Random Poster's rumors from Fall camp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoopsDawg

Substitute Lee with Gibson and I agree with you.

---

I like Gibson. It's hard to overlook Lee's YPA though. I understand why he doesn't play and I hope he gets his act together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcdog70

so what you are saying that being #1 in the SEC is "GOOD"-no shit Sherlock. Any time MSU can be in the top five in the SEC is AWESOME. Optimized there is a word you looked up in your Funk and Wagnalls. Besides that Dak was second in total offense last year behind an OL that is much maligned by you mullygrubbers. Quit with the bitching until you have something to bitch about. Do you just lie around dreaming up shit? **** Chris Brown and the horse he rode in on.

---

I'm saying it could have been even better. And just think how good it's going to be without Dak who was not only our best passer but essentially our best running back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg34

Think about a diamond formation with those three in the backfield at the same time.

---

I like how you think. And I would love to see some diamond formation stuff next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I like how you think. And I would love to see some diamond formation stuff next year.

---

Really? The diamond again?
Think about our O-Line and how defenses would attack the diamond.
We run a spread offense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PMDawg

8th year. EIGHTH. He is who he is at this point. I'm not really saying this to you, don't take it that way. Just kind of putting it out there, because I'm with you.

---

Sorry I come across as a little thin-skinned at times. Never would have taken issue with your post anyway. As Johnson85 said, there is evidence he is making some changes.

I also suspect, after last year, he figures he will probably be around longer than he thought, so may be more motivated to get it done here. I've posted before a source I have told me he was looking at Maryland, in part because he was frustrated with OM cheating. Now that they are about to get busted, perhaps he's not looking for the exit anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacklistedbully

Sorry I come across as a little thin-skinned at times. Never would have taken issue with your post anyway. As Johnson85 said, there is evidence he is making some changes.

I also suspect, after last year, he figures he will probably be around longer than he thought, so may be more motivated to get it done here. I've posted before a source I have told me he was looking at Maryland, in part because he was frustrated with OM cheating. Now that they are about to get busted, perhaps he's not looking for the exit anymore.

---

I also heard the same thing from a well connected booster, that Dan was fed up with the unm cheating and the playing field not being level in that regard. Things changed though when it got real with the NCAA and unm and he's been re energized. We shall see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dallas_Dawg

Really? The diamond again?
Think about our O-Line and how defenses would attack the diamond.
We run a spread offense

---

Hahahahaha! Todd is frustrated by Mullen's stubbornness with the OL and you are frustrated at his diamond formation and he isn't even a coach. Hilarious!

Todd you should go and volunteer to coach a pee wee football team and run the diamond.***

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

Maybe so, but we were a bad 2-pt conversion pass to shump away from beating lsu last year. We had the right guy (shump) on the right play, but again, a bad pass...

---

What?!? I'm a fan of most of your posts, but c'mon... you forget the ***?? I could have caught that pass. Not perfect, but geez.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turfdawg67

What?!? I'm a fan of most of your posts, but c'mon... you forget the ***?? I could have caught that pass. Not perfect, but geez.

---

Well I didn't have a great angle at the game, but it looked to be a really poor pass. I hope you can forgive me since you're probably the only fan of my posts haha

It was a poor pass and a very difficult catch for Shump. That was on Dakota

This whole thing about not playing more talented Rb's because of pass blocking issues after two years... yeah.. I'm not buying that shit anymore.

So what's the main issue? Attitude, approach to studies, somebody wears a dirty sanchez to practice? Can anybody she'd some real light here..?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Random Poster

It was a poor pass and a very difficult catch for Shump. That was on Dakota

---

It was a poor pass, but not an uncatchable one. It hit him in the hands, but he did have to reach back awkwardly for it. A playmaker probably makes the catch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blacklistedbully

It was a poor pass, but not an uncatchable one. It hit him in the hands, but he did have to reach back awkwardly for it. A playmaker probably makes the catch.

---

Talking about the LSU game? Where Shump let the ball roll off his chest in the endzonr?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Random Poster

It was a poor pass and a very difficult catch for Shump. That was on Dakota

---

Exactly. Could it have been caught? Possibly. Was it a bad pass? Absolutely.

It's ok to say Dak made a mistake he's great but it was a poor pass & he'd tell you the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew

Exactly. Could it have been caught? Possibly. Was it a bad pass? Absolutely.

