2nd hand from the Admin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

Kentucky and Tennessee had missed bowls for multiple seasons- not 1 time

UPig had an interim coach- he was going to be fired regardless

Auburn was a cluster

The thing is- the school that stuck with their coach for his down season after a a good run- Missouri- is now reaping the benefits for doing so.

---

Mizzou also had a killer schedule last year. SELU, Arizona State (8-5), Syracuse (8-5 Big East Co-Champs), and Central Florida (10-4 C-USA East Co-Champs).

LT would have been proud of that. Mizzou got caught in the cross fire of all the Texas/Big 12 BS. They really wanted to go to the Big 10, but it blew up in their face and they bailed to the SEC. They scheduled that way because their conference is weak, and Pinkel was going to get a pass no matter what any of their fans said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homedawg

I'm not sure abou that. Attitudes? Maybe talent? No. Croom inherited multiple nfl guys and we lost to MAINE! Who did Mullen inherit besides dixon that was an nfl guy?

---

Mullen inherited Dixon, Chaney, Charles Mitchell, KJ Wright, Quinten Saulsberry, Derek Sherrod, Pernell McPhee, and Kyle Love who all spent time on NFL 53-man rosters. Many would also count Fletcher Cox & Josh Boyd. I can't remember the timing of commitments by Banks, Chris White, Cam Lawrence & Gabe Jackson.

Croom inherited Norwood, Quinton Culberson, Kevin Dockery, Willie Evans, David Stewart & Deljuan Robinson

Croom inherited some talent, but he got some bums too that didn't deserve to be in a BCS conference. I would never argue for Croom over Mullen from a coaching standpoint, but having been at State when Croom took over, I remember well how terrible that group was as a whole.

We need to drop the shit about our history! Our past does not define our future! Mullen has proven a few things, one we dont have to lose to lesser opponents, two, we cannot compete with SEC elite if we continue to recruit in the 30's and 40's, three MSU can get to bowl games. There are other things he has done well, but IMO he has made some really head scratching mistakes in year five. I hear folks on the radio and read comments on boards that Mullen is a young coach and is going to make mistakes, but its his 5th year and he is still making those mistakes. You know what that tells me, he is to stubborn to see his failures, or he is to stupid to see his failures. We have to let the season play out, but those that are defending Mullen, let me ask you this, if we end up 5-7 and then finish 2014 at 6-6 with as some would say a much more manageable schedule, did we do the right thing by keeping him?
One more thing, for those that think this is a knee jerk reaction to OM, in 2010/11 we had just won 9 games 2 in row vs Rebs and had the best players in the State locked up as commitments and were headed to the gator bowl, but by Feb our class ranked in the 40's. Now fast forward to this past Feb, Freeze kicked our ass in the egg bowl and in recruiting, then watching them this season has shown they are moving in the right direction. Proof was the LSU game, some of you all were so excited we went toe to toe with LSU but lost by 33, two weeks later OM with an injury filled rooster of freshman and walk ons beat LSU. So again who is living the relentless effort creed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawgfan77

We need to drop the shit about our history! Our past does not define our future! Mullen has proven a few things, one we dont have to lose to lesser opponents, two, we cannot compete with SEC elite if we continue to recruit in the 30's and 40's, three MSU can get to bowl games. There are other things he has done well, but IMO he has made some really head scratching mistakes in year five. I hear folks on the radio and read comments on boards that Mullen is a young coach and is going to make mistakes, but its his 5th year and he is still making those mistakes. You know what that tells me, he is to stubborn to see his failures, or he is to stupid to see his failures. We have to let the season play out, but those that are defending Mullen, let me ask you this, if we end up 5-7 and then finish 2014 at 6-6 with as some would say a much more manageable schedule, did we do the right thing by keeping him?
One more thing, for those that think this is a knee jerk reaction to OM, in 2010/11 we had just won 9 games 2 in row vs Rebs and had the best players in the State locked up as commitments and were headed to the gator bowl, but by Feb our class ranked in the 40's. Now fast forward to this past Feb, Freeze kicked our ass in the egg bowl and in recruiting, then watching them this season has shown they are moving in the right direction. Proof was the LSU game, some of you all were so excited we went toe to toe with LSU but lost by 33, two weeks later OM with an injury filled rooster of freshman and walk ons beat LSU. So again who is living the relentless effort creed?

