Anti-Leach doesn't mean anti-pass

[msugolf]

This is one of the more annoying, bothersome critiques from the pro-Leach crowd. Just because I'm not a fan of Leach (never have been) doesn't mean I want to run the wish bone or triple option. It just means that I think there are better (pass happy) options that would fit our university and demographics better. Yet there are several people who act as if Leach invented the passing game and his is the only sure fire way to go.

We also have to figure out what our goals are as a football program. When we hired Leach it was all about Cohen attempting to take us to another level that Mullen couldn't; to be able to beat the top level teams by throwing it more. Now the goalposts have been moved to we need to transition to a more modern day offense...pass heavy, throwing it all over the field. And now here we are rebuilding our football program after nuking it from the ground up, just to get back to where Dan had it. And for what, just to pass more? You're telling me the only way to transition into a more modern style offense was to blow up the program?

I get there were some locker room problems as well but you don't always have to cut off all your limbs because you have a hangnail.

[DownwardDawg]

This is a good post!!

[ShotgunDawg]

This is one of the more annoying, bothersome critiques from the pro-Leach crowd. Just because I'm not a fan of Leach (never have been) doesn't mean I want to run the wish bone or triple option. It just means that I think there are better (pass happy) options that would fit our university and demographics better. Yet there are several people who act as if Leach invented the passing game and his is the only sure fire way to go.

We also have to figure out what our goals are as a football program. When we hired Leach it was all about Cohen attempting to take us to another level that Mullen couldn't; to be able to beat the top level teams by throwing it more. Now the goalposts have been moved to we need to transition to a more modern day offense...pass heavy, throwing it all over the field. And now here we are rebuilding our football program after nuking it from the ground up, just to get back to where Dan had it. And for what, just to pass more? You're telling me the only way to transition into a more modern style offense was to blow up the program?

I get there were some locker room problems as well but you don't always have to cut off all your limbs because you have a hangnail.

Joe nuked our football program, not Leach.

I'm not sure Leach has actually kicked anyone off the team or is them quitting because the standards are high the same as kicking them off?

Who cut the limbs off?

[msugolf]

Joe nuked our football program, not Leach.

I'm not sure Leach has actually kicked anyone off the team or is them quitting because the standards are high the same as kicking them off?

Who cut the limbs off?

You have to get approval from the top dog (Cohen) to be able to do what's being done to the program so I'd start there

[ShotgunDawg]

You have to get approval from the top dog (Cohen) to be able to do what's being done to the program so I'd start there

Approval to do what?

Who has Leach kicked off the team? Name one player that Leach kicked off?

[msugolf]

Approval to do what?

Who has Leach kicked off the team? Name one player that Leach kicked off?

Who said anything about kicking kids off the team? Not me ... oh wait that was you projecting that onto me ..twice. Just saying it a bunch of times doesn't make it true.

I do however believe the choice in scheme has caused some opt outs and has led to players not being utilized as well as they can/could be, which in turn has caused our fans to just say "oh so and so is horrible. we need to recruit better. Leach needs his guys." That's BS

[ShotgunDawg]

Who said anything about kicking kids off the team? Not me ... oh wait that was you projecting that onto me ..twice. Just saying it a bunch of times doesn't make it true.

I do however believe the choice in scheme has caused some opt outs and has led to players not being utilized as well as they can/could be, which in turn has caused our fans to just say "oh so and so is horrible. we need to recruit better. Leach needs his guys." That's BS

So a scheme that some players don't fit is "burning the program to the ground"?

[R2Dawg]

Joe nuked our football program, not Leach.

I'm not sure Leach has actually kicked anyone off the team or is them quitting because the standards are high the same as kicking them off?

Who cut the limbs off?

Disagree. Culture wise, yeah Joe nuked it. Football wise, well Leach did that part.

[ShotgunDawg]

Disagree. Culture wise, yeah Joe nuked it. Football wise, well Leach did that part.

I don't agree. We were pretty terrible in the Music City Bowl and last season.

Did you miss our defensive effort vs Auburn & A&M last year?

Does Leach get no credit for building a culture that has made our defense night and day better this season?

[R2Dawg]

I don't agree. We were pretty terrible in the Music City Bowl and last season.

Did you miss our defensive effort vs Auburn & A&M last year?

Does Leach get no credit for building a culture that has made our defense night and day better this season?

I didn't say we were a good team last year but we had some talent - proof this year's D.