It's ok to say Dak made a mistake he's great but it was a poor pass & he'd tell you the same.

---

Exactly. We can blame 32 for alot of shit- that isnt one. 15 was to blame there.

Hell, 15 is the one that missed Walley wide open in the seam for a TD to jam the ball into Wilson for a 9 yard gain. If 15 reads the coverage- Walley walks in and there is no FG attempt vs LSU. Prescott was great- but he wasnt perfect.

Holy cow, no one is saying who's to blame for the loss of the game but Shump should've had it. Yeah the pass could've been perfect, but it hit his hands, chest, hands again and then the ground. I'm a Shump apologist, but that's obvious!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turfdawg67

Holy cow, no one is saying who's to blame for the loss of the game but Shump should've had it. Yeah the pass could've been perfect, but it hit his hands, chest, hands again and then the ground. I'm a Shump apologist, but that's obvious!

---

That's just it. The pass didn't have to be perfect if it would've just been ok he catches it. They ran a perfect play & the whole part of the end zone is open. He could've lobbed it to him. He decided to throw it on a line & then throws it behind him. Again it wasn't an impossible catch but if Dak puts the pass anywhere but where he did it's an easy pitch & catch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Commercecomet24

Shumpert has no vision at all. I re watched all of our games and time and time again shumpert missed the hole. One play against auburn really stands out. The right side of our ol collapsed the auburn DL, bear had the corner sealed and shump had 15 yards before he would've been touched. Instead he cuts back left runs into dak and gets tackled for an 8 yard loss. Our ol weren't world beaters but shump made them look much worse when he ran the ball. He missed the hole 80% of the time.

---

Yea, I joked that if Shumpert was trying to run through the St. Louis arch he would somehow manage to hit one of the columns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maroonmania

Yea, I joked that if Shumpert was trying to run through the St. Louis arch he would somehow manage to hit one of the columns.

---

That made me laugh! I appreciate all our players and the effort they put out for State and shump plays hard, vision is just not one of his strong points. I just saw to many times last year where he just completely missed a hole.

To those saying "we were ranked _____ in the SEC! Offense isn't the problem!"....I say to you, then you and I have different goals for MSU football. I don't give a rats ass if we are #1 offensively in the country, you should ALWAYS try to maximize your offense. You don't just say, "Yea, we could gain 80+ more yards per game and 5+ more points per game if we would go ahead and move Aeris to starter....but F it, we'll be top 5 offensively even wasting 8 plays a game, so let's just do that instead." That's ignorance.

You aren't always going to have an equal offense and defense. But guess what, if you have an above average offense and maximize its' potential...you may not have to be equally good defensively to still win most of your games. The problem is, we don't maximize our offense, so in order to beat good teams we have to rely on our weaker units to play over their head bc we're giving away potential points and yards offensively by trotting guys like Shumpert out there. It's stupid. Period. This isn't intramurals, brother...this is the SEC. You don't reward the less talented hard worker with starting RB game reps in this league. You put your most talented RB in at starting RB, and if he doesn't know the play book or pass blocking....You. Teach. His. Ass. So. He. DOES. You're the coach....so COACH

That's my opinion.

I said it in the other thread and I'll say it in this one. Mullen is coaching for the long haul. It seems to me that he puts a high value on the maintaining the culture of the locker room.

Yes you can play talented rookies who don't go to class. Yes you can pay $180k to get a guy to sign on the dotted line. But when you do know that it is only a matter of time before it all comes crashing down. It always does. It did for Sherrill. It will for Freeze.

If you haven't figured it out yet as much as Mullen loves football (and he does) he know that there are bigger things than football. He has put some guys in the league and they are now multimillionaires...but most of the guys that sign with State will never get anywhere close to that. So Mullen takes very seriously the promises he makes to these kids' mothers when they entrust him with their sons and he looks them in the eye and says he will try to make him into a better man.

We should be proud of that. We should not be win at all cost.

Yes, change OL coaches if necessary. Yes, play talented guys. But I do not blame Mullen for sticking to his standards for this program. In the end it actually does translate to consistency and wins on the field like we have never seen before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reason2succeed

If you haven't figured it out yet as much as Mullen loves football (and he does) he know that there are bigger things than football. He has put some guys in the league and they are now multimillionaires...but most of the guys that sign with State will never get anywhere close to that. So Mullen takes very seriously the promises he makes to these kids' mothers when they entrust him with their sons and he looks them in the eye and says he will try to make him into a better man.

