll get a lot further by having expectations than we will with none.

It's sad the attitude that is overtaking our fans, which is basically " we are
Miss state. We are losers. If you don't like it, follow another team."

Hey rebels... Mission accomplished !

The fact that some of us believe your perspective is short-sighted doesn't mean that we accept being losers. What you are suggesting, based on the history of our program, is simply continuing the chain of revolving coaches because none can ever continue to build past a certain point.

Using your example of we should expect more year after year, we will have to fire a coach every 4-5 years.

Instead of demanding instant gratification, what some of us are suggesting is that a program with the history and draw that MSU has, must be built on a solid foundation and sometimes it may take some patience in order to get that foundation laid properly so that future success can be built on top of it. We've played coaching roulette in the past without much success, why not try it the other way?

If you want an example of doing it the way you believe it should be done, just look to our northern MS counterparts. Cuttcliff was successful by any Ole Miss standard not dated in 1950, yet they wanted more, so they fired him. Hired Orgeron, who was a disaster, so they fired him after 3 years and hired Nutt. Nutt won 8 games each of his first 2 years and the Ole Miss faithful proclaimed themselves back. Unfortunately, that foundation was not built properly and they immediately fell straight back to the cellar, and then they had to fire Nutt too.

[Percho]

I'm not really sure where this question comes from. I don't think we will ever win a national title. But to play this game I guess if you gave Saban 7 years like he's had at Bama with the reputation that proceeded him and his coaching prowess I'd say we would have at least won the SEC by now - for one we wouldn't have had to get past the Alabama machine. As far as natty title, I guess if you gave him 10 years at State I'd assume he'd win one.

I ask the question in the context of I believe Saban is a whole lot better coach than CDM and he may would have won some games at MSU that CDM hasn't but even for Saban I believe it would be nearly impossible to win a NC at MSU. I guess I am asking just where should we be in year 5 or 6 or 7? How different does one think it would be with Saban in year 5, 6 or 7 at MSU?

[preachermatt83]

I like the point Croom Diaries was making. It is too easy for people to say "more bowl games in X years than we've been to in Y years prior". This isn't your father's SEC. For a lot of you, this isn't even the same SEC you attended a several years ago or more. We are almost at the "everybody gets a trophy" level of bowling.

Just bowling doesn't cut it. Six wins should be the floor for any SEC school that isn't in major rebuilding mode.

6 wins is a D.

7 wins is a C.

8 wins is a B

9-10 wins is an A.

More than that is an A+.


We got a C last year and we're scratching and clawing this year for a D.

very good post

[cheewgumm]

"The fact that some of us believe your perspective is short-sighted doesn't mean that we accept being losers. What you are suggesting, based on the history of our program, is simply continuing the chain of revolving coaches because none can ever continue to build past a certain point. "


Most of the arugments that I have seen have said that we should be happy with 6 wins, or 7 wins because our histroy is so bad, and this as good as it's been. They are not making the point that this is a slow process and we are in the middle of it. They are making the point that we should not expect any more. does that mean ever? IF not "ever", then when is the proper time to expect more?


Using your example of we should expect more year after year, we will have to fire a coach every 4-5 years.

I never said we should expect more year after year, but I'll act like I did to address your point. My point is there should be some time period in which we expect more. I can use your logic and say the opposite about your stance. So, you think that we should Never fire a coach, ever...just so we don't have to change coaches. I don't think you think that either, but I am not saying he has to have a better record every year. If you truly believe this, then when is your barometer for when you would say we need a newe coach?



Instead of demanding instant gratification, what some of us are suggesting is that a program with the history and draw that MSU has, must be built on a solid foundation and sometimes it may take some patience in order to get that foundation laid properly so that future success can be built on top of it. We've played coaching roulette in the past without much success, why not try it the other way?

Some of you? Maybe. I have not disected every post. However, many are suggesting that we should not expect more from Mississippi State, not that we are in the middle of a process. If you are suggesting that, then again, my question is when do you cut bait? What has to happen for you to say its time to move on?


If you want an example of doing it the way you believe it should be done, just look to our northern MS counterparts. Cuttcliff was successful by any Ole Miss standard not dated in 1950, yet they wanted more, so they fired him. Hired Orgeron, who was a disaster, so they fired him after 3 years and hired Nutt. Nutt won 8 games each of his first 2 years and the Ole Miss faithful proclaimed themselves back. Unfortunately, that foundation was not built properly and they immediately fell straight back to the cellar, and then they had to fire Nutt too.

