So we have two choices....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

We probably would if we had an NFL-type receiver like Michael Crabtree though.

---

So we just need an NFL star? Oh, well that seems like a good recruiting pitch..."come to State! We'll have a fun offense and stretch the field a bit more if you or one of the other guys we're bringing in is a future NFL Pro Bowler.

This is the system you're defending to your death? Lord have mercy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

If Ole Miss can keep Kiffin and maintain this new elevated level for the next decade, then good for him. However, I suspect that they'll be back to "less than a 7-5 program" next year without Kiffin and we'll win more games during the Mullen-Leach Era than they do over the same time frame.

I could be wrong, but I bet I won't be.

---

So our program sucks so bad that we're back to hoping other teams drop back to our level since we're incapable of rising up to theirs? Do you even hear yourself right now? We deserve better than this mentality. We are in the best conference in football. Are we going to have the money A&M or anyone else has? Maybe not. But we still have the capability to maintain a Top 15-25 program....but guess where we aren't? The Top 25.

Maybe if we beat the team Vandy beat yesterday we'd be closer to the top 25. Disgusting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

The only stretch is Dan having us knocking on the door of anything.

FWIW- Neither MSU nor Ole Miss have a win over a team with six wins right now and if they beat us we would be their best win of the year won/loss wise.

---

Are you REALLY trying to compare our football season to theirs at this point???! My God you and Quars have lost it. Why don't you dedicate your fandom to Leach instead of State. Do you even watch the damn games? How anybody on Earth could watch the way we performed at home against Georgia yesterday and compare it at all with what Ole Miss did against Bama....I just can't.

Unfortunately I've found my answer in this thread. I was hoping more people would rather risk losing to try and take a gamble on taking a step forward....but the majority have accepted that we are poor MSU that can't compete, so we should be thrilled with a boring ass 7-5 where we beat absolutely nobody, and don't even compete with the good teams in our league. Oh, and Kentucky. What a damn joke. What a loser mentality a large portion of our fan base has. Call me unrealistic, but as a competitor I'd rather go 0-12 every year going forward trying to achieve that ultimate goal of a Championship, than to accept just being better than the worst teams in the league and willfully not make any attempts to get better.

It's that mentality that will keep people like me from investing more in NIL going forward. Why should I invest in something that our administration and fan base majority isnt serious about? I can do more with my money and my Fall Saturdays

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

Then under that criteria Mullen was pretty close for you then, his first 4 years he averaged 7.25 wins a season building the program, then averaged 8 wins over his next 5 years. (8.2 if you include the 2017 bowl game he didn't coach).

---

Mullen was 7.1 - 4.9 in regular seasons. I don't really count bowls for or against a coach either way because you never know who you're going to draw.

It should be pointed out that Mullen only had to play a P5 non-conf twice in his career here and he lost both of them (2009 Georgia Tech and 2013 Oklahoma State) so even that comparison doesn't quite line up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

So our program sucks so bad that we're back to hoping other teams drop back to our level since we're incapable of rising up to theirs? Do you even hear yourself right now? We deserve better than this mentality. We are in the best conference in football. Are we going to have the money A&M or anyone else has? Maybe not. But we still have the capability to maintain a Top 15-25 program....but guess where we aren't? The Top 25.

Maybe if we beat the team Vandy beat yesterday we'd be closer to the top 25. Disgusting

---

I think you're putting some pretty intense strawman onto what I'm saying. I think we have been a better program than Ole Miss and Tennessee over the last 14 seasons (not debatable really), and that just because they've been good the last 2 years isn't enough to change that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

The difference is Leach has a good track record with patience.

Statistically our offense has been as good or better than most of Dan's. And that's with a p**** playing QB. Georgia was allowing like 10 PPG coming into tonight. We scored 13.

I want to see what Leach can do with a different QB and 4-5 classes of receivers.

You can say he isn't changing but then we have Chris Parson as a QB recruit.