We should be proud of that. We should not be win at all cost.

Yes, change OL coaches if necessary. Yes, play talented guys. But I do not blame Mullen for sticking to his standards for this program. In the end it actually does translate to consistency and wins on the field like we have never seen before.

---

Nobody is saying we should lower our standards. For instance, all indications are that Aeris Williams & Nick Gibson are both good character guys and hard workers....but that they haven't moved ahead of Shumpert & Holloway due to experience, playbook, & pass blocking. That is pure garbage if true. If a 2-3 year guy is a good character guy, hard worker, and more talented than the guy that's a JR or SR, he should start. And if he doesn't know plays &/or blocking schemes, his position coach should be fired for not preparing our best guys to play.

That isn't wanting anybody to lower our standards...that's just wanting our coaches to do what they are paid to do. Coach players up, put the best 11 on the field, and win games. I can promise you our RB responsibilities are no tougher than a majority of programs in the country....so we either coincidentally recruit the dumbest RB's in America every year, or there's a coaching problem as to why these guys aren't ready to play by year 2 and 3. This isn't the pros, we only get these guys for 3-4 years. It can't take 2-3 to get a guy ready to play for a middle of the pack SEC team. We aren't running the damn wishbone with a mix of fun and gun. It shouldn't be brain surgery to play RB at MSU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

To those saying "we were ranked _____ in the SEC! Offense isn't the problem!"....I say to you, then you and I have different goals for MSU football. I don't give a rats ass if we are #1 offensively in the country, you should ALWAYS try to maximize your offense. You don't just say, "Yea, we could gain 80+ more yards per game and 5+ more points per game if we would go ahead and move Aeris to starter....but F it, we'll be top 5 offensively even wasting 8 plays a game, so let's just do that instead." That's ignorance.

You aren't always going to have an equal offense and defense. But guess what, if you have an above average offense and maximize its' potential...you may not have to be equally good defensively to still win most of your games. The problem is, we don't maximize our offense, so in order to beat good teams we have to rely on our weaker units to play over their head bc we're giving away potential points and yards offensively by trotting guys like Shumpert out there. It's stupid. Period. This isn't intramurals, brother...this is the SEC. You don't reward the less talented hard worker with starting RB game reps in this league. You put your most talented RB in at starting RB, and if he doesn't know the play book or pass blocking....You. Teach. His. Ass. So. He. DOES. You're the coach....so COACH

That's my opinion.

---

This concept?

Col. Jessep: Maybe I'm just spitballing here, maybe we have a responsibility as officers to train Santiago, maybe we as officers have a responsibility to this county to see that the men and women charged with its security are trained professionals. I'm certain I've read that somewhere once, and now I'm thinking your suggestion of "transferring Santiago" while expeditious and painless might not be in the manner of speaking, the "American way". Santiago stays where he is, we're going to train the lad,


I say Code Red, them all!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Nobody is saying we should lower our standards. For instance, all indications are that Aeris Williams & Nick Gibson are both good character guys and hard workers....but that they haven't moved ahead of Shumpert & Holloway due to experience, playbook, & pass blocking. That is pure garbage if true. If a 2-3 year guy is a good character guy, hard worker, and more talented than the guy that's a JR or SR, he should start. And if he doesn't know plays &/or blocking schemes, his position coach should be fired for not preparing our best guys to play.

That isn't wanting anybody to lower our standards...that's just wanting our coaches to do what they are paid to do. Coach players up, put the best 11 on the field, and win games. I can promise you our RB responsibilities are no tougher than a majority of programs in the country....so we either coincidentally recruit the dumbest RB's in America every year, or there's a coaching problem as to why these guys aren't ready to play by year 2 and 3. This isn't the pros, we only get these guys for 3-4 years. It can't take 2-3 to get a guy ready to play for a middle of the pack SEC team. We aren't running the damn wishbone with a mix of fun and gun. It shouldn't be brain surgery to play RB at MSU.

---

Dang Clint! Mullen has done more than coached up players. You seem to forget how far we have come, we don't play in Conference USA! Yes he has made mistakes but he has done more for less than any coach in the Sec!