I think they made the right decision getting rid of Cutcliffe. This whole notion that building a team takes all this time is non-sense. Like it's building a house. I get the analagy, but its not accurate. You get good players and have a good coach, you have a good team...done and done. damn, at the pace we are gonig(how long has Miss State playerd football, 100 years?) I'm gonna be dead before we hit 8 wins.

[War Machine Dawg]

I think they made the right decision getting rid of Cutcliffe. This whole notion that building a team takes all this time is non-sense. Like it's building a house. I get the analagy, but its not accurate. You get good players and have a good coach, you have a good team...done and done. damn, at the pace we are gonig(how long has Miss State playerd football, 100 years?) I'm gonna be dead before we hit 8 wins.

We've had 2 8-win seasons in the last 3 years, you asshat. The agenda with some of you, or perhaps the impatience, is nuts.

[Coach34]

very good post

actually it wasnt- by his own scale- 8 wins is a B- and that is what we had last year- not a C

[Coach34]

We've had 2 8-win seasons in the last 3 years, you asshat. The agenda with some of you, or perhaps the impatience, is nuts.

no shit- some of them act like we have gone 6-6 the last 4 years....We have been 4-4 in the SEC 2 of the last 3 years.

[cheewgumm]

Hey, DICK Cheese!!!

Your write-ups are horrendous.


We've had 2 8-win seasons in the last 3 years, you asshat. The agenda with some of you, or perhaps the impatience, is nuts.

[War Machine Dawg]

Hey, DICK Cheese!!!

Your write-ups are horrendous.

Way to bring a factual, informative response to the board. Someone doesn't like having his dick stepped on for having an agenda or exposed for spewing bullshit about our records.

As for my write-ups, to each his own. I have yet to see you bring a post to the board that's worth a single damn. Just about all your 638 posts are all something along the lines of "we suck" or "fire Mullen."

[SheltonChoked]

During the best run of any conference EVER. The sec west has a longer champioship run than any other other ever. 5 national champs and 3 heismans. In the sec west alone.

We have to play 8 games against them. And have won more than any other coach in his first 5 years in our history.

Yeah it's a long road. And it will take more than 5 years. It may take more than 15

It will take $$$

[War Machine Dawg]

During the best run of any conference EVER. The sec west has a longer champioship run than any other other ever. 5 national champs and 3 heismans. In the sec west alone.

We have to play 8 games against them. And have won more than any other coach in his first 5 years in our history.

Yeah it's a long road. And it will take more than 5 years. It may take more than 15

It will take $$$

Exactly. It's a long, hard road just to be an "average" or "mediocre" team in the SEC right now. And the biggest problem we have is money, as was pointed out in a thread earlier today. While we're at it, look at the enrollment numbers for us versus the other SEC schools. We're on of the smallest in a state with a tiny population. We may have record high levels of enrollment right now, but we'd need to double our size just to even get into the ballpark of the amount of alumni most of the other SEC schools are pumping out. We don't have the raw amount of donors to draw on to build up the money warchest that other SEC programs have.

[cheewgumm]

Ya'll are right. Why even keep up with it? We have no chance and should not expect more. I'm convinced. Congrats.

Oner thing, before I go...a lot of people on here say they bring "facts" to the discussion, which basically amounts to googling State's football history and explaining how we've always sucked. Congrats, you brought "facts" to the discussion. These "facts" about how we are outmanned, out moneyed, we;'ve never won much, we've only been to a few bowls, etc..etc.. are not like a mathematical formula that predicts the future.

Things change.

The fact that you can google or go to Hailstate.com and show how we have been to X number of bowls, has 0 effect on the bowls we are to go to, or games we are to win. They are meaningless to the future.

I am anxious to see how far your patience goes. And I anxiously await WMD(ickheads) column on how it's "time for change".

And I'm not usually into name calling( go look up ALL my post and find one where I called someone a name), but you've now called me something twice. Frist one I let it go, cause I figured you were an old dude or soemthing. now, I figure it's jsut fair game.



Exactly. It's a long, hard road just to be an "average" or "mediocre" team in the SEC right now. And the biggest problem we have is money, as was pointed out in a thread earlier today. While we're at it, look at the enrollment numbers for us versus the other SEC schools. We're on of the smallest in a state with a tiny population. We may have record high levels of enrollment right now, but we'd need to double our size just to even get into the ballpark of the amount of alumni most of the other SEC schools are pumping out. We don't have the raw amount of donors to draw on to build up the money warchest that other SEC programs have.