---

Yes, not ready to jettison Leach; let?s give him a chance to get a different QB. And apparently it will have to be somebody from the portal. We only can assume that the rest of the QB room is not even at the level of our starter. But Leach is on thin ice; he was either wrong about WR or he has not been able to recruit a bona fide QB. If it?s the latter, he has to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Mullen was 7.1 - 4.9 in regular seasons. I don't really count bowls for or against a coach either way because you never know who you're going to draw.

It should be pointed out that Mullen only had to play a P5 non-conf twice in his career here and he lost both of them (2009 Georgia Tech and 2013 Oklahoma State) so even that comparison doesn't quite line up.

---

Yeah football at State is way more fun and enthusiastic under Leach than Mullen.*

This isn't about Mullen VS Leach though. I brought Dan up bc I was referring to better recruiting not helping a finesse team like Leach's as much as it would a physical team like Mullen's. This Mullen takeover of the thread seems like a way to derail the original debate of whether you're satisfied with 6-6/7-5 every year with no chance of competing for the West...or if you're willing to gamble on being better and possibly competing for the West but risking losing that auto bowl every year?

Mullen has nothing to do with this other than being more balanced, and getting us to this floor we now sit at. Leach has not built on it, and hasn't even done as good as Moorhead yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

I think you're putting some pretty intense strawman onto what I'm saying. I think we have been a better program than Ole Miss and Tennessee over the last 14 seasons (not debatable really), and that just because they've been good the last 2 years isn't enough to change that.

---

No I totally understand what you're saying. Tennessee sucked for many years, and Ole Miss was trash under Luke. And yet both have easily springboarded past ol 6-6/7-5 MSU pretty quickly. And I would definitely trade the Belk bowl and Music City bowls we got to experience while they were down, to be competing for the SEC like they are currently. You're actually doing a great job of proving my point. They are committed and didn't accept being mediocre or worse...and now they have 2 of the best 3-4 coaches in AMERICA. Meanwhile we're piddling along with Leach getting whipped by everyone with a pulse and taking a coachless Auburn to overtime on our home field. You totally made my point, thank you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Yeah football at State is way more fun and enthusiastic under Leach than Mullen.*

This isn't about Mullen VS Leach though. I brought Dan up bc I was referring to better recruiting not helping a finesse team like Leach's as much as it would a physical team like Mullen's. This Mullen takeover of the thread seems like a way to derail the original debate of whether you're satisfied with 6-6/7-5 every year with no chance of competing for the West...or if you're willing to gamble on being better and possibly competing for the West but risking losing that auto bowl every year?

Mullen has nothing to do with this other than being more balanced, and getting us to this floor we now sit at. Leach has not built on it, and hasn't even done as good as Moorhead yet.

---

I don't care if we are "balanced" or not, "physical" or not (those are just buzzwords anyway without objective definitions). All that matters is winning, so yes, Leach ≈ Mullen right now. And I liked Mullen like most people here (although to be fair, a lot of people didn't like him while he was here and have just retroactively changed to say they did), so therefore I also like Leach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Mullen was 7.1 - 4.9 in regular seasons. I don't really count bowls for or against a coach either way because you never know who you're going to draw.

It should be pointed out that Mullen only had to play a P5 non-conf twice in his career here and he lost both of them (2009 Georgia Tech and 2013 Oklahoma State) so even that comparison doesn't quite line up.

---

Well don't care what you count, the record is the record and it's always recorded that way. Historically written down that way so you have to include the total numbers. Also, when you add bowl games, the number of P5 teams go up as well. It all counts.

You have to look at a tenure breakdown to see the trends. It's pretty obvious that the last 5 years were nearly a game better on avg than the first 4 years. That's an upward trend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EdwardDrayton

Yes, not ready to jettison Leach; let?s give him a chance to get a different QB. And apparently it will have to be somebody from the portal. We only can assume that the rest of the QB room is not even at the level of our starter. But Leach is on thin ice; he was either wrong about WR or he has not been able to recruit a bona fide QB. If it?s the latter, he has to go.