I hope he keeps building, which he has!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

To those saying "we were ranked _____ in the SEC! Offense isn't the problem!"....I say to you, then you and I have different goals for MSU football. I don't give a rats ass if we are #1 offensively in the country, you should ALWAYS try to maximize your offense. You don't just say, "Yea, we could gain 80+ more yards per game and 5+ more points per game if we would go ahead and move Aeris to starter....but F it, we'll be top 5 offensively even wasting 8 plays a game, so let's just do that instead." That's ignorance.
You aren't always going to have an equal offense and defense. But guess what, if you have an above average offense and maximize its' potential...you may not have to be equally good defensively to still win most of your games. The problem is, we don't maximize our offense, so in order to beat good teams we have to rely on our weaker units to play over their head bc we're giving away potential points and yards offensively by trotting guys like Shumpert out there. It's stupid. Period. This isn't intramurals, brother...this is the SEC. You don't reward the less talented hard worker with starting RB game reps in this league. You put your most talented RB in at starting RB, and if he doesn't know the play book or pass blocking....You. Teach. His. Ass. So. He. DOES. You're the coach....so COACH

That's my opinion.

---

Right, your opinion. But your opinion doesn't mean shit to our Coaching Staff. What does matter is watching our players every day in practice. Dan thinks Shump deserves to play, He is the head coach of a top 5 offense Two years in a row. What's your claim to fame, a moderator on ED. If you actually look at Hollaways Stats , he is just as good as anyone. Hell you can nit pick any offense in the History of football and say it wasn't fully optimized. I scratch my head sometimes at what Dan does but looking at the Big Picture, I am satisfied.

"It takes 3 weeks to get a good RB ready to play college football"- Kyle Whittingham

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcdog70

Right, your opinion. But your opinion doesn't mean shit to our Coaching Staff. What does matter is watching our players every day in practice. Dan thinks Shump deserves to play, He is the head coach of a top 5 offense Two years in a row. What's your claim to fame, a moderator on ED. If you actually look at Hollaways Stats , he is just as good as anyone. Hell you can nit pick any offense in the History of football and say it wasn't fully optimized. I scratch my head sometimes at what Dan does but looking at the Big Picture, I am satisfied.

---

It's a message board, I'm discussing the team. Never said I know more than Dan, so that's a silly thing to even bring up. That being said...Dan has been wrong about Shumpert for 3 years now, yet he's going to be trotted back out there again it appears. So just because someone isn't calling Dan a football God on a message board, doesn't mean he thinks he's a bad coach or that I could do better. It's just critiquing & discussing one aspect of his coaching that appears to be a poor pattern.

I continually get amazed at how we constantly have to have conversations about whether other posters are being too optimistic, pessimistic, or whatever. I joined into a discussion, gave my opinion, called it my opinion, and left it at that. Never said my opinion amounted to a hill of beans, bc it doesn't. So I'm not sure why you said that about my "claim to fame" or anything else. I'm just discussing the topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Random Poster

"It takes 3 weeks to get a good RB ready to play college football"- Kyle Whittingham

---

Interesting. You sure he didn't mean 3 years?*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcdog70

Right, your opinion. But your opinion doesn't mean shit to our Coaching Staff. What does matter is watching our players every day in practice. Dan thinks Shump deserves to play, He is the head coach of a top 5 offense Two years in a row. What's your claim to fame, a moderator on ED. If you actually look at Hollaways Stats , he is just as good as anyone. Hell you can nit pick any offense in the History of football and say it wasn't fully optimized. I scratch my head sometimes at what Dan does but looking at the Big Picture, I am satisfied.

---

Sheesh Bro.... It's a message board.

You and the guy that thinks any bit of slight negativity on Elitedawgs affects recruiting need to go take paranoid pills & hang out in a bathroom stall

I am thinking people are under rating the rbs a little due to how bad the ol was last season. If the o line is decent some guys will break out and have decent seasons.

I want to see the center downfield stepping on somebody******

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcdog70

Right, your opinion. But your opinion doesn't mean shit to our Coaching Staff. What does matter is watching our players every day in practice. Dan thinks Shump deserves to play, He is the head coach of a top 5 offense Two years in a row. What's your claim to fame, a moderator on ED. If you actually look at Hollaways Stats , he is just as good as anyone. Hell you can nit pick any offense in the History of football and say it wasn't fully optimized. I scratch my head sometimes at what Dan does but looking at the Big Picture, I am satisfied.