Where did I not give Leach credit for correcting some culture stuff?

Reading comprehension 101 gun.

[ShotgunDawg]

I didn't say we were a good team last year but we had some talent - proof this year's D.

Where did I not give Leach credit for correcting some culture stuff?

Reading comprehension 101 gun.

IDK man, you been saying some pretty unreasonable stuff

[Maroonthirteen]

Hear, Hear!!!!!

I realize Bounds and others want to discredit others and make others look stupid for questioning Leach. However you're exactly right. I, in no way, want a 1980 offense. I do want an offensive that is productive. Leachs offense is absolutely atrocious.

[bluelightstar]

This is one of the more annoying, bothersome critiques from the pro-Leach crowd. Just because I'm not a fan of Leach (never have been) doesn't mean I want to run the wish bone or triple option. It just means that I think there are better (pass happy) options that would fit our university and demographics better. Yet there are several people who act as if Leach invented the passing game and his is the only sure fire way to go.

We also have to figure out what our goals are as a football program. When we hired Leach it was all about Cohen attempting to take us to another level that Mullen couldn't; to be able to beat the top level teams by throwing it more. Now the goalposts have been moved to we need to transition to a more modern day offense...pass heavy, throwing it all over the field. And now here we are rebuilding our football program after nuking it from the ground up, just to get back to where Dan had it. And for what, just to pass more? You're telling me the only way to transition into a more modern style offense was to blow up the program?

I get there were some locker room problems as well but you don't always have to cut off all your limbs because you have a hangnail.

Great post. People are creating a false dilemma -- you don't have to choose between the triple option and throwing the ball 65 times a game. People say Ole Miss was "pass happy" under Hugh Freeze but they never averaged fewer than 35 carries a game. You know why? Because everybody (except Mike Leach apparently) knows you have to be able to run the ball in this league.

[msugolf]

Great post. People are creating a false dilemma -- you don't have to choose between the triple option and throwing the ball 65 times a game. People say Ole Miss was "pass happy" under Hugh Freeze but they never averaged fewer than 35 carries a game. You know why? Because everybody (except Mike Leach apparently) knows you have to be able to run the ball in this league.

Bo Bounds is the worst at this. He had Freeze on the other day and tried to bait him into agreeing with him about the myth of a balanced offense, which Leach is known for mocking. Freeze responded "Well, we sure want to have the appearance of a balanced offense to keep defenses on their toes." Radio silence after that response ...loved it.

[RiverCityDawg]

You make some fair points, but I feel like there's this underlying sentiment by many, and I see it in your post, that it would have been easy just to plug any Tom, Dick or Harry in at coach and do what Dan Mullen did. Not only what Dan did, but I what he did in 2014 or at least 2015 & 2017.

1) We just weren't set up to sustain that level of success based on personnel. Yes, for 2018 and especially on defense, and that's a failing of Moorhead's, but there were some holes in the roster that are coming home to roost. There's a great T&L podcast episode from a week or two back that breaks down the last few recruiting classes and it's a mess.

2) Dan was/is a damn good coach. Yes, he lost some focus and drive with us towards the end, but what he did at his peak isn't easily replicated. He's a top coach and we were fortunate to scoop him up on the rise. Hiring a head coach in the SEC is hard, especially at State. We just don't have the ability to pick whoever we want. It's not poor ol missippi state, it's just the truth. You make a bad hire in Moorhead and a program like ours gets in a hole in a hurry. Mike Leach is a proven winner at the P5 level and has always done so with inferior talent relative to his opponents in his conference. That's exactly what we're facing, so it makes sense to get someone with that resume. You could try and land another up and comer like Dan, but the failure rate on that approach is higher than the success rate. The obvious guys have "better" options than State.

All that to say, maybe we didn't have to take on THIS transition, but I think some of what we're seeing would have happened with any coach just based on what was being taken over. We could be MORE successful on offense, but how much more? Enough to win one more game maybe? The hope obviously is that the medium/long term success will outweigh the short term sacrifice. We'll see.

[Maroonthirteen]

You make some good points and observations. Just look at Tennessee. They have gone through coach after coach and they have plenty of resources to be successful. Finding a good coach that is a good fit isn't easy. I, for one, think schools fire coaches way to quick. But I digress that is a different topic.

However I don't buy any of this "Cohen had a vision to change the football program." He hired Moorhead because Day turned him down and Moorhead was a good hire on paper.