[War Machine Dawg]

Ya'll are right. Why even keep up with it? We have no chance and should not expect more. I'm convinced. Congrats.

Oner thing, before I go...a lot of people on here say they bring "facts" to the discussion, which basically amounts to googling State's football history and explaining how we've always sucked. Congrats, you brought "facts" to the discussion. These "facts" about how we are outmanned, out moneyed, we;'ve never won much, we've only been to a few bowls, etc..etc.. are not like a mathematical formula that predicts the future.

Things change.

The fact that you can google or go to Hailstate.com and show how we have been to X number of bowls, has 0 effect on the bowls we are to go to, or games we are to win. They are meaningless to the future.

I am anxious to see how far your patience goes. And I anxiously await WMD(ickheads) column on how it's "time for change".

And I'm not usually into name calling( go look up ALL my post and find one where I called someone a name), but you've now called me something twice. Frist one I let it go, cause I figured you were an old dude or soemthing. now, I figure it's jsut fair game.

274

[The Croom Diaries]

During the best run of any conference EVER. The sec west has a longer champioship run than any other other ever. 5 national champs and 3 heismans. In the sec west alone.

We have to play 8 games against them. And have won more than any other coach in his first 5 years in our history.

Yeah it's a long road. And it will take more than 5 years. It may take more than 15

It will take $$$

Y'all act like anyone who doesn't find this acceptable just has their head in the clouds expecting to win the west. No - all anyone wants to see is MSU beat a good team. At least then we'll know we are capable of it.

If that's too much too ask, fine. But Mullen's 7 SEC wins over the past 3 years are against teams with a combined record of 5-49 in the SEC. That is what Mullen is hanging his hat on, so at the very least we have to beat 0-6 Arkansas.

[sbcmortgageman]

Give croom diaries a break. He is one of the few writers/bloggers out there thttp://youtu.be/YlVi0noRr-ohat is tolerable. I enjoy reading his stuff more than any msu beat writer or blogger out there.

Being a good blogger doesn't give someone a free pass to negatively spin coaching records just to get site clicks. I tried explaining this to him on twitter. Our beat writers are negative enough. If all the bloggers keep this crap up and post it all over message boards, twitter, Facebook, etc, just remind me again how this helps the program move forward?

[The Croom Diaries]

Being a good blogger doesn't give someone a free pass to negatively spin coaching records just to get site clicks. I tried explaining this to him on twitter. Our beat writers are negative enough. If all the bloggers keep this crap up and post it all over message boards, twitter, Facebook, etc, just remind me again how this helps the program move forward?

I'm not trying to get site clicks. I get nothing out of this. I don't get ad money or anything. This message board needs ads and donations because they have to pay for it, I joined Sports Illustrated so I wouldn't have to pay to publish the site and I get free use of pictures. The only reason I posted it on this board was because I thought it was interesting. I post about 1 of every 50 articles I write on here.

I will never sell out for page views. I will write what I believe. My point on twitter was that people hound me all day long about writing positive material but when I write positive stuff they don't read it. I wrote a story on Gabe Jackson who is about to tie the all-time starts records at State and it got 150 views. Then I wrote about how well our defensive line is doing and it got 200 views. Then I write negative stories and it gets 1,500-2,500 views. I'll write whatever I think is relevant, but I'm not going to go out of my way to pump sunshine when no one is reading it...it's not worth the time. And if I've got two stories in mind, one negative and one positive but only time to write one I'll write the negative one because no one is reading positive right now.

But I appreciate you thinking I have some affect on the program. I am a fly on the wall. Even if I disagree with the admin at the end of the year I will support their decision. I've made my beef known in-season but I won't do it during recruiting season. That is what I don't understand - people wanting me to wait until recruiting season to air out all the dirty laundry.

[sbcmortgageman]

I'm not trying to get site clicks. I get nothing out of this. I don't get ad money or anything. This message board needs ads and donations because they have to pay for it, I joined Sports Illustrated so I wouldn't have to pay to publish the site and I get free use of pictures. The only reason I posted it on this board was because I thought it was interesting. I post about 1 of every 50 articles I write on here.

I will never sell out for page views. I will write what I believe. My point on twitter was that people hound me all day long about writing positive material but when I write positive stuff they don't read it. I wrote a story on Gabe Jackson who is about to tie the all-time starts records at State and it got 150 views. Then I wrote about how well our defensive line is doing and it got 200 views. Then I write negative stories and it gets 1,500-2,500 views. I'll write whatever I think is relevant, but I'm not going to go out of my way to pump sunshine when no one is reading it...it's not worth the time. And if I've got two stories in mind, one negative and one positive but only time to write one I'll write the negative one because no one is reading positive right now.