---

Get a grip man. Geez.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Nobody is saying we should lower our standards. For instance, all indications are that Aeris Williams & Nick Gibson are both good character guys and hard workers....but that they haven't moved ahead of Shumpert & Holloway due to experience, playbook, & pass blocking. That is pure garbage if true. If a 2-3 year guy is a good character guy, hard worker, and more talented than the guy that's a JR or SR, he should start. And if he doesn't know plays &/or blocking schemes, his position coach should be fired for not preparing our best guys to play.

That isn't wanting anybody to lower our standards...that's just wanting our coaches to do what they are paid to do. Coach players up, put the best 11 on the field, and win games. I can promise you our RB responsibilities are no tougher than a majority of programs in the country....so we either coincidentally recruit the dumbest RB's in America every year, or there's a coaching problem as to why these guys aren't ready to play by year 2 and 3. This isn't the pros, we only get these guys for 3-4 years. It can't take 2-3 to get a guy ready to play for a middle of the pack SEC team. We aren't running the damn wishbone with a mix of fun and gun. It shouldn't be brain surgery to play RB at MSU.

---

Thank you! Well said. I have zero problems with high character guys. But we're wasting guys that could impact us and help us right now in Dear, Aeris, Lee, Gibson and probably Couch if the rumors about him playing well are true because they aren't juniors or seniors. If you are Mississippi State you can't afford to do that and succeed.

And it pisses me off to hear that Rankin could have helped us last year but we redshirted him so we could start Warren. I'm not buying the "he wasn't ready in September but then the switch went off in November" crap. Had we played him early in the year against USM, Northwestern State, and Troy he probably would have learned sooner and been ready for the stretch run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tcdog70

Right, your opinion. But your opinion doesn't mean shit to our Coaching Staff. What does matter is watching our players every day in practice. Dan thinks Shump deserves to play, He is the head coach of a top 5 offense Two years in a row. What's your claim to fame, a moderator on ED. If you actually look at Hollaways Stats , he is just as good as anyone. Hell you can nit pick any offense in the History of football and say it wasn't fully optimized. I scratch my head sometimes at what Dan does but looking at the Big Picture, I am satisfied.

---

If you look at Holloway's stats from last year he also had 0 rushing TD's. Aeris had 4. I don't have a problem with Shumpert playing at FB/H-Back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

If you look at Holloway's stats from last year he also had 0 rushing TD's. Aeris had 4. I don't have a problem with Shumpert playing at FB/H-Back.

---

Aeris had 3 rushing TD. Holloway had 5 rec TD from the backfield mostly, if I recall correctly. Holloway is an APB running back and averaged over 100 all purpose yards per game. No he is not the RB to get red zone TD rushing. What we have to replace is Dak's 10 rushing TD's either from the QB position again or a combination of QB/RB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

If you look at Holloway's stats from last year he also had 0 rushing TD's. Aeris had 4. I don't have a problem with Shumpert playing at FB/H-Back.

---

Who do you pull off the field to go with a fullback? If we pull a wr, I think I'd rather see 2 TEs than a fullback

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Percho

I want to see the center downfield stepping on somebody******

---

Thread winner.

Just want to point out that we have a lot of upperclassmen on the roster that don't start over young guys. If it's close it goes to the upperclassmen. If it's not, the guy that's more ready will play the majority of the snaps. Oh, and starter vs snaps played is two very different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Interesting. You sure he didn't mean 3 years?*

---

The problem is that a good RB and a good RB in the SEC are two different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

Aeris had 3 rushing TD. Holloway had 5 rec TD from the backfield mostly, if I recall correctly. Holloway is an APB running back and averaged over 100 all purpose yards per game. No he is not the RB to get red zone TD rushing. What we have to replace is Dak's 10 rushing TD's either from the QB position again or a combination of QB/RB.

---

My bad on the numbers but my point remains that our starting running back that Dan thinks is a great blocker had zero rushing touchdowns and Aeris had more in limited action. Aeris at the very least is ready and could be a 1k rusher for us at worst and probably would have last year as well had he been afforded the opportunity. Lee and Gibson are both ready as well.