---

So what I'm reading from a culmination of posts is, if we can just get Josh Allen at QB and Michael Crabtree and Wes Welker at WR, maybe then we can see what Leach can do and whether or not he's the guy. Seems reasonable.

Why can we spend 70 million on a baseball stadium but can't offer a good damn coach $6 million a year to give us a shot at the West?

Will at QB in this "Offense" and Holloway up the middle both yield similar results against SEC defenses with a pulse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Why can we spend 70 million on a baseball stadium but can't offer a good damn coach $6 million a year to give us a shot at the West?

---

Like I said, if, like, Mike Gundy will agree to become our next coach, then by all means fire Leach.

But ... would our fans be any happier with him? Is there an amount we can give him to make him come here? And would he really be better than the 7-5 Mullen/Leach standard?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

I don't care if we are "balanced" or not, "physical" or not (those are just buzzwords anyway without objective definitions). All that matters is winning, so yes, Leach ≈ Mullen right now. And I liked Mullen like most people here (although to be fair, a lot of people didn't like him while he was here and have just retroactively changed to say they did), so therefore I also like Leach.

---

You always take the shit that isn't the point of a post and make your response to that instead of the point. Weird. I guess it's because you know I made a great point but can't admit it.

All I care about is winning too...but you aren't winning this league with a 90% pass rate. Just aren't.

So when Todd brought up "just needing to recruit better", I said no, maybe if Dan was still here...but recruiting better doesn't change the fact that we will still throw it 90% of the time, so we will still never succeed at a high level. Dan was simply an example of a coach that could benefit more from better recruiting bc he played a physical style that required more man vs man heads up strength. Leach's finesse offense doesn't require that, which is why he spits out the same results with WSU players as he does with MSU players.

Y'all are getting too hung up on the Dan comments. Probably on purpose, bc comparing Leach to Dan paints a much better picture (although still a worse one) than comparing him to his current peers and his current efforts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Like I said, if, like, Mike Gundy will agree to become our next coach, then by all means fire Leach.

But ... would our fans be any happier with him? Is there an amount we can give him to make him come here? And would he really be better than the 7-5 Mullen/Leach standard?

---

Who knows? If he wins they will. If he takes us to another level they will. And even if he hits status quo for Leach, you will still gobble him up, so why the F do you care? If he will still bring us a minimum 6-6/7-5 but possibly gives us a prayer at more, what's the reason Not to? If you would quit obsessing over Leach and us being a program that can't do better than mediocre, you'd see that your posts are actually agreeing with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

You always take the shit that isn't the point of a post and make your response to that instead of the point. Weird. I guess it's because you know I made a great point but can't admit it.

All I care about is winning too...but you aren't winning this league with a 90% pass rate. Just aren't.

So when Todd brought up "just needing to recruit better", I said no, maybe if Dan was still here...but recruiting better doesn't change the fact that we will still throw it 90% of the time, so we will still never succeed at a high level. Dan was simply an example of a coach that could benefit more from better recruiting bc he played a physical style that required more man vs man heads up strength. Leach's finesse offense doesn't require that, which is why he spits out the same results with WSU players as he does with MSU players.

Y'all are getting too hung up on the Dan comments. Probably on purpose, bc comparing Leach to Dan paints a much better picture (although still a worse one) than comparing him to his current peers and his current efforts

---

I brought up Mullen on my own because he is a good comparison to Leach and I like both of them, not because of anything you said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Who knows? If he wins they will. If he takes us to another level they will. And even if he hits status quo for Leach, you will still gobble him up, so why the F do you care? If he will still bring us a minimum 6-6/7-5 but possibly gives us a prayer at more, what's the reason Not to? If you would quit obsessing over Leach and us being a program that can't do better than mediocre, you'd see that your posts are actually agreeing with me.

---

Yes, I think we agree that if Mike Gundy will take our job, we can fire Leach this month. But it would take someone on that level (a level that Leach was generally considered to be on before he came here, by the way) for it to even be a plausibly good idea. Playing mid-major roulette to hope for someone better than Mullen and Leach is not likely to pay off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

I brought up Mullen on my own because he is a good comparison to Leach and I like both of them, not because of anything you said.