But I appreciate you thinking I have some affect on the program. I am a fly on the wall. Even if I disagree with the admin at the end of the year I will support their decision. I've made my beef known in-season but I won't do it during recruiting season. That is what I don't understand - people wanting me to wait until recruiting season to air out all the dirty laundry.

I never said you have some kind of effect on the program. I said a bunch of bloggers writing negative stuff about university could affect the program, specially when you blast it all over social media and message boards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it you the other day that said Scott specifically replied to you on Twitter because he "knew what you would do with it". I think you may be giving yourself a little too much credit. The article about Gabe was a good article but the reason he didn't get so many views is because everybody already knows that he's a great player and prolly didn't have to read about it again.

These are just my opinions fwiw.

[SheltonChoked]

The problem is there is no in between. I want Mullen to beat a good team too. But that his wins are vs teams with a 0.0926 winning percentage and his losses are vs teams with an 0.805 leaves a lot of middle ground.

AGAIN, Mullen is recruiting better, winning more, and playing better vs the best era one confernce has ever had in the history of major college sports. (outside of UCLA basketball under Wooden and UNC womens soccer, but those we just one team) *cough**cough**cough**cough**cough**cough**cough* biggest fault was not paying Cecil Newton. A crystal football would have solved all of this.


Like I said before, It's $$$$

And Croom diary's I like your blogg. Keep posting stuff. The debate is good, but have some patience. If we go to Div4, our road will be harder, but our chances to be great will be much higher.

[The Croom Diaries]

I never said you have some kind of effect on the program. I said a bunch of bloggers writing negative stuff about university could affect the program, specially when you blast it all over social media and message boards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it you the other day that said Scott specifically replied to you on Twitter because he "knew what you would do with it". I think you may be giving yourself a little too much credit. The article about Gabe was a good article but the reason he didn't get so many views is because everybody already knows that he's a great player and prolly didn't have to read about it again.

These are just my opinions fwiw.

I was just giving specific examples about positive articles. I've been doing this for 3 years now and have written around 1,500 articles. I could write a masterpiece of positivity but if we aren't winning no one will read it.

70% of my traffic is through twitter and Facebook so it's pretty necessary. If I'm going to write something, Im going to promote it.

I know Strick knows who I am and all the admin. I also know that I've written two different articles on the video board which received over 10K views each. You only get those type of numbers if you've struck a nerve or massive agreement. I know Strick read them and has been hearing it from people. I know at least 50 people tweeted my articles to him because I saw it..so he was aware that I have been leading the charge on this. That's why I said that.

[HunterDawg]

The problem is there is no in between. I want Mullen to beat a good team too. But that his wins are vs teams with a 0.0926 winning percentage and his losses are vs teams with an 0.805 leaves a lot of middle ground.

AGAIN, Mullen is recruiting better, winning more, and playing better vs the best era one confernce has ever had in the history of major college sports. (outside of UCLA basketball under Wooden and UNC womens soccer, but those we just one team) *cough**cough**cough**cough**cough**cough**cough* biggest fault was not paying Cecil Newton. A crystal football would have solved all of this.


Like I said before, It's $$$$

And Croom diary's I like your blogg. Keep posting stuff. The debate is good, but have some patience. If we go to Div4, our road will be harder, but our chances to be great will be much higher.

We don't have any middle ground wins because we don't schedule any middle ground teams. We continue to only schedule chickenshit OCC games. All we get is a W. We can't seriously point to those wins as accomplishments or proof that we are good or getting better or anything. Any CUSA or Sunbelt team would destroy Alcorn or Jackson St. and everyone knows it. Lower tier Sunbelt teams are jokes, too. USM after 24 consecutive losses isn't going to impress anyone, either. So, we will again have wins everybody disregards and losses to highly ranked teams with nothing in between. When we try to compare stats with other teams everyone will continue to say, "look at their stats against real teams" and that crap.

It is our fault. Are we really scared to play any mid level teams? Looks like it. Reminds me of the old saying, "No coach ever got fired for winning". That should be Dan's motto.

How do we prove we are good by losing to LSU and beating Alcorn?

[sbcmortgageman]

I was just giving specific examples about positive articles. I've been doing this for 3 years now and have written around 1,500 articles. I could write a masterpiece of positivity but if we aren't winning no one will read it.