Cohen hired Leach because he was out of options. The whole .... get his players, transition the program... are excuses to buy time for Leach's buyout to go down.

State will get back to its roots next hiring cycle. We will really be in a rebuild at that point.

[bluelightstar]

You make some good points and observations. Just look at Tennessee. They have gone through coach after coach and they have plenty of resources to be successful. Finding a good coach that is a good fit isn't easy. I, for one, think schools fire coaches way to quick. But I digress that is a different topic.

However I don't buy any of this "Cohen had a vision to change the football program." He hired Moorhead because Day turned him down and Moorhead was a good hire on paper.

Cohen hired Leach because he was out of options. The whole .... get his players, transition the program... are excuses to buy time for Leach's buyout to go down.

State will get back to its roots next hiring cycle. We will really be in a rebuild at that point.

It's somewhat frustrating because if Leach fails, we're definitely going to go back to a spread option offense. And then it'll take us a while to get any running backs, a run blocking line, and a QB that can run power on 3rd and short.

[the_real_MSU_is_us]

You make some fair points, but I feel like there's this underlying sentiment by many, and I see it in your post, that it would have been easy just to plug any Tom, Dick or Harry in at coach and do what Dan Mullen did. Not only what Dan did, but I what he did in 2014 or at least 2015 & 2017.

1) We just weren't set up to sustain that level of success based on personnel. Yes, for 2018 and especially on defense, and that's a failing of Moorhead's, but there were some holes in the roster that are coming home to roost. There's a great T&L podcast episode from a week or two back that breaks down the last few recruiting classes and it's a mess.

2) Dan was/is a damn good coach. Yes, he lost some focus and drive with us towards the end, but what he did at his peak isn't easily replicated. He's a top coach and we were fortunate to scoop him up on the rise. Hiring a head coach in the SEC is hard, especially at State. We just don't have the ability to pick whoever we want. It's not poor ol missippi state, it's just the truth. You make a bad hire in Moorhead and a program like ours gets in a hole in a hurry. Mike Leach is a proven winner at the P5 level and has always done so with inferior talent relative to his opponents in his conference. That's exactly what we're facing, so it makes sense to get someone with that resume. You could try and land another up and comer like Dan, but the failure rate on that approach is higher than the success rate. The obvious guys have "better" options than State.

All that to say, maybe we didn't have to take on THIS transition, but I think some of what we're seeing would have happened with any coach just based on what was being taken over. We could be MORE successful on offense, but how much more? Enough to win one more game maybe? The hope obviously is that the medium/long term success will outweigh the short term sacrifice. We'll see.

Those holes are arguably more home to roost now than then. Every teams 2 deep should be a mostly Sr/rJr or Jr rSo players, with a few experienced but non NFL caliber rSr thrown in there with the few true studs of the younger classes. But mostly it should be older guys.

So lets look at those 3 classes:

RSr is a good group of experienced, non NFL caliber guys. Spencer, Kobe Jones, Parker, Eiland, Osirus Mitchell. The trench guys are really critical contributors for us, the other 2...

Sr/rJr has Kylin (headcase that's no longer on the team but I included him because he did play some this year), Odom, and Austin Williams. That's absolutely PATHETIC to only have 2 guys of a 4th year class be in the 2 deep.

Jr/rSo class has actual talent. Dolla Bill, marcus Murphy, Cole Smith, Crumedy, Brule, Watson, Furdge... but some guys that aren't very god yet (Preson) are forced to play due to the upper 2 classes being so bad.

The rest of the players are young. OL specifically (our worst position group) is coincidentally the position group that is the hardest for young guys to play at. it takes about 3 years to even hope of being ready to play, with many well remembered players needing till year 4 to reach their potential.

So of course we suck. We've got guys that should ride the bench a year playing in the 2 deep. We've pressed almost the whole team up a year from their natural development

[AROB44]

Dan was/is a damn good coach. Yes, he lost some focus and drive with us towards the end, but what he did at his peak isn't easily replicated. He's a top coach and we were fortunate to scoop him up on the rise. Hiring a head coach in the SEC is hard, especially at State. We just don't have the ability to pick whoever we want. It's not poor ol missippi state, it's just the truth.

This is so true. We are a very difficult place to win based on being in the SEC West. You are almost guaranteed 2 or 3 losses per year in this division. Very little room for error.

[msugolf]

So a scheme that some players don't fit is "burning the program to the ground"?

Would you rather me call it a "3-4 year transition period?" Is that less offensive?