---

Exactly. This is what our enemies want us to think. "You have never won, so you never will, so don't even try."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

"Bowl games" is window dressing BS to prop him up -- when NOTHING about that accomplishment can be compared to previous MSU coaches.

- When Bellard took over here, there were 12 total bowl games -- meaning you had to finish in the top 24 to go: Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta, Sun, Cotton, Gator, Citrus(Cap1), Liberty, Peach(ChickFilA), Independence, Holiday

- When Jackie took over here, there were 15 total bowl games -- meaning you had to finish in the top 30 to go: The above plus Hall of Fame(Outback), Copper(Buffalo Wild Wings), and Tangerine(Russell Athletics).

- When Croom took over here, there were 27 total bowl games.

- When Mullen took over here, there were 33 total bowl games. In his second year, 2 more were added: Heart of Dallas and Pinstripe Bowl. Taking the total number to 35.

- In 2014, there is expected to be 4 more bowls added: Bahamas, Boca Raton, Miami Beach, and Camellia bowls.

We're staring at 78 of 126 FBS teams playing bowl games next year.

By previous standards -- Mullen has had ONE bowl team here in 5 years.

---

Now this is informative and interesting. I've been wondering what the numbers on this we're concerning what it took to gain bowl eligibility versus the different coaching era's.
This provides perspective to anyone no matter what side of the fence you're on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

Exactly. This is what our enemies want us to think. "You have never won, so you never will, so don't even try."

---

Look back in our history and count all the 5-6 seasons, those would now be bowl games. Hell Jackie went 7-4 and stayed home

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

Look back in our history and count all the 5-6 seasons, those would now be bowl games. Hell Jackie went 7-4 and stayed home

---

STOP LOOKING AT OUR PAST!!! We can win should and will win but stop with the old M-State mentality. Our future should define us not our past. It's time to move in a new direction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

Look back in our history and count all the 5-6 seasons, those would now be bowl games.

---

This is not exactly true. We used to only play 6 conference games and 5 OOC games until 1992 when the SEC went to 8 conference games. We've only gone 5-6 once since 1992 (1996). We had plenty of OOC games to become bowl eligible- we just had bad teams

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tbonewannabe

Look back in our history and count all the 5-6 seasons, those would now be bowl games. Hell Jackie went 7-4 and stayed home

---

Correct.

By today's 6-6 bowl standards and assuming we go .500 in overtime(tie) games, and schedule a 12th game patsy, we would have played in 27 bowl games since 1970.

We would have only "missed" 16 bowl games in 43 years -- 7 of which would have happened under Croom and at the end of Jackie.

We would have AVERAGED making a bowl game 63% of the time... And that's in our own "woeful" history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coach34

This is not exactly true. We used to only play 6 conference games and 5 OOC games until 1992 when the SEC went to 8 conference games. We've only gone 5-6 once since 1992 (1996). We had plenty of OOC games to become bowl eligible- we just had bad teams

---

You are missing the glaring difference which is what Cadaver has been talking about - the SEC has raised our floor tremendously. We have DOUBLED our budget over the last 5 years. The gap between us and lower tier conference schools used to be 10 yards, now it's 100. We have so many more advantages because of TODAY'S SEC that we are able to recruit better just by showing up. Can you deny this? THAT is why we are doing the minimum. No lower-tier conference school should be able to compete with us for four quarters. We should always win those games, and win them handedly. You have to leave the past in the past because things are MUCH different today. Once you recognize this fact you will see it as most everyone else does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Croom Diaries

You are missing the glaring difference which is what Cadaver has been talking about - the SEC has raised our floor tremendously. We have DOUBLED our budget over the last 5 years. The gap between us and lower tier conference schools used to be 10 yards, now it's 100. We have so many more advantages because of TODAY'S SEC that we are able to recruit better just by showing up. Can you deny this? THAT is why we are doing the minimum. No lower-tier conference school should be able to compete with us for four quarters. We should always win those games, and win them handedly. You have to leave the past in the past because things are MUCH different today. Once you recognize this fact you will see it as most everyone else does.

