Truly hilarious that any of you think this is about Dan Mullen......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoomBoom

from your own source:

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries

---

That doesn't matter at all. It's not all about who your coach is. Ever wonder why the same programs continue to average more wins over time?

This thread is ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoomBoom

At what point in MSU history were we offering top 15 pay?

---

That's irrelevant. I'm not even sure what your point is.

What record do you think Nick Saban would have here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

That doesn't matter at all. It's not all about who your coach is. Ever wonder why the same programs continue to average more wins over time?

---

oh, i agree. that's why i supported Mullen when he had delivered at Top 35 team as a young coach. he deserved time to build the program, and grow as a coach. but he hasn't done either in years. it's time.

and is is SOMEWHAT about who your coach is, and we deserve one commensurate with what we are paying.

i do think we can hire a coach that can field a team equal or a little better to what Mullen fielded in 2014.......and do more with it. it would take things aligning well to have a playoff shot, and even then a longshot to win, but it's possible, and honestly it was never possible under Mullen. his ceiling is about #15, and he reached it in 2014.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

That's irrelevant. I'm not even sure what your point is.

What record do you think Nick Saban would have here?

---

irrelevant? wtf do you think your argument was?

when saying we are repeating the past, it sure as hell matters when the situation is different. it makes a TON of difference, when you run off a coach, on whether you can compete for a good replacement or not. historically, we could not. presently, we damn sure can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

Really? Because the 2013 talking points of why we need to get rid of him were very similar as today. Very similar.

---

That's the point, the talking points are the same for a reason. If we would have acted then we would be in year 3 of a new coach instead of trying to figure out how to get rid of him now.

BoomBoom we simply disagree on how much more money can buy us. Do I think we're overpaying for Mullen? Probably so. But he's following the same track Jackie Sherrill followed, and most agree he was an elite coach.

I think 10-2 is about the best any SEC have-not school can muster. Maybe 11-1 in the East but then they always get their ass kicked in Atlanta. Obviously this can flip-flop.

Anyways, unless we're getting Bobby Petrino or a handful of other elite coaches, to me it simply doesn't matter. We're going to suck more than we are good. Until we break that mold and do things differently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

BoomBoom we simply disagree on how much more money can buy us. Do I think we're overpaying for Mullen? Probably so. But he's following the same track Jackie Sherrill followed, and most agree he was an elite coach.

I think 10-2 is about the best any SEC have-not school can muster. Maybe 11-1 in the East but then they always get their ass kicked in Atlanta. Obviously this can flip-flop.

Anyways, unless we're getting Bobby Petrino or a handful of other elite coaches, to me it simply doesn't matter. We're going to suck more than we are good. Until we break that mold and do things differently.

---

i think we ARE following the track MSU took with Sherrill. his time had passed, maybe due to grief over Keffer, maybe due to the game just passing him by, but the point is we held on to him too long, and dug a hole for the program. we are for damn sure repeating that mistake.

the other mistake you are making is assuming the future will mirror the past. for all we know, Saban retires, LSU muffs replacing Miles, and Ole Miss gets hammered....leaving the West wide open if we are in position to take advantage.

but yes, if you think top pay will not attract a top coach, then we disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

This is about Mississippi State football. A normal coach cannot build a consistent winning football program here. We simply do not have the resources that the 'haves' possess. Make peace with this fact. I'll spare you details, because certain posters will just get bogged down on them. Bottom line is, we are at the bottom when the historical equation spits out what's needed to be a successful football program.

Until we redefine how we want to compete in football, this historical trend will continue. Dan Mullen is as good as the next guy, and he'd probably win big at a 'have' school. He nearly won big here. So let's quit thinking that we can just go get another guy. I know we have more money than ever before, but if you hadn't noticed, the price to play is higher than it's ever been before too. Not to mention assistants.

Ole Miss chose to pay players and recruit better. That's them - not us. It fits them - not us.

No, we're going to have to jar our line of thinking. I don't know the answer, but it's going to have to revolve around JUCO players and a true outside the box innovative offense. Great defense should come with the territory, that's what the state of MS produces better than anything.

---

Shit, this is your answer for every sport we compete in. Because we are poor OL' Mississippi State.

One of your worst ever posts, and that's saying a lot. We CAN compete with ALMOST anyone in the country. How much money is enough? We have SEC money, SEC network money, SEC facilities. We can pay a HC 4-5 million a year or more if needed. We just have to commit to winning. Make the right hire, and there are tons of coaches that would take this job right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TimberBeast

That's the point, the talking points are the same for a reason. If we would have acted then we would be in year 3 of a new coach instead of trying to figure out how to get rid of him now.

---

And history proved you wrong. All the soothsaying in 2013 ended up being foolishness when you have the results of the last 2 years staring at you. You can't jump the last 2 years or assume the next coach would have done the same. No way to know that but we do know keeping him at that time was 100% unequivocally the correct answer. How can you even debate it with 19 wins the last two years staring at you? That's silly. Now it may time this year depending on how it plays out but you cant go back to 2013 and act like you knew this was going to happen because not a one who was pushing to get rid of him then suspected a run to #1. I know many saw potential for the following year but not to that degree and by the end of the year the vast majority of the ones pushing for a change had back off that stance by the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

Quote where I said this.

My post was in no way meant to project my opinion of Dan Mullen. It's simply to illustrate how this scenario plays out over and over and over again in MSU football history.

---

This is the way it plays out everywhere. Every team trends up and down. Every single one. Historically, the good ones make moves before they get into a 5 year long rut. We've historically been bad at making moves to avoid the long ruts as opposed to a down year or two.