---

Except he's not a good comparison. Mullen built us from Croom, to #1, and to where we now consider the "status quo" of a 7-5 program. Leach has built us into...nothing. He's actually taken a step back from Dan. Hasn't even matched JoMo's best. So no, Dan is not a good comparison for Leach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

I thought we were talking about if our recruiting was significantly better under specific coaches. Leach isn't a big time
Recruiter either...so I thought you meant using the money to help us recruit. It won't increase the amount Leach puts into it, just like it wouldn't Mullen. But the money would help.

And since Mullen won 10 games and had a balanced attack with stout defenses....and Leach isn't even our best coach on the field each Saturday....I would definitely say Mullen could win much bigger than Leach if each had a top 15-20 class each year. But that's just me and I'm aware it can't be proven.

---

I mean, Mullen is available if you want him back so bad. I can't wait to run the QB up the middle on 3rd and 8. "Spread the fun"

Maybe one day y'all will realize msu is just a mediocre program at best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

Yes, I think we agree that if Mike Gundy will take our job, we can fire Leach this month. But it would take someone on that level (a level that Leach was generally considered to be on before he came here, by the way) for it to even be a plausibly good idea. Playing mid-major roulette to hope for someone better than Mullen and Leach is not likely to pay off.

---

I never compared Leach to Gundy. And I'm not saying Gundy is the answer. I don't like Gundy actually and think he wouldn't be a good fit. Better than Leach, absolutely. I was just using your Gundy response to say if you think we are going to be 6-6/7-5 regardless, why not hire someone that will keep us there at minimum but gives us a shot at more? Leach won't do that. And if you have been watching us play under him you know that already

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

I never compared Leach to Gundy. And I'm not saying Gundy is the answer. I don't like Gundy actually and think he wouldn't be a good fit. Better than Leach, absolutely. I was just using your Gundy response to say if you think we are going to be 6-6/7-5 regardless, why not hire someone that will keep us there at minimum but gives us a shot at more? Leach won't do that. And if you have been watching us play under him you know that already

---

Gundy is the only coach I think of that I think has a decent chance of being an upgrade to Leach that we can also maybe realistically hire. If you can come up with another, slot him in there. But it's not going to be some coordinator or G5 coach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Except he's not a good comparison. Mullen built us from Croom, to #1, and to where we now consider the "status quo" of a 7-5 program. Leach has built us into...nothing. He's actually taken a step back from Dan. Hasn't even matched JoMo's best. So no, Dan is not a good comparison for Leach.

---

If Leach gets 9 years here (and I think he will), I'm confident that he'll have a year that compares well to 2014.

But to say that Leach isn't better than JoMo is pretty silly. JoMo lost about 6 games he had no business losing and would not have made another bowl game if Cohen/Keenum hadn't had the courage to fire him after just 2 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RezDog7

I mean, Mullen is available if you want him back so bad. I can't wait to run the QB up the middle on 3rd and 8. "Spread the fun"

Maybe one day y'all will realize msu is just a mediocre program at best.

---

I'm literally saying in that post that Mullen was just used as an example. Good lord you people can't read.

But at least you answered the original question, and admit to thinking we can't ever compete. Looks to be the consensus around here. Maybe me and the other guys that think we can take another step should just stop caring and stop investing....clearly the majority don't think we can ever compete anyway, so why waste the money and time. Maybe hire a bargain bin coach and just see how good a million a year can get us. Maybe we'll stumble in to a Freeze every 20 years or so. Spend that money on different sports, or whatever. Didn't realize our fan base had such a loser mentality. Maybe I expected too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

If Leach gets 9 years here (and I think he will), I'm confident that he'll have a year that compares well to 2014.

But to say that Leach isn't better than JoMo is pretty silly. JoMo lost about 6 games he had no business losing and would not have made another bowl game if Cohen/Keenum hadn't had the courage to fire him after just 2 years.

---

I didn't say Leach wasn't better than JoMo. Good try though. His record hasn't been as good as JoMo's best, but a jar of mayonnaise is better than JoMo. Don't twist my words

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

I'm literally saying in that post that Mullen was just used as an example. Good lord you people can't read.

But at least you answered the original question, and admit to thinking we can't ever compete. Looks to be the consensus around here. Maybe me and the other guys that think we can take another step should just stop caring and stop investing....clearly the majority don't think we can ever compete anyway, so why waste the money and time. Maybe hire a bargain bin coach and just see how good a million a year can get us. Maybe we'll stumble in to a Freeze every 20 years or so. Spend that money on different sports, or whatever. Didn't realize our fan base had such a loser mentality. Maybe I expected too much.

---

I don't know how "Our program is the 8th best in the SEC over the last decade with the 13th best budget" and "13 straight bowls with no down years is pretty cool, especially when most of the elites in the conference can't say that" are a loser mentality.

I want us to win the CFP in my lifetime. I think establishing ourselves as a program that always goes to bowls and competes to be ranked is more likely to lay the foundation to get there than constantly changing coaches and mixing up some losing records is. Maybe I'm wrong, but our program is perceived a lot better nowadays than we were in January 2009.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RezDog7

I mean, Mullen is available if you want him back so bad. I can't wait to run the QB up the middle on 3rd and 8. "Spread the fun"

Maybe one day y'all will realize msu is just a mediocre program at best.

---

I'd hire Mullen today when the transfer portal to assist him. He wouldn't have to recruit near as hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quaoarsking

I don't know how "Our program is the 8th best in the SEC over the last decade with the 13th best budget" and "13 straight bowls with no down years is pretty cool, especially when most of the elites in the conference can't say that" are a loser mentality.

I want us to win the CFP in my lifetime. I think establishing ourselves as a program that always goes to bowls and competes to be ranked is more likely to lay the foundation to get there than constantly changing coaches and mixing up some losing records is. Maybe I'm wrong, but our program is perceived a lot better nowadays than we were in January 2009.

---

Trust me, your mentality has nothing to do with our bowl streak. Your mentality is how we never improve from where we are. Being content gets you left behind in this league. We are a worse program now than we were when Mullen left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Trust me, your mentality has nothing to do with our bowl streak. Your mentality is how we never improve. Being content gets you left behind in this league. We are a worse program now than we were when Mullen left.

---

I don't think that is the national perception of our program, nor is that borne out by statistics. For example, we are still 8th in the FPI in the SEC since Mullen left (ahead of Ole Miss and Tennessee), just like we were in the second half of his run here.

Goodbye Leach! I thought you could be a difference maker. everyone loves your wit, however, no one fears you or your offense, especially with an unathletic qb leading it in the SEC

You guys that want Mullen back are just nuts.

I want better than that if we move on from Leach.

Good grief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

So we just need an NFL star? Oh, well that seems like a good recruiting pitch..."come to State! We'll have a fun offense and stretch the field a bit more if you or one of the other guys we're bringing in is a future NFL Pro Bowler.

This is the system you're defending to your death? Lord have mercy

---

And you're telling others that WE have the loser mentality? Wow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowbell

Leach is in no way equal to Mullen at this point. Mullen had us atleast knocking on the door

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

Fine.

Mullen 69-46 (.600)
In sec 33-39 (.458)

Leach 17-17 (.500)
In sec 10-15 (.400)

If mullen wasn't good, leach really sucks

---

LOL the revisionism is truly amazing:

Let's looks at the first 3 years-

Mullen: 21-17 - 9-15
Leach (projected): 18-18 - 10-16
(Throw in a New Mexico, Tulane & Alabama A&M and take out UGA, Vandy for 2020 Covid and here are your records)

Mullen: 21-17 - 9-15
Leach- 21-18 - 9-15

But most on this board would welcome back that underachieving douche because he had a couple smoke and mirrors seasons and a guy named Dak.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowbell

You are really stretching Todd. Todays SEC slate isn't near what it was in 2010-2015. And leach ain't winning the egg bowl. The sec teams we have beaten are atrocious right now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

Are you REALLY trying to compare our football season to theirs at this point???! My God you and Quars have lost it. Why don't you dedicate your fandom to Leach instead of State. Do you even watch the damn games? How anybody on Earth could watch the way we performed at home against Georgia yesterday and compare it at all with what Ole Miss did against Bama....I just can't.