---

This is SO true that I don't see how people could miss it. We have enough talent now just because so many kids want to play in the SEC that we can play poorly and still normally squeak out non-conference games. That was not the case 20 years ago. I will stand by my statement that there are a LOT of coaches out there that could do what Mullen is currently doing with our program. No, a totally incompetent coach couldn't but there are a whole lot our there that could. I mean heck, is there any scenario out there 20 years ago where Vandy could gather enough talent to do what they are doing now? KY, who really doesn't even care that much about football, is having a big recruiting class and will likely be much better in another year or 2.

and considering we play 8 SEC games, we should welcome 4 patsies a year to guarantee a great shot at a bowl game as a minimum. Raise the floor to six wins, then have a few seasons where we push into the 8-10 range with a chance to win the West when the stars align. maintaining a winning record and consistency is a must. Our program (and I include everyone from the AD, to coach, to the fan base) has failed to establish that floor this year. That's piss poor and unacceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Croom Diaries

You are missing the glaring difference which is what Cadaver has been talking about - the SEC has raised our floor tremendously. We have DOUBLED our budget over the last 5 years. The gap between us and lower tier conference schools used to be 10 yards, now it's 100. We have so many more advantages because of TODAY'S SEC that we are able to recruit better just by showing up. Can you deny this? THAT is why we are doing the minimum. No lower-tier conference school should be able to compete with us for four quarters. We should always win those games, and win them handedly. You have to leave the past in the past because things are MUCH different today. Once you recognize this fact you will see it as most everyone else does.

---

Boom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maroonmania

This is SO true that I don't see how people could miss it. We have enough talent now just because so many kids want to play in the SEC that we can play poorly and still normally squeak out non-conference games. That was not the case 20 years ago. I will stand by my statement that there are a LOT of coaches out there that could do what Mullen is currently doing with our program. No, a totally incompetent coach couldn't but there are a whole lot our there that could. I mean heck, is there any scenario out there 20 years ago where Vandy could gather enough talent to do what they are doing now? KY, who really doesn't even care that much about football, is having a big recruiting class and will likely be much better in another year or 2.

---

Boom boom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Political Hack

and considering we play 8 SEC games, we should welcome 4 patsies a year to guarantee a great shot at a bowl game as a minimum. Raise the floor to six wins, then have a few seasons where we push into the 8-10 range with a chance to win the West when the stars align. maintaining a winning record and consistency is a must. Our program (and I include everyone from the AD, to coach, to the fan base) has failed to establish that floor this year. That's piss poor and unacceptable.

---

Boom boom boom

3 great posts in a row.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by engie

Correct.

By today's 6-6 bowl standards and assuming we go .500 in overtime(tie) games, and schedule a 12th game patsy, we would have played in 27 bowl games since 1970.

We would have only "missed" 16 bowl games in 43 years -- 7 of which would have happened under Croom and at the end of Jackie.

We would have AVERAGED making a bowl game 63% of the time... And that's in our own "woeful" history.

---

Make it 4 strong posts in a row.

Whoever said that UK doesn't care about football, that's not really true. UK has always had excellent attendance, even when they were horrible. They are top fifteen every year in attendance. UK most assuredly cares about football.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pollodawg

Whoever said that UK doesn't care about football, that's not really true. UK has always had excellent attendance, even when they were horrible. They are top fifteen every year in attendance. UK most assuredly cares about football.....

---

Being in Lexington has to help with that some.