Meaning, in some form or another, every Power 5 school is where coaches go to die (the graveyard). Very rarely does a coach move up from a major school. 95% of them end up getting fired. That's how the business works. Auburn's been a graveyard for 25 years. Nebraska is the same. Don't even get into schools like Indiana, Illinois. Heck, when was the last time a school like Texas A&M had a coach that didn't end with a firing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawg-gone-dawgs

I am so sick of this cop-out that, "This is just the way it's gonna be"..BS. This lame ass excuse is what has and will continue to give Dan a pass. I don't blame him for staying under those circumstances. If the fans and administration don't expect big things then he will be here forever and all will be just rosey because "poor lil Mississippi State just can't do any better...."

---

It's not a cop out, it's reality. What's real is
athletic budget
Starkvegas population
Mississippi (have you noticed our less than progressive elected leaders?)
school enrollment numbers (which lead to a smaller population of alumnae)
athletic history
and so on...

We just don't have the infrastructure to be competitive on a consistent basis. Jackie did it but fell off quick. That was the best we had for a long time. Now Mullen has led us to unchartered territory with Dak (probably the only reason we got there) and everyone wants more. If you want change then we'll have to double the numbers of everything I just listed (enrollment, athletic budget, etc) and that's just not going to happen.

I have more fun supporting our Bulldogs now, but cheering for the SEC as a whole (except for Ole Miss), than when I used to fret about our 3-8 record under Rockey Felker in the 80s. These past few years have been incredible, but it's all we can expect from the resources we have. If we grow, so will the higher tier competition. We will always be Miss State and the sooner you accept that the happier you'll be.

Baseball and basketball are on a different level as smaller schools can compete. Miss State competes well in those to major sports.

Hail State!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SailingDawg

It's not a cop out, it's reality. What's real is
athletic budget
Starkvegas population
Mississippi (have you noticed our less than progressive elected leaders?)
school enrollment numbers (which lead to a smaller population of alumnae)
athletic history
and so on...

We just don't have the infrastructure to be competitive on a consistent basis. Jackie did it but fell off quick. That was the best we had for a long time. Now Mullen has led us to unchartered territory with Dak (probably the only reason we got there) and everyone wants more. If you want change then we'll have to double the numbers of everything I just listed (enrollment, athletic budget, etc) and that's just not going to happen.

I have more fun supporting our Bulldogs now, but cheering for the SEC as a whole (except for Ole Miss), than when I used to fret about our 3-8 record under Rockey Felker in the 80s. These past few years have been incredible, but it's all we can expect from the resources we have. If we grow, so will the higher tier competition. We will always be Miss State and the sooner you accept that the happier you'll be. I'll even add that if Mullen acted like he was fully invested in the program people would even be willing to overlook one losing season without giving the man total grief about it but unfortunately, he doesn't act that way.

Baseball and basketball are on a different level as smaller schools can compete. Miss State competes well in those to major sports.

Hail State!

---

This whole thread is bogus. Dan Mullen himself has already shown you can win here at least enough to go to bowl games by doing so for 6 straight years. And nobody is raising the bar. Most everyone I've seen on this board has said that a 6-7 win season this year would be perfectly acceptable as we transition from Dak and have a very young team in areas (because of some weak recruiting by Mullen and staff). People are upset now because what we saw Saturday looks much more like a 3-4 Vandy type team than a 6-7 win team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

And history proved you wrong. All the soothsaying in 2013 ended up being foolishness when you have the results of the last 2 years staring at you. You can't jump the last 2 years or assume the next coach would have done the same. No way to know that but we do know keeping him at that time was 100% unequivocally the correct answer. How can you even debate it with 19 wins the last two years staring at you? That's silly. Now it may time this year depending on how it plays out but you cant go back to 2013 and act like you knew this was going to happen because not a one who was pushing to get rid of him then suspected a run to #1. I know many saw potential for the following year but not to that degree and by the end of the year the vast majority of the ones pushing for a change had back off that stance by the end.

---

i think the season end result isn't far off from what most expected.

judging 2014 by the "run to #1" is just as dumb as judging 2016 by the loss to USA. you have to look at the body of work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

That is a symptom of the whole deal. It isn't mutually exclusive. He seems to me like he's just sort of given up DUE to the fact that he didn't get it done when he had the chance. He knows it's pretty damn hard to do. He knows his method (the same method that is used all over the country) results in a 'peak'. Can't keep it consistent.

---

So if he has given up as you say, then it absolutely is on HIM and HIM ALONE. That has not a damn thing to do with our history, resources, or expectations. It is in no way a "Mississippi State football problem" when our coach who is making $4.3 million gives up after a stretch of 19 wins over two years. That is a completely absurd proposition. If anything, he should be driven even further to push us over the top after seeing how close we've been. And if he isn't, then we have to find someone who will be immediately. It's that simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoomBoom

i think the season end result isn't far off from what most expected.

judging 2014 by the "run to #1" is just as dumb as judging 2016 by the loss to USA. you have to look at the body of work.

---

I agree. But to argue that we should have fired him in 2013, with a winning season, and use what happened Sat as an "I told you so" moment is pretty asinine with the latest body of work staring at you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarketingBully

Shit, this is your answer for every sport we compete in. Because we are poor OL' Mississippi State.

---

No, just football.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taog Redloh

That's irrelevant. I'm not even sure what your point is.

What record do you think Nick Saban would have here?

---

Better than Dan, and he wouldn't lose to USA..

yeah but we have the resources to out recruit and beat USA. Cmon.