Printable View
Would Leach be taking over a better program if Croom would've coached the past two years or Moorhead?
For me, it's Croom.
Neither one could install their offense in the time they were here, both were decent recruiters although I think Croom may have attracted a higher quality makeup type, but Croom, if nothing else, could build culture. The players respected him and for that I think Leach would be taking over a better program if Croom would've coached the past two years rather than Leach.
I think it's pick your poison.
Croom had no offense, still had issues with culture (albeit improved), and purely lucked into his only bowl season thanks to defense and special teams play.
JoMo had some offense, had issues with culture, and parlayed a metric shit ton of talent on defense into two disappointing seasons of underachievement.
I think Croom may have left things a little better, but JoMo will be easier to recover from.
Mullen recovered quickly from Croom.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
No telling how long it'll take to toughen up the Charmin left by Joe
One thing though is that I think the players knew they needed a new coach after Croom whereas the Moorhead players may not have that awareness
Croom didn't piss away discipline. He brought discipline. Both were stubborn and had awful offensive schemes. Slight edge to Croom.
The title of the thread makes it seem you like are asking who did a better job as a head coach. I'd go with joe.
But if what you're asking is who left the program in better shape on the way out the door, I think that's to be determined still.
Moorhead's offense wasn't putrid against terrible teams. Croom lost to Maine.
But Moorhead bred a team full of pu$$ies in just 2 years. Croom's teams sucked but at least they were tough. Give me Croom.
Interesting question. The hard part about this is the difference in what those two coaches took over.
The Croom tenure seemed worse and we obviously won more with Joe. But as someone who was at State during the transition from Jackie to Croom, I can tell you it was a major cleansing and redirection of the culture. It had gotten really bad at the end for Jackie. Yes, Croom had his issues too (the on campus gun thing), but overall it just seemed like he had assembled a better group of humans.
Moorhead went the opposite direction taking over a really good culture and spoiling it in a pretty short period of time.
I'm convinced if Joe was still our coach we would be getting ready for a 4 or at best 5 win season with the train plummeting downward from there. Maybe it's just recency bias, but I'm leaning towards a soft buy that Croom was better. Wow.
I think they go hand in hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by confucius say
It's hard to directly compare the two because they took over drastically different programs.
IMO, the number 1 job of any coach is to leave the program better than they found it. Moorhead did not do that, and while it may have been tiny, I think you could say Croom actually did do that.
But, you are talking about overall state of the program. Croom and LT left us undermanned, undersized, underfunded, and behind in facilities. Mullen had a ton more to overcome and build.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
I think the program overall is way healthier than it was when Mullen took over. Player attitudes are the easiest of problems to deal with compared to what Mullen faced.
True program is in a better spot now than when Mullen took over but that's mostly because it was already at that level before Moorhead took over. If we'd have kept Moorhead for another few years, it may have been lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
Mullen was a couple plays away from winning 7 games year one.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg
I agree. And I think even 1 more season under JoMo would have meant a much greater level of damage. I think still having Mullen players on the roster will also benefit us in the transition. There are still a lot of guys around who know the Mullen way was superior to the JoMo way, and will embrace what Leach is doing. 1 more season would have seen almost all of those guys gone, and with it any memory of hard work.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
And? Mullen took over a completely different program in terms of everything. No SEC payday. No NEZ. No Modern football training facility. He had a 5'7" walk on playing QB. He did a spectacular job making that a competitive program quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
But today's program is at a far better place then it was then, and it's not even close. It took shitty coaching and culture to win 6 last year - but we still have all the pluses of what Mullen, the Ninja, and the Cheerleader added. That will make Leach's job much easier than Mullen's, and means that overall the program is in a better place then it was in 2009.
the slytanic- was terrible -and it isn't close
Croom was worse by a mile.
True both Croom and Moorhead never got their offense going , but Croom had 3 more years to do so.
Croom never instilled discipline on the team. Thinking otherwise is just revisionist history.
Lastly, at least Moorhead beat bad teams. Croom struggled with every game no matter who the opponent was. Croom was the worst coach in our history by a long shot.
Moorehead was worse. It took Croom 5 years to totally tank. Moorehead in 1.
So if that's the number 1 job of any coach, you're saying that croom (who left the program a tiny bit better than he found it) was a better head coach at state than Jackie (who left the program worse than he found it)? That's not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Joe > Croom.
Croom inherited a dumpster fire. Joe inherited a ready made 10 win team. Croom did a better job at MSU than JoMo and it’s not even remotely close.
Croom won only 3 games three times and 4 games once. That's totally tanking. Joe sucked and had more talent, but he never totally tanked. Losing to OM and KY and ULL and going 3-9 in 2019 would have been totally tanking.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
So you are saying winning 8 games is totally tanking, but going 3-8 with a loss to non division-1 Maine and UAB is not ? Got itQuote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
this all day long .... and Croom stepped straight into probation when he set foot on campus ... If Croom had what JoMo had to work with I think he wins a few more games than he did... but I also know for fact that Croom had lost the respect of a large portion of the team - so if we're picking our poison at least Croom beat Bama back to back (even if they sucked at the time)Quote:
Originally Posted by BeastMan
Don't forget a 20 point loss to 2-9 Vandy that same year we loss to Maine and UAB.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE Bruce Dickinson
As expected, this is a great discussion. Really puts Joe into perspective
I think Joe is better, but timing is the key here. We got rid of Joe under tenuous circumstances but still before it totally bottomed out. Croom was canned after the most humiliating Egg Bowl showing in many people?s lifetime.