Unfortunately I've found my answer in this thread. I was hoping more people would rather risk losing to try and take a gamble on taking a step forward....but the majority have accepted that we are poor MSU that can't compete, so we should be thrilled with a boring ass 7-5 where we beat absolutely nobody, and don't even compete with the good teams in our league. Oh, and Kentucky. What a damn joke. What a loser mentality a large portion of our fan base has. Call me unrealistic, but as a competitor I'd rather go 0-12 every year going forward trying to achieve that ultimate goal of a Championship, than to accept just being better than the worst teams in the league and willfully not make any attempts to get better.

It's that mentality that will keep people like me from investing more in NIL going forward. Why should I invest in something that our administration and fan base majority isnt serious about? I can do more with my money and my Fall Saturdays

---

I've seen the vast majority of MSU games in person. Which is probably more than you can say.

If you withhold NIL you're being stupid. Because doing so hurts all sports at MSU. Another mindset that some crappy MSU fans needs to get out of. "Let's sabotage the program because I don't like the coach and leave the next guy a mess. It's cool I can just blame the last coach when I actively discouraged fans to participate. But it's cool because we run the ball now and I get to say we're physical while we still can't beat Bama or Georgia consistently. So nothing's really changed."

Let me tell you something else- schools like Auburn when they want to get rid of a coach do the exact opposite of what you are suggesting. They give more to the program. Because then if the coach really isn't any good and is given all the resources in the world then they have good grounds to fire him AND they leave the program in good shape for the next coach.

And now you tell me who among the two of us is suggesting giving more more money to fix our program? That would be me. But you want to question my fandom? Really? Eat shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

Fine.

Mullen 69-46 (.600)
In sec 33-39 (.458)

Leach 17-17 (.500)
In sec 10-15 (.400)

If mullen wasn't good, leach really sucks

---

Not an apples to apples comparison since Leach played a 10 game SEC only schedule his first year during the middle of covid where he didn?t get a spring or much of a summer with his team.

Also, Mullen outside of the year we opened with Oklahoma State, all of Mullen?s non conf games were played against G5 schools.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CadaverDawg

I would agree with that if we still had Mullen...a guy that could have won huge here with better recruiting. But Leach is the same with a roster full of 2 stars as he is a roster full of 4 stars...so I'm not sure HE is the guy to finally start recruiting big with. We have to continue as many high 3 and 4 stars as possible, plus a 5 star every few seasons in the trenches, all while increasing our coaching and transfer portal production. Easier said than done, but much more likely to land a slightly better class and hire a much better coach, than to increase our recruiting ranking 20 spots and hope Leach can turn that into a West Championship. Ole Miss isn't recruiting top 10, but they have the right coach, for example. We will have to do similar imo

---

Dude Dan couldn?t win at Fla. just admit your hate for Leach agenda

* Mullen 2009: 5-7 (3-5) Last in the West

Wins: Jax St, Vandy, Mid Tn, UK and OM
Losses: Auburn (24-49), LSU, Ga Tech, Houston, UF, Bama (3-31) & Ark (21-42)

-----------------------------

* Mullen 2010: 9-4 (4-4) Next to last in West (thanks OM)

Wins: Mem, UGA, Alcorn St, Houston, UF, UAB, UK & OM. The collective records of the teams we beat... 37-65 with only UF having a winning record at 8-5. We did whip Michigan (7-6) in the Gator Bowl.
Losses: Auburn (7-29), LSU, Bama (10-30) & Arky

------------------------------

* Mullen 2011: 7-6 (2-6) Next to last in West (thanks again OM!)
{preseason ranking of #20}

Wins: Mem, La Tech, UAB, UK, Tn-Martin & OM. Collective record of teams we beat... 31-54. With powerhouse La Tech with the only winning record at 8-5. We beat Wake Forest (6-7) in bowl game.
Losses: Auburn, LSU, UGA, USC, Bama (7-24) & Arky (17-44)

-------------------------------

Let's do one more to preview for Leach's next year...


