Jordan Rodgers just said

[Cooterpoot]

The biggest concern with the AU game is the FL game. We're going to be sky high and use a lot of energy in that FL game. Win or lose, going to be tough to turn around and play AU. Being at home is big.

[Bubb Rubb]

As Brad Edwards said this morning, "Mullen was the best coach in MSU history. Is it really reasonable that they won't miss a beat with Moorhead?"

I sure do get tired of hearing this. Mullen did a good job for us but there are certainly several areas for improvement. We've already seen improvement in one area with Moorhead's recruiting. We're seeing another example with the depth chart - Moorhead will play the best players.

[BulldogDX55]

The biggest concern with the AU game is the FL game. We're going to be sky high and use a lot of energy in that FL game. Win or lose, going to be tough to turn around and play AU. Being at home is big.

I'm not too concerned about it. In 2014, we slapped around LSU, A&M, and Auburn in consecutive weeks.

[Johnson85]

I'm not too concerned about it. In 2014, we slapped around LSU, A&M, and Auburn in consecutive weeks.

Also, like 2014, I think it's going to help that the games are in the "right" order. No letdown from LSU to A&M to Auburn because they were all huge. Think the same will apply to Florida. I'm sure some of the players want to beat Mullen, but they're probably not going to let beating a pretty mediocre florida team interfere with a much more hyped game the following week.

If I was going to be worried about a game get messed up because of team psychology/emotions/attitude, it'd be the LSU game after a bye week if we do go into it undefeated, or even A&M the next week. Both of those seem like potential letdown games if things are going well.

[ShotgunDawg]

I sure do get tired of hearing this. Mullen did a good job for us but there are certainly several areas for improvement. We've already seen improvement in one area with Moorhead's recruiting. We're seeing another example with the depth chart - Moorhead will play the best players.

I fully understand.

It's reasonable to ask though: if MSU has bad history in football, have been playing for over 100 years, and Mullen was the best coach they've had; how reasonable is it that they find an equal or better replacement with their next hire?

Now, as an MSU fan, I can rattle off numerous reasons why comparing the current MSU program to anything that happened prior to 1990 as a useless exercise as the two programs don't resemble each other in any way, however, that has to be proved on th field.

In MSU's history of football, I don't believe we ever made back to back good hires. From an outsider perspective, it would seem reasonable that MSU may not make a great hire.

[Maroonthirteen]

I'll wait till I see us against a good opponent before I get to excited.

Yeah, feels very similar to pre-season 2001.

JoMo was a good hire. We have a defense and running backs.

I?m not sure Fitz will be the runner he was. I highly doubt his passing accuracy has improved. I?m skeptical about our secondary.

[Jarius]

His accuracy doesn’t need to improve as much as people think. If our wide receivers will just catch passes they should catch his % will go up to a normal level. If they can create a little separation so he doesn’t have to stick it in their face mask every throw that would help too.

[Liverpooldawg]

Of course, you probably also aren?t wooly on our men?s basketball team even though this is more talent then we have ever had on one team in our history. Sit back, relax, and enjoy the 2018-2019 MSU sports season. There aren?t going to be many that will collectively be as great as the one coming up.

I've heard that before and no, a NIT appearance does not get me excited for basketball. There is great potential on both teams but all potential really means is you haven't done anything yet. I'll enjoy the season much better playing the expectations game when I have a reference point.

[Bubb Rubb]

I fully understand.

It's reasonable to ask though: if MSU has bad history in football, have been playing for over 100 years, and Mullen was the best coach they've had; how reasonable is it that they find an equal or better replacement with their next hire?

Now, as an MSU fan, I can rattle off numerous reasons why comparing the current MSU program to anything that happened prior to 1990 as a useless exercise as the two programs don't resemble each other in any way, however, that has to be proved on th field.

In MSU's history of football, I don't believe we ever made back to back good hires. From an outsider perspective, it would seem reasonable that MSU may not make a great hire.

It's just a different time and era. With the SEC money and upgraded facilities, State is a much more viable option for student athletes than it was before Mullen.

Mullen averaged just over 7 wins per season, while playing four cupcakes and Kentucky every year. He had a couple of spectacular seasons, and a bunch of mediocre to slightly better than average seasons. That's been done here before.

Like I said, Mullen was a good coach, and I understand the bowl streak is something that's never been done before. But it's important to remember the era. There are more bowl games than ever, and there are 12 game seasons now. In retrospect, outside of 2014, he really didn't do anything spectacular here. Mullen happened to be in the right place at the right time. Jackie accomplished more during the 97-2000 timeframe. It's my opinion that any competent coach can achieve 7/8 wins here every year with the occasional great year. The floor is higher, thanks in part to Mullen, but thanks in bigger part to the era, dynamics, SEC money, improved facilities, and extra cupcake on the schedule. Mullen couldn't raise the ceiling though. We will see if Moorhead can.