My issue with Croom has more to do with 2008 than some of the early losses to teams like Maine or insert C-USA team. He built it up in 2007 to what seemed like the start of something good, and then immediately crashed the following year. LA Tech, 3-2, and 45-0 were more infuriating to me than losing to Maine in Year 1.
Moorhead was bad, yes. Moorhead also did not lose the kind of games Croom lost. Both of them got embarrassed by good teams, but Croom got embarrassed by some bad teams.
Had we waited another year to fire Joe then it would?ve been a more legitimate debate, because I think we would?ve gone 3-9 or 4-8 this year and it would?ve taken a while for us to get back going. Making the change when we did allows us to minimize the long term negative impact Joe had. Croom?s impact was minimized by the fact that 2009-2010 was, in my opinion, peak Mullen, and the best coaching job he did here.
Croom is by far worse than Moorhead. By far. The freshness of Moorhead is doing a lot of clouding of the mind. It was time for Moorhead to leave but thinking Croom was better is insane. Croom not counting the fluke 2007 year won back to back games once in his other 4 years. He had 4 losing streaks of at least 3 games. He coached 40 games against P5 teams he scored 30 or more 6 times. SIX TIMES!! Joe failed no doubt about it but Croom was next level bad minus all the "discipline" he installed. Let's be honest after Jackie let the program fall his last few years hell even Moorhead would've been looked at as a disciplinarian.
Yep. A few bad officiating calls cost us the game against a ranked GaTech. One play call/execution against LSU and we win that game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooterpoot
Mullen took a sick program with same players and had us competing with top 25 talent. The issue was scheme and not putting players in a position to win. Croom had his teams play tough even though talent wasn't really there. Mullen didn't have to do a 180 on culture. Not saying it was perfect but much different challenge right now.
I'll take Croom over Moorhead. Imagine if we gave Moorhead 5 years?
Agree. Honestly joe is between Jackie and Croom, but is closer to Jackie than he is to Croom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ifyouonlyknew
Moorhead, but it's by a hair.
Croom was regularly losing to Maine, La Tech, Vandy, etc.
Moorhead in two years had two bowl games and two wins over UM. He also recruited better.
Both were lousy coaches in a race to the bottom.
In retrospect I wanted Croom gone in year three, and was stubborn on Moorhead and wanted to see what he did through his second season. Which was a flaming disaster.
Both said really stupid things about the fans. Croom said he didnt care what the fans thought. Moorhead told us to pound sand and kick rocks. Both indefensible.
Glad both are gone.
I think people remember croom for way better than he was. The only decent year we had, was the single luckiest season in college football history. Go back and look at the numbers if you don?t believe me. We won 3 sec games in which we barely gained 200 yards in. If a tipped pick six against Auburn, a brutal decision by John Parker Wilson, and coach O punts and we go 4-8 that season. Moorhead was bad for sure, but Croom was unwatchable.
What happened to Moorhead should have happened to Croom. After year three Croom should have been canned. Moorhead's offense is light years better than Croom's god awful Trash Coast Cluster. Remember one spring game under Croom neither offense scored a TD and not one forward pass was completed.
It's unclear, but I give the nod to Croom over Moorhead. Croom inherited an absolute train wreck of a program. And the SEC and MSU didn't have the resources and advantages we have now. Croom still managed to win SEC COY of the year, beat Bama twice, and beat UF. His 2009 class that he put in place for Mullen was the best in school history.
Croom was lazy and hardheaded... JoeMo was just hardheaded.
While neither was good, Moorhead has left the cupboard more full than Croom did. (The 2008 MSU team had 6 future NFL players, We have had 5 drafted each of the last 2 years).Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg
Croom had his problems with discipline as well, but our offense was horrible under Croom. In 2008, we AVERAGED 275 yards of offense a game.
Leach is inherited a RS FR 4* QB and a great RB. Mullen had a Relf and Dixon. Leach has some experience in the WR. Mullen started 5 True FR at WR. The 2 "experienced WR" in 2009 caught passes for 141 yards.
The 2009 Defense was loaded with Mullen recruits.
Some of yall must not remember the Croom years like I do.
This IMO isn't even worth comparing. The Croom era was an absolute dumpster. He improved the culture a little bit but not by as much of a margin as some of yall apparently think.
We were absolutely terrible in most phases of the game. We were just as boneheaded and dumb as we were under JOMO. We had the same issue with pre snap penalties/offsides etc. that we had under Joe.
Joe would at least try to make an adjustment, Croom on the other hand was determined that that HB dive on 1st and 2nd down were going to work every series regardless of who we were playing.
I'm surprised we aren't all blind from having to watch the Croom era, it was that bad. I couldn't survive another Croom era ha.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BB30
I must've missed all of these adjustments.
But yes, Croom did suck also. Hard to pick a biggest loser coach though.
I didn't miss their confused faces thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44
https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...om_400x400.jpg
https://s3media.247sports.com/Upload...200&height=630
his adjustment was to have Fitz run on the left side of center as opposed to the usual right side of center ... other than that I have no idea of "other" adjustments last season except moving his residence much further NorthQuote:
Originally Posted by StateDawg44
Croom beat Saban. I don't care what kind of talent Bama had at the time compared to what they had now. They still out recruited us then.
Croom came in and got alot of the problems players out and did a pretty good job recruiting. Just a terrible game planner and lazy.
We almost missed the opening kick at La Tech because Croom was reading the paper at the hotel and all the assistants were scared to say anything