Mullen 2012: 8-5 (4-4) 4th(!) in the West thanks to OM (3-5), Arky (2-6) & Auburn (0-8)

Wins: Jax St, Auburn, Troy, S.Alabama, UK, UT, Mid TN & Arky. Collective record...
37-61 with Jax St & Mid Tn with the only winning records.
Losses: Bama (7-38), A&M (13-38), LSU (17-37) & OM (24-41). And we gave Northwestern their first bowl victory since 1949 in the Gator Bowl.

This was our teaser to the "We Believe" season. We started 7-0 and then proceeded to get blown out in 5 of our last 6 games. But we were "competitive" and "balanced" hmmm.

-------------------------------

If anyone is counting, that blue collar offense scored 2 TDS vs Bama in 3 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Tibbons

Not an apples to apples comparison since Leach played a 10 game SEC only schedule his first year during the middle of covid where he didn?t get a spring or much of a summer with his team.

Also, Mullen outside of the year we opened with Oklahoma State, all of Mullen?s non conf games were played against G5 schools.

---

Good points, and people that don't want Leach continue to intentionally leave out Leach's first year was a 10 game SEC schedule and with Covid impacting spring and summer workouts. The Power 5 v. Mullen's non-conference is spot on also. Mullen had the easy recipe of win 4 G5s and then win 2-4 SEC games most seasons.

Cadaver I've read your posts and get what you're saying. To a large extent I agree. Couple points about your views:

1) you say you won't donate to NIL unless we have a coach that has potential to win big. That's fair, but recognize that there's far more people who get turned off by bad seasons than there are like you who get turned on by potential. IE, overall we get more money with 7-5 seasons than we would 2 bowless seasons as the high ceiling coach gets it together. So from an admin perspective, you can see why they're scared to get rid of a 7-5 coach.

2) You say you'd be find going 0-12 if it was "in the pursuit" of winning big. Well, Leach has proven at both schools he has that potential... but he had to be given more than 3 seasons to make it happen. I don't understand how you can say you'd be OK with 0-12 if the coach had potential to compete with the elite, but also say you want to fire a 7-5 coach that has proven multiple times they can build such a program? It does not jive. To me Leach is the coach you seek, only you get 7-5 instead of 0-12.

3) regarding winning big, you need to find another football team to support, because we CANNOT and WILL NOT EVER compete with programs throwing tens of millions of dollars at each recruiting class. Bama's QB made more NIL money last year before he ever took a college snap than we have GATHERED SO FAR for ALL NIL. We CANNOT get top players competing with that. Imagine if the NFL had no salary cap and one team spent 20x the salary as another team- that's college. That's OSU/UGA/Texas/Bama to us. If you can't find enjoyment out of 8-4 then you need ot move on, because Saban himself couldn't win big here. There is a reason top coaches are desperate to get to blue bloods, it's because they know that is the only way to win big in this sport. In the pros coaches never move around, because the money is equal and any team can be built into a contender.

I'm no lover of Leach. Our terrible road performances this season and the lack of a step forward on offense have me mostly off the wagon. But I disagree with some of your logic leading you to be so passionate about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santiago

Good points, and people that don't want Leach continue to intentionally leave out Leach's first year was a 10 game SEC schedule and with Covid impacting spring and summer workouts. The Power 5 v. Mullen's non-conference is spot on also. Mullen had the easy recipe of win 4 G5s and then win 2-4 SEC games most seasons.

---

And honestly Leach spent 2020 dealing with Moorhead's mess too. A real spring and fall would have gone a long way in getting guys to buy in and weed out some malcontents. And it really would have helped Costello too.

Vs. Ranked Opponents through year 3:

Mullen: 2-12 (.143)
Leach: 6-8 (.429)