Does Cohen Give Mullen An Extension Without Firing Hev first?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

The thing about stats is they only tell the story about what you actually have and not what the stats would be if you had better talent, so there's no comparison. That said we can assume that better talent would likely result in better production- even though the production may not be statistically "bad".

Here's the difference between the safeties and o-line for us. Our safety coach left last year. So if it was a coaching issue that was resolved. Hughes while I don't think he was the best coach on our staff brought value with his recruiting. We went out and landed two really good JUCO safeties to help try to fix the problem. On the o-line we constantly miss our targets and nothing seems to be done about it. While our o-line is good enough to do well against lesser SEC teams and OOC teams, it constantly struggles with top level SEC teams to the point where you could argue that it is holding us back from getting more signature wins.

Hevesy has ZERO o-linemen drafted by the NFL that played for him for 4-5 years that weren't recruited by Sylvester Croom. He has had a couple of free agents like Clausell and Day but neither of those are likely long term NFL players.

---

Good post they do OK against lower level teams but if we're going to be anything ever better than a 6 to 7 win team we have got to get some-better talent that can compete with good teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I think that was Hevesy being a blind squirrel finding a nut after Calhoun got hurt because that caused us to play Jenkins more at LG and move Desper to RG and then everything suddenly clicked. Why was he not able to figure that out before midseason? So, I think it goes deeper than just recruiting with him. He misevaluates our guys and where they fit in sometimes as well. And that hurts us a lot too. Had those injuries not happened who knows what happens?

I think his strength is he knows a lot about how to play o-line which is a good thing obviously but at the end of the day there's more to it and in college you have to be able to recruit, evaluate, and figure out where all the pieces go.

And to be totally fair we have had personnel issues at other position groups as well. But you are right there are too many obvious issues with him that it's hard to look past the recruiting issues alone. It's just shocking that he has been allowed to go on for so long as is. Even Croom was going to demote McCorvey before he got fired and Byrne never gave him a chance to do it- not that I'm complaining but just saying it's bad when Croom has more insight into what's holding the team back than Dan. It's going to take Cohen and/or the boosters stepping up to fix it. And going back to the title of the thread, I would definitely tell Dan no extension if Hevesy is still on the field coaching with the option to demote vs. firing him.

---

I agree 100%.

I'm curios to see where Jenkins lines up in the first game next season. If it's not LG then there is definitely a problem with the coaching. He was absolutely dominant against OM from that position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I seen it dawg

It's ****ing semantics!!! They didn't let us do dick until the game was almost over. It was basically a 3 yr old taking swings at a high school kid while the high school kid has his hand on the 3 yr olds face keeping him away. No damage at all.

---

Disagree. I don't think "garbage time" is ever in play while a game is still within reach, particularly if the other team is not subbing backups heavily and going prevent. Games almost always turn on momentum. It can be seized at any given time and turn a game around. "Garbage time" is strictly a case where, no matter what the losing team does, there is no hope of winning.

All this said, if Les Miles weren't coaching LSU that day, and there had been someone less conservative,etc, there's a much better chance it would have been "garbage time" for us.

There are plenty of games every year where the team that was vastly out-played won. Hell, Ole Miss has made a living off some games like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Really Clark?

He signed Percy Harvin, if I'm not mistaken.

Here is the thing. First off I've said several times now we should replace him. He can coach OL but his recruiting is crap for the most part. Now when he actually recruits at times he can hit it out of the park. Chris Jones, Dak, etc. guys who like him (because nobody talks about this side of the equation) really really like him. But he is going to hit .150 and strikeout 225 times in a season. The reward for his coaching is not overcoming his recruiting risks. I don't care if an OL coach is a great recruiter, that irrelevant to me. But he can't be a detriment either.

ETA. My bad, Gonzo signed Harvin. Chris Jones and Rankin are his 2 highest recruits here and of course he got Dak.

---

The point is that Hev is a huge detriment to OL recruiting. Rankin is from Mendenhall. There is a full scholarship program to UNM there and they still can't get high school kids from there to go to UNM. It is easier than recruiting Starkville.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Random Poster

LSU was up 23-6 with 5 mins left in the game. They relaxed a little and Williams surprised them with 2 passes. When we got the ball back that last time- we got 2 yards in 4 downs. LSU got serious again and stuffed our ass- just like they had the first 55 mins of the game.

---

So USC scoring 17 points in the final 5:00 against PSU shouldn't count as a victory because PSU went in the prevent for two drives at the end of the game?! Ok got it!

2nd half of the LSU game total yards before that final MSU possession, after we got to 20-23:
LSU - 95
MSU - 191

We held them to almost as few yards in the 2nd half as they did us in the first half. The real difference is they put it on us in the first half. But they were not "in control" for all but 5 minutes of the game.

In fact, in the 2nd half we held them to 3 straight 3-and-outs, followed by the only drive they had that got a first down, followed by another 3 & out.

I seriously don't think going 3-and-out in 4 of 5 drives was LSU "easing up on us".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bucky Dog

So USC scoring 17 points in the final 5:00 against PSU shouldn't count as a victory because PSU went in the prevent for two drives at the end of the game?! Ok got it!

---

I would equate that to the 1997 Egg Bowl where we dominated pretty much the whole game and lost because we went to prevent defense and then lost on a two point conversion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I would equate that to the 1997 Egg Bowl where we dominated pretty much the whole game and lost because we went to prevent defense and then lost on a two point conversion.

---

Exactly my point. They game is never out of reach until it's over and out of reach so to speak. RP summizing LSU laid down and gave us those points to make it close then buttoned up on D is not correct. We adjusted on O with DW and play calling and our D in the second half was very good. PSU did not go into the prevent, but USC went hurry up and found some plays and things late to catch up after PSU had shut them down for the middle two quarters and most of the fourth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bucky Dog

Exactly my point. They game is never out of reach until it's over and out of reach so to speak. RP summizing LSU laid down and gave us those points to make it close then buttoned up on D is not correct. We adjusted on O with DW and play calling and our D in the second half was very good. PSU did not go into the prevent, but USC went hurry up and found some plays and things late to catch up after PSU had shut them down for the middle two quarters and most of the fourth.

---

I agree. It's sort of like winning a baseball game 4-1 with the team having four runs on five hits and the other team having 1 run on 10 hits. It's very possible to dominate a game statistics wise and still lose. That's why the only sat that really matters is the score. At the same time RP is correct that LSU went to prevent and you are correct that we made some adjustments to get us back in the game. We also recovered an onsides kick and that stole a possession for us and allowed us to get a little closer. Unfortunately for us, LSU clamped down and brought the heat and finished us off.

Stats tell some of the story, but not the whole story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

I agree. It's sort of like winning a baseball game 4-1 with the team having four runs on five hits and the other team having 1 run on 10 hits. It's very possible to dominate a game statistics wise and still lose. That's why the only sat that really matters is the score. At the same time RP is correct that LSU went to prevent and you are correct that we made some adjustments to get us back in the game. We also recovered an onsides kick and that stole a possession for us and allowed us to get a little closer. Unfortunately for us, LSU clamped down and brought the heat and finished us off.

Stats tell some of the story, but not the whole story.

---

Unfortunately for us, LSU boomed a 61-yard punt to put us at our own 23, then our 1st-down play was a Holloway-for-2 play to put us behind the sticks. Even with that, on the 4th down play, Fred Ross was open for a 1st-down, but D Will was brutally slow in recognizing it, then actually stopped his roll out to make the play, allowing the LSU D-lineman to catch up to him 4 seconds after the snap.