70% of my traffic is through twitter and Facebook so it's pretty necessary. If I'm going to write something, Im going to promote it.

I know Strick knows who I am and all the admin. I also know that I've written two different articles on the video board which received over 10K views each. You only get those type of numbers if you've struck a nerve or massive agreement. I know Strick read them and has been hearing it from people. I know at least 50 people tweeted my articles to him because I saw it..so he was aware that I have been leading the charge on this. That's why I said that.

Fair enough.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

If Strick reads your stuff, I wish you would write 10 articles a day about Bracky Brett. He's way more of a problem than Dan could ever dream of being.

You could also write up what your ideal schedules over a 2-3 year span would be like and mention that it shouldn't include top 15 OOC teams. Some middle of the pack BCS teams or high-level non BCS teams would generate more interest and create more wins that we could be proud of and not be told that all we can ever beat are sisters of the poor. We obviously need cupcakes sprinkled in - don't want all losable OOC games. But scheduling needs to be looked at.

Last 4 years and next year OOC:
Memphis, Alcorn St, Houston, UAB
Memphis, LA Tech, UAB, TN Martin
Jackson State, Troy, South AL, Middle TN
Oklahoma St, Alcorn St, Troy, Bowling Green
USM, UAB, South AL, TN Martin

So far we're 15-1 in those, but there's only one game in there that could really be bragged about (had we won). It came against a top 15 team on the first game of the season.

[The Croom Diaries]

If Strick reads your stuff, I wish you would write 10 articles a day about Bracky Brett. He's way more of a problem than Dan could ever dream of being.

You could also write up what your ideal schedules over a 2-3 year span would be like and mention that it shouldn't include top 15 OOC teams. Some middle of the pack BCS teams or high-level non BCS teams would generate more interest and create more wins that we could be proud of and not be told that all we can ever beat are sisters of the poor. We obviously need cupcakes sprinkled in - don't want all losable OOC games. But scheduling needs to be looked at.

Last 4 years and next year OOC:
Memphis, Alcorn St, Houston, UAB
Memphis, LA Tech, UAB, TN Martin
Jackson State, Troy, South AL, Middle TN
Oklahoma St, Alcorn St, Troy, Bowling Green
USM, UAB, South AL, TN Martin

So far we're 15-1 in those, but there's only one game in there that could really be bragged about (had we won). It came against a top 15 team on the first game of the season.

I didn't say Strick reads my stuff, I said he knows who I am and read my video board articles. I highly doubt he frequents M&WN. I've written about Bracky several times. I can only beat the dead horse so many times. As far as non-conference, I could care less who we schedule. If it's cupcakes then we should beat them if it's BCS teams then let's see how we measure up. I'm more interested in gaining bragging rights vs. SEC teams than other BCS teams.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

Agree with this. Except you seem to be pointing the finger at Dan when it's our AD who makes the schedule. It's usually either a top 10 team, a cupcake OOC game, a decent OOC win that people don't care about because it's a no-name opponent, or a down SEC program. No in-between. Since Dan has been here, he hasn't had many opportunities against teams that are pretty even with us. He'll get his shot at a similar level team on Thanksgiving - a win will hopefully calm people down.

Next year should provide opportunities too - got A&M, Auburn, Arkansas, and Vandy at home, and Kentucky and the Bears on the road. All winnable games, and at least 4 of those would be good wins. Kentucky and Arkansas should improve, so those would be decent wins also.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

I can agree with that. I want bragging rights over more than just Kentucky myself. Problem is we're in the SEC West. The East usually provides several 5-7 to 8-4 type teams, while the West is usually full of top 10 teams or LSU, who just has our number. We own Kentucky right now, won our last game with TN, got a chance to take back Egg Bowl bragging rights this year and make it 4/5, I hope next year get a chance to make it 3 in a row vs. Arkansas, will face a pretty good Vandy team at home, and may have a shot at A&M if Manziel leaves.

I'm not the most patient person myself, but I think Dan deserves next year. 1 - he's done more in his first 5 years than basically any other MSU coach, and 2 - next year has some tough but winnable games and will be his chance to right the ship. If we look like crap the last 2 weeks, write another article like this and I'll probably share it on my facebook page. Til then, let's see what happens.

[cubswillwinitonedaydawg]

I guess I need to learn how to reply with quote.

