No way on God's green earth would I ever hire him. There is NO upside to hiring him over most names being talked about. He's not hungry for the game anymore and hates recruiting.Quote:
Originally Posted by basedog
Printable View
No way on God's green earth would I ever hire him. There is NO upside to hiring him over most names being talked about. He's not hungry for the game anymore and hates recruiting.Quote:
Originally Posted by basedog
The hell you say. Lost to Houston, Georgia Tech, SOUTH ALABAMA!Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
No. He still has to recruit the player. Yes NIL will play a role, but he still has to recruit the player.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
No, don't bring him back at all.
Conference USA Champ Houston in Y1Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
11-3 Orange Bowl Ga Tech in Y1
I feel like Mullen is the Leach option of this year's coaching search.
If we can't land a Chadwell or Leipold type home run hire, I could see us going to Mullen instead of Herman or a coordinator.
Well, thank God for the transfer portal. **Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
Seriously? The only "bad" loss in that three is SA.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
Mullen is better than half the guys on the list. Mullen should be the fall back, period. We gonna hire Schumann over Mullen? If we do we screwed the pooch in this search and should focus on basketball.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
I cannot believe y'all are missing THE ONE THING that drives Mullen: his EGO!
Y'all are all saying he is number 4 or 5 and/or the choice if you can't get the first 4 on the hot board. Dan Mullen would absolutely ask Megan and the Kids if they would like to live in Starkville again. Then he would tell his agent to tell Keenum and Selmon that if he isn't the first choice, don't bother calling. He has a job right now that is a heck of a lot easier than coaching football. Do we even know if he takes another coaching job, how much of his buyout at Florida he might lose?
So yes. If State interviews Mullen, it will be because his agent said < Dan is your guy! Shut it down and let's get to work!>
And State absolutely disrespected South Alabama to start that game. The players were jumping around smack talking before and during the coin toss. Mullen came out in Khaki Shorts for gosh sakes! Maybe Georgia could do that to a team like South Alabama but State was too close in talent level to USA and had turned down several players who were on that team. Over-confident much??
With an expert opinion like this, I guess that wraps it up. Move on, can't hire him.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
Other than having a much better body of work, having won at our specific school, and 15 years SEC HC experience? There is absolutely upside with him over the others, he's the only one that isn't a massive risk.Quote:
There is NO upside to hiring him over most names being talked about.
Speculation.Quote:
He's not hungry for the game anymore
Everyone does. Nobody, and I mean nobody, likes wining and dining arrogant high school kids and their families that typically think their baby is gods gift to sports. Its cancerous, you have to work with some of the worst people on the planet, and it is RIPE with corruption all the way to the core. If someone says they like recruiting they are A) lying B) a world class POS.Quote:
and hates recruiting.
Recruiting is great, but doesn't the next couple of years of production come from the portal?
The portal is great to fill holes, but on a SEC level you can't just rebuild your roster with portal kids. First, there isn't enough high end portal players to go around, and the ones that are high end, are expensive as hell and everyone wants them.Quote:
Originally Posted by DesotoDog1967
We have to target the G5 kids that are sophomores or juniors that have started and played really well, but not too well. That way we can build some depth and hopefully recruit a few HS kids that are difference makers.
We have to get Stonka back committed to us. He is the type of kid that can be a big time player, plus we have a great shot at keeping on campus for 3-4 years before he goes pro.
Recruiting is far less important now than it once was, especially for us. You still go after the true difference makers, your top guys you think are can't miss. But why sign a 3* who may or may not pan out, and if they do you may or may not lose them, when you can get one who has proven what they can do at a smaller program? That transfer comes with the added benefit of you actually having them for the next 3 years rather than having to worry about them hitting the portal. The new template needs to be much more heavily focused on transfers, we aren't Bama or UGA with the luxury of having 20 four star recruits in every class.Quote:
Originally Posted by DesotoDog1967
Inherently there are more potential transfers each year than there are high school recruits. Recruits are gambles, especially those ranked 3* and lower. A transfer his going to have a higher floor because you've seen what they can do at a collegiate level, they have had another year to develop, and they can't transfer again without sitting. There is overall just less uncertainty. You can't just abandon recruiting. You still have relationships to maintain, and you still want to get the bellcows you have a shot with, but you can cut way back on the ratio of recruits/transfers.Quote:
Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog
I laugh when folks talk about DM not liking recruiting, hell no he doesn't but most don't anyway. All I know, DM coached up a lot of 2- and 3-star players and produced a bunch in the NFL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous
I'm not predicting he will be our coach, I have no idea, but I don't hate DM, fact is I'm thankful for him being at Msu 9 years. That ain't happened very much at Msu, JWS with 12 years is the most I can ever recall.
Btw, Arnett was the shortest in time as HC. Times have changed a lot over the years.
Seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
Houstin and GT were year 1 first of all. Second they were both ranked and really good teams that year. Also we got screwed by key officiating calls those two games that if made correctly we probably win with Tyson Lee at QB.
USA yeah was a bad loss. Bad coaching move with QBs that game. Fitz plays that game and we win by 3 TDs.
So then, what are the bad losses? USA yeah and I can't think of another. Not bad in 9 years. I can think of many recent coaches with 3 bad losses each season.
USA game was lost because we didn't play the best QB we had that day. The all time rushing SEC QB sat on the bench.Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainObvious
Weren't the Houston and Ga Tech losses on year 1? Plus Houston won 10 games that year and their QB threw for nearly 6k yards while Tech won 11 games and finished in the top 10. I don't think that's very fair to criticize plus we played them very well. Now South Alabama was bad but Prescott had just left so we were starting a new QB plus we missed a two FGs that game. Still shouldn't have lost but South Alabama isn't Maine and I don't believe we ever had another loss like that under Mullen during his nearly decade tenure. Heck Saban lost to ULM.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackSailsDawg
But still....Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach34
I didn't even scroll up to see who he was talking about, but since he said that, I'd probably have whoever it is on top if my board.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous
This is well saidQuote:
Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog