Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 85

Thread: Buy Or Sell: Croom is Better than Moorhead?

  1. #1
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700

    Buy Or Sell: Croom is Better than Moorhead?

    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.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  2. #2
    Senior Member BrunswickDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Home of Slay, GA
    Posts
    11,916
    vCash
    1746501
    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.
    "After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
    - Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18

  3. #3
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
    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.

    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

  4. #4
    Senior Member Cooterpoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    11,578
    vCash
    52714
    Croom didn't piss away discipline. He brought discipline. Both were stubborn and had awful offensive schemes. Slight edge to Croom.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    10,866
    vCash
    3100
    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.

  6. #6
    Senior Member KOdawg1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    10,785
    vCash
    966500
    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.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,546
    vCash
    3100
    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.

  8. #8
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by confucius say View Post
    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.
    I think they go hand in hand.

    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.

  9. #9
    Senior Member BrunswickDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Home of Slay, GA
    Posts
    11,916
    vCash
    1746501
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Mullen recovered quickly from Croom.

    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
    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.
    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.
    "After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
    - Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18

  10. #10
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
    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.
    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.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Cooterpoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    11,578
    vCash
    52714
    Quote Originally Posted by BrunswickDawg View Post
    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.
    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.
    Mullen was a couple plays away from winning 7 games year one.

  12. #12
    Senior Member BrunswickDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Home of Slay, GA
    Posts
    11,916
    vCash
    1746501
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    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.
    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.
    "After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
    - Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18

  13. #13
    Senior Member BrunswickDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Home of Slay, GA
    Posts
    11,916
    vCash
    1746501
    Quote Originally Posted by Cooterpoot View Post
    Mullen was a couple plays away from winning 7 games year one.
    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.
    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.
    "After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
    - Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    4,116
    vCash
    3700
    the slytanic- was terrible -and it isn't close

  15. #15
    Senior Member THE Bruce Dickinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Starkville, MS
    Posts
    1,267
    vCash
    3100
    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.

  16. #16
    Senior Member bulldawg28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,443
    vCash
    3700
    Moorehead was worse. It took Croom 5 years to totally tank. Moorehead in 1.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    10,866
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    I think they go hand in hand.

    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.
    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.

    Joe > Croom.

  18. #18
    Super Moderator BeastMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    7,504
    vCash
    3100
    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.

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    10,866
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldawg28 View Post
    Moorehead was worse. It took Croom 5 years to totally tank. Moorehead in 1.
    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.

  20. #20
    Senior Member THE Bruce Dickinson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Starkville, MS
    Posts
    1,267
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldawg28 View Post
    Moorehead was worse. It took Croom 5 years to totally tank. Moorehead in 1.
    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 it

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.