[smootness]

I'm not trying to get site clicks. I get nothing out of this. I don't get ad money or anything. This message board needs ads and donations because they have to pay for it, I joined Sports Illustrated so I wouldn't have to pay to publish the site and I get free use of pictures. The only reason I posted it on this board was because I thought it was interesting. I post about 1 of every 50 articles I write on here.

I will never sell out for page views. I will write what I believe. My point on twitter was that people hound me all day long about writing positive material but when I write positive stuff they don't read it. I wrote a story on Gabe Jackson who is about to tie the all-time starts records at State and it got 150 views. Then I wrote about how well our defensive line is doing and it got 200 views. Then I write negative stories and it gets 1,500-2,500 views. I'll write whatever I think is relevant, but I'm not going to go out of my way to pump sunshine when no one is reading it...it's not worth the time. And if I've got two stories in mind, one negative and one positive but only time to write one I'll write the negative one because no one is reading positive right now.

But I appreciate you thinking I have some affect on the program. I am a fly on the wall. Even if I disagree with the admin at the end of the year I will support their decision. I've made my beef known in-season but I won't do it during recruiting season. That is what I don't understand - people wanting me to wait until recruiting season to air out all the dirty laundry.

Uh...so you're not trying to get site clicks, but you determine what you write based on the number of site clicks it will get? Ok....

I think you just made sbcmortgageman's point for him.

[The Croom Diaries]

Uh...so you're not trying to get site clicks, but you determine what you write based on the number of site clicks it will get? Ok....

I think you just made sbcmortgageman's point for him.

No, you missed the point. I have a topic list a mile long on my phone. I get about 10 ideas for articles a day, and I have to narrow them down or combine them based on what I have time to do. I still write positive articles. I wrote one yesterday and the day before that. I write whatever I think is relevant. But if the top 3 stories I have for today are all negative I'm not going to go OUT OF MY WAY to sort through the stat book or gene'spage to find something positive to write about because no one is reading that anyway. If there's a positive story at the top of my list like there has been the last two days then I'll write it - it doesn't have any bearing what the view count will be - if I think it's important I'll write it. I could pump up the propaghanda machine pretty high if I wanted to but I don't do that. I could write an article right now about Ole Miss and get 15,000 views on it but I'm not going to. The whole point of me even mentioning the view count on the positive articles is that I keep getting hounded for not writing positive articles - but the people that are hounding me aren't even reading them! So they're not interested in reading articles, they just don't want anyone to be negative. It's either that or there's a lot more people who either think like I do or are open to hearing criticism of Mullen since every single other outlet for MSU news other than Matt Stevens is only pumping the positive.

[smootness]

I write whatever I think is relevant. But if the top 3 stories I have for today are all negative I'm not going to go OUT OF MY WAY to sort through the stat book or gene'spage to find something positive to write about because no one is reading that anyway.

This is fine, but you yourself said that if your choice is between a positive story and a negative one, you will post the negative one...for the sake of site clicks.

[The Croom Diaries]

This is fine, but you yourself said that if your choice is between a positive story and a negative one, you will post the negative one...for the sake of site clicks.

I don't know what you do for a living but let's say you sell insurance. If you had the opportunity to give a presentation for your insurance to 1,000 people or 100 people - and you could only choose one - which would you choose?

[smootness]

I don't know what you do for a living but let's say you sell insurance. If you had the opportunity to give a presentation for your insurance to 1,000 people or 100 people - and you could only choose one - which would you choose?

I didn't say you're making a bad decision, and I'm not even the one who said you're hurting the program. But you can't claim to not care about site clicks and then say that you make your decisions based on how many site clicks it gets, basically confirming his point that you will post negative things over positive ones because it generates more traffic.

Just like if I was the insurance salesman you describe, and I would always pick to present to 1,000 people, I couldn't then claim that I make decisions on the way I present based on how many people will show up to hear it.

[The Croom Diaries]

I didn't say you're making a bad decision, and I'm not even the one who said you're hurting the program. But you can't claim to not care about site clicks and then say that you make your decisions based on how many site clicks it gets, basically confirming his point that you will post negative things over positive ones because it generates more traffic.

Just like if I was the insurance salesman you describe, and I would always pick to present to 1,000 people, I couldn't then claim that I make decisions on the way I present based on how many people will show up to hear it.

Ok, fine. I care if people read what I write. Otherwise there would be no purpose to doing it. My main point was that I'm not trying to generate a bunch of page views. It was insinuated that that is what I'm trying to do - whether it be for monetary gain or to advance me as a writer. But that is not true. I do check my stats obviously because I care that I'm not speaking to an empty audience.