Printable View
Everybody thought we should have ran it more under Leach. He was making moves to do that. We lost to UK because the lack of attempts in the run game. But what this staff is doing right now is criminal. There is no excuse for running 12 personnel over 10 when you have a TE room where you are playing and burning a true freshman's RS and playing him out of position.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainObvious
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
Like Bucky, I think they care about winning and they may THINK that they are doing what is best for MSU. But as we see that isn't really always the case. Which is why we needed a buffer between the boosters and the program which is what the athletic director is. If we had Selmon at the time I can almost assure you that we have a different coach and a much better situation. The boosters do want access- but they also want to win. And losing to Ole Miss is something that they can't stand. They will turn on their chosen coaches if they don't win in a heartbeat. Which is why if we go 4-8 or 5-7 this group is probably toast.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
And as with Allyn McKeen- a HUGE problem MSU has and always has had is a major lack of foresight. It's always knee jerk do the opposite of whatever the last coach did. Oh wait- why don't these players fit that completely opposite system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
Bucky on fire! REP GIVEN!Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
We wished Will would play better but that ain't happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
I have never referred to cigar boys in my posts. Good ole boys, being those that got their buddies hired, and those that pushed out the offensive system we had in place , and rushed in making a 180 changing it. Alos those in the administration that supported it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainObvious
This points at the staff and administration, and if any alumni then also.
It is obvious that there was this push to rush way too fast in throwing out the offensive style even before we had the players for it.
Agree with you Bucky. And for these actions by admin, staff, and any boosters with their nose in this, it has soured me from supporting MSU , until we clean house of this backwards crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckyIsAB****
Did you actually look up the Ole Miss scoring, overall record, and yards per game for this year. It makes us look even worse. I am ignoring that you had to use Vandy as a bench mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
This year, UM , since you want to compare:
Record , 4-1.
- Yards per game ... 11th in the nation
- Scoring per game ... 14th in the nation
- Time of possession... 127th(because they are scoring so dang fast, but I would imagine Arnett hates that since it puts his defense on the field too much)
Ole Miss has played LSU and Bama also, same as us.
Our stats last year are way better than this year, and that is after a full season. So far this year we have played weaker defenses statistically.
We are a few inches from being 1-4 this year moreso than the cheerleading a couple of people have done on here that we are improving.
And anyone saying give all this a chance this year, I am tuning them out. The boosters, staff and admin that wanted to nuke what we were building over the past 3 years showed no patience. Better skill players, and mobile qb's were being recruited and signed. The AR was headed toward modifications , and it was still the best equalizer on talent differential.
I cannot support this program with this good ole boy stuff going on.
I hope we win, and turn things around, but I am done as far as supporting good ole boys that nuked what we were building.
What has soured me is the lying about the scheme to the fans and the players. At least be honest about the scheme. It was intentionally misleading I'm sure with the thought that whatever they're doing now would be betters. And then they could say "see told you so".Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
Instead we are left with a team that is poorly coached, boring, and isn't working on top of not being what the fans wanted in the first place.
What? I wasn't using Vandy as a bench mark. That's silly. Just showing that 3 schools are below us in TOP, two good offenses at that and Kentucky is right with us. TOP is a pretty useless stat to be measured by. Just sick of those acting like we were great at ball control in SEC games when we were not. Especially those who lean heavily on metrics to be using TOP is pretty comical and showing they didn't actually look to see how we actually did last year. It would have put us somewhere in the 90's in rankings in SEC games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
Arnett was set up for failure from the word go. He's in over his head. He might be a good head coach ten years from now, but not at this moment. Another year with Arnett is a deeper hole to crawl out of when he's gone. He was promoted after a tragic situation. There was no formal coaching search. This is not the same as hiring some guy with a decent resume, some head coaching experience and giving him two or three years to build his team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
I agree, and is why I keep saying we need to clean house on those that were in his ear on changing so drastically this year on the offense. It is obvious there was a group pushing for an instant nuking of what we were building and this was the opportunity. We had Parson, Creed, Justin Brown(left due to not going to catch balls his freshman year with limited WRs on the field), and others were coming in that would amp up any modified AR.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapGame
But for the sake of returning players , transitioning for them, it was a very stupid admin, staff, and booster effort of changing things so fast.
Arnett could have brought in an AR OC, or any combination of efforts with Barbay to keep the transition this year slow. They rushed it all, and we had boosters championing this as progress.
How the heck do they think we signed Parson, Creed, Brown, and others? IT was not because we RTDF.
That is my take on it at least, right or wrong. I hope those that cheered for this are happy, because they will lose NIL funding from all this crap.
Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ole Miss are low because they are actually scoring and scoring quickly. We are just getting 3 and outs. Being bunched in with Vandy with TOP isn't a good thing. And let's be honest, Vandy is scoring more PPG than us right now anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
Ole Miss - 44.6 PPG - 6th in the country
Kentucky - 37 PPG - 21st in the country
Tennessee - 36 PPG - 29th in the country
Vandy - 31.3 PPG - 56th in the country
State - 28 PPG - 73rd in the country
We are so great.
During the transition I was very puzzled by Arnett's actions, his coaching moves, etc. How he seemed to treat all the Leach's O staff. Didn't understand it. I felt like he almost hated everything about Leach and the O staff even tho Leach was the one who gave him the opportunity to come here and have total freedom running his scheme.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
But I just said to myself it's his team now and he needs to set the course. I thought it would set us back but was hoping it didn't set us back much.
Now I understand why I felt Arnett hated Leach so much.
Oh I know, I was just using them because TOP is not an end all be all stat. Just tired of how we were this ball control offense from some but they didn't research that we really were not in the SEC. Especially those that use TOP now but are metrics centered with other arguments. Analytics don't regard TOP very highly.Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachT14
I definitely agree. TOP is extremely meaningless. If you are a modern college football coach and still using that as a barometer for success, you have no business being a college football coach. Looking at you Zach Croom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
But we scored 2 TDs against Bama ***Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachT14
Then tell Arnett that. Because he was on TV this season on SEC, saying that was the main reason he changed offense...... after publicly saying he would change little.Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachT14
That is the reason I brought up TOP.
And he has gone against 4 of the worst defenses in the nation so far.
Unfortunately for the folks who have their access with the program renewed, overall stats don't like like our coaching staff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
And they could care less about the young recruits we signed that thought they were coming in as Coach Leach's last recruiting class. Parson held the class together telling them that.Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachT14
But you are right, those wanted access and to run what they want instead.
We were so close to breaking loose in this AR modified with some really athletic skill players. Something we never had in the past.
I think and this my opinion only, he was right when you look at the Kentucky game last year. The defense played well until they just gave out because of all the 3 and outs. It was a close game but we were 20 minutes to the negative. You can't ask a defense to be out there 40 minutes and expect to win. That's a big big time differential in a close game. We would go through way too many dry spells of 3 and outs during games. Now he hasn't corrected it, we are worse but that's has as much to do with our defense not stopping even long 1st down conversions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago