Printable View
This. That offense is going to LSU. They promoted the wrong coach. Sure they'll continue to be successful if they keep putting money in but to think they maintain where they are this year, that's somewhat delusional.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
I don't disagree that he hit his ceiling but the way he did things it wasn't going to go beyond that. It's kind of chicken and egg to me. Dan hit his ceiling because of his recruiting which also means that doing it that way also meant we hit that ceiling as well. It does not however mean that Dan's ceiling is MSU football's ceiling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardoMSU
No one knows how 2018 would have gone with Dan. He could very well have checked out and squandered everything as well.
I can run through that season pretty well:Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd4State
SFA-Easy W
@K-State-Uncomfortably close but a W
La Lafayette-Easy W
@Kentucky-Probably uncomfortable but I think we win. I also could see us lose a close one like we did in 16.
Florida-We win a close-ish one
Auburn-Probably the same score because we ran Dan's offense
@LSU-I still don't think we win this game. I think it's a close loss. This is the one that everyone has always said we win with Dan and I just always push back on that. I still think we lose either this one or UK.
A&M-We basically ran Dan's offense and won.
La Tech-Probably closer than it would need to be but a W
@Bama-We lose
Arky-Easy W
OM-Closer than it would need to be because Dan would be searching for another job, probably Miami or Ohio St, but we would win.
I think we're probably 10-2. So we would've been a game better.
You still in the mind set it's about the offense and an us against them mindset inside the fan base and booster factions. And I'm not saying it's not ok to have a preference I'm saying we let that override the overall goal, pull together no matter what and be in line with what we need to do to put together a great program. The closest we ever came was under Jackie and Mullen as being somewhat cohesive as one. Buy in has to happen with whoever we have as coach and offense they run. The offense they run is secondary. Everyone buys in as one, pulls the same direction without running their own agenda...scheme is secondary. Hell winning at the beginning is secondary to being completely sold out as one program, one NIL, one fanbase. They culled Lane and uplifted Petey so fast we call them delusional. We never do that. We can't even be excited as one on the first day of a hire. We still have many who hate NIL to the point of not giving. They have those who hate to be writing checks to have to support the NIL, but they send it in religiously because they are told to and know if you want wins, this is what it takes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
I mean … you always said Kamario was not starting vs Ole Miss.
Preach it brother.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
No I am not in that mindset, nor a preference. You are making some rather large leap if you think I have any agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
I was referring to how even when we were winning, there were on here some not happy unless we RTDF. To me winning is winning, no matter how it gets done. Zero preference to me.
We had some really poor leadership decisions in the recent decade, so that was the point.
Anything you are assuming otherwise is your own personal assumption it seems.
Comparing to another school that pulls the same direction is because while we had a faction pining for "Blue Collar" and "RTDF" they were focused on the future.
Heck we are just now seeing a logo on the helmet, that our leadership for years lied about.
I like what Selmon is doing and getting us there.
My point, for any group to pull the same direction is the trust the leadership is likewise doing whatever it takes. It seems we are getting there somewhat, and overcoming several years of some screwups.
Maybe so. But I think you are missing the other side of what I'm saying. You think it's just the ones who wish for an old smash mouth style of offense as an issue. I know multiple that were only invested in Mike Leach or only invested because they have some place at the table. When Mike died they left the table. When those lost a place at the table they took their ball and went home. Or the ones who pushed in Cohen. It's more of those types, way more, than those who wish we would run the ball more. Many of the run the ball types gave during Leach and still do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santiago
Some of you really misunderstood my problem with the Airbone. It wasn’t that we threw the ball so much as it was how we threw the ball. Every game became us vs the Drop 8 Defense and then we would throw check down after check down to the RB. Your RB leading the team in receptions with over 100 was ridiculous.
I love Kiffin’s O and they throw it around. Indiana’s O is good. Throwing the ball is fine. 300 dump off passes to RB’s every season was just awful to watch
True. I would much rather watch a 2-10 team throwing the ball over the field.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
To be fair a lot of that had to do with the arm talent we had at QB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
They weren't united under Matt Luke.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
Or O. Or even cutcliff after one bad year.
Unity happens when a team wins.
Let Pete go 7-5 next year and that unity will fall apart. They will be calling staff changes. Do it again in 2027 and they will want him gone.
Kiffin has been building that program for 6 years, people acting like Kiffin leaving will not have an impact sound just like the Ole Miss homers.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
Does it matter who leads in receptions if we still win more than we lose?Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
No they still were united under Freeze and believed it was all a witch hunt. The majority understood Luke was part of their unofficial punishment and they needed to just stay a float but make no mistake they were very united from Freeze forward. The fans might not have been united as much under O because the wins wasn't there but the system and machine he helped establish is still in place and has been enhanced over the years. Cutcliffe issue was he didn't want to be so brazen like many of the money guys wanted him to be. They were chomping to go full bore by that time and Cut held them back on buying recruits like several wanted. When they got Nutt they were behind him too.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
I don't care if we run the 1930 wishbone on leather helmets as long as we win. And I truly mean that. I dont care about who the coach is, scheme, uni combo, etc. Just win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Lebby's O in Y1 and Y2 were better than Leach's Y1/Y2Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt3467
But who won more? Also Leach played a far more difficult schedule across his first two years than Lebby.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Lebby's was also better than Dan's in year one and 2 as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Not to get into a pissing match. It shows that we can win multiple ways. If Lebby continues to build we could easily score 35 PPG next year.
Even more of it had to do with his decision making. He was too unsure too much and would check it down too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by MBDawg601
Leach wanted him to throw it downfield more like all of us.
A check down is a third read. Very few times do you run a play where a swing pass to a running back is the first read.
Not according to FPI:Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...encies/group/8
https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...n/2024/group/8
https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...n/2022/group/8
https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...n/2021/group/8
https://www.espn.com/college-footbal...n/2020/group/8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Leach's offense improved significantly more in year two than year one much more so than Lebby did. Playing an all SEC schedule in 2020 without a spring and a few games with half a football team is not really fair to weigh against Leach but it's done all the time. His offense jumped from 340ypg to 440ypg from year to year and scored 8 more ppg. While Lebby went from 377ypg to 398ypg and 5ppg.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt3467
Dickie Scruggs, felon. That is all.
Leach inherited some dudes on defense. Lebby inherited a juco team. Leach's recruiting was shit and he was gonna be exposed had he stayed aroundQuote:
Originally Posted by Matt3467
I dont do FPI- I do actual totals that happenedQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
"I do actual totals that happened"Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
And also "sure Leach won games, but hypothetically I imagine that he would have stopped winning if he hadn't died."
Shall we compare Leach's defenses vs Lebbys?Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
Year 1: Leach's D 6th in the SEC...Lebby? Dead last because no talent was left
Year 2? Leach had the 9th D while Lebby in Y2 had the 15th
Leach inherited Dudes. Now its NIL/Portal and moneyyyyy.
The FPI links I gave you show defense too. Compare away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
Spoken like the complete moron you are. We were favored tonightQuote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
You're taking to a complete idiot that is grabbing at anything while in the quick sand that is Lebby supportQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
We are 5-7. There was no reason for us to be favored. They are an 8 win team
Yet, we were. Vegas just didn't realize how terrible our coaching wasQuote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
FPI favored us. The SEC may have gotten passed by the Big 10, but not the ACC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
You know absolutely dick about football. It’s breathtakingly painful to behold the absurdity of your confidence rapped up in total ignorance. Sadly the real problem is to know that you don’t know you have to be able to realize that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking
Sorry I don't have your level of football knowledge to realize that actually the ACC is better than the SEC in football. I'll try to do better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coursesuper
No that is not at all what I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by Really Clark?
Comment was when we were winning, who was griping and why. How fast did we start hearing "Blue Collar" as soon as certain coaches get hired. It is a very old MSU thing.
My comment is not about wanting any offense, it is how assinine our old school fanbase acted when we were winning, and posted here, wanting the 1990s again.
Does not matter to me if we run the triple option, as long as we win.
How much does it cost to just have freaking special teams against mid level ACC teams?
If you say something to c34, he's gonna be on you. We should all have a hero in our life, so in that respect, good for him that c34 is that shining light to himQuote:
Originally Posted by Quaoarsking