[msu15]

Yeah, feels very similar to pre-season 2001.

Absolutely not

[TrapGame]

Yeah, feels very similar to pre-season 2001.

JoMo was a good hire. We have a defense and running backs.

I?m not sure Fitz will be the runner he was. I highly doubt his passing accuracy has improved. I?m skeptical about our secondary.

Shoop's specialty is the secondary.

Fitz actually has receivers that can catch the ball. His numbers will improve.

Fitz doesn't have to be the runner he was for this offense.

You can't even remotely compare this team to 2001. Just stop.

[StarkVegasSteve]

Shoop's specialty is the secondary.

Fitz actually has receivers that can catch the ball. His numbers will improve.

Fitz doesn't have to be the runner he was for this offense.

You can't even remotely compare this team to 2001. Just stop.

You absolutely can compare this team to 2001. The similarities are closer than most want to admit. I believe it'll be different this time because we have loads more established depth this year than in 01. But the similarities are definitely there

[Johnson85]

It's just a different time and era. With the SEC money and upgraded facilities, State is a much more viable option for student athletes than it was before Mullen.

Mullen averaged just over 7 wins per season, while playing four cupcakes and Kentucky every year. He had a couple of spectacular seasons, and a bunch of mediocre to slightly better than average seasons. That's been done here before.

Like I said, Mullen was a good coach, and I understand the bowl streak is something that's never been done before. But it's important to remember the era. There are more bowl games than ever, and there are 12 game seasons now. In retrospect, outside of 2014, he really didn't do anything spectacular here. Mullen happened to be in the right place at the right time. Jackie accomplished more during the 97-2000 timeframe. It's my opinion that any competent coach can achieve 7/8 wins here every year with the occasional great year. The floor is higher, thanks in part to Mullen, but thanks in bigger part to the era, dynamics, SEC money, improved facilities, and extra cupcake on the schedule. Mullen couldn't raise the ceiling though. We will see if Moorhead can.

I mostly agree with this except I think you are underselling how good a coach you have to be to win 7-8 wins a year anywhere in the SEC West. Gus Malzahn is a good coach at a program willing to cheat as much as any team in the nation, and he won 8, 7, and 8 wins in the three seasons prior to last year, and that was with bowl games. Bert Beliema averaged 9.7 wins a year at wisconsin and topped out at 8 wins at Arknsas. Kevin Sumlin was the hot midmajor coach and won 8, 8, 8, and 7 games at A&M after Manziel left.

That said, being in the SECW and paying SEC West salaries does make everybody in the west competitive for the type of coaches that can do that, but it's still a crap shoot.

[Bubb Rubb]

I mostly agree with this except I think you are underselling how good a coach you have to be to win 7-8 wins a year anywhere in the SEC West. Gus Malzahn is a good coach at a program willing to cheat as much as any team in the nation, and he won 8, 7, and 8 wins in the three seasons prior to last year, and that was with bowl games. Bert Beliema averaged 9.7 wins a year at wisconsin and topped out at 8 wins at Arknsas. Kevin Sumlin was the hot midmajor coach and won 8, 8, 8, and 7 games at A&M after Manziel left.

That said, being in the SECW and paying SEC West salaries does make everybody in the west competitive for the type of coaches that can do that, but it's still a crap shoot.

I understand what you're saying, and we have to play the gauntlet every year. But we pretty much had 5 guaranteed wins on the schedule every year under Mullen. Then you only have to beat Arkansas or Ole Miss to get bowl eligible. Our 7-8 win seasons have coincided with Arkansas being crummy and A&M collapsing late season every year. Now LSU is down, which helps.

I'm not diminishing what Mullen did here, but I'm not going to make it bigger than it is, either. Malzahn is nothing special in my mind, but their permanent east opponent is better than ours, and they've always played a good OOC game, so their schedule has been tougher. Beliema couldn't recruit to Arkansas like he needed to and Sumlin's teams were soft up front. But State has an advantage over those places because of the schedule.

[TrapGame]

You absolutely can compare this team to 2001. The similarities are closer than most want to admit. I believe it'll be different this time because we have loads more established depth this year than in 01. But the similarities are definitely there

C'mon man that's absolutely asinine to think this team has comparable similarities to 2001. You want to compare teams then we are talking more 98-99. Jackie Wayne was getting harassed by ole miss private eyes and had lost control in the locker room. That team sure didn't have a QB that was a dark horse for the Heisman.

[StarkVegasSteve]

[QUOTE=TrapGame;978503]C'mon man that's absolutely asinine to think this team has comparable similarities to 2001. You want to compare teams then we are talking more 98-99. Jackie Wayne was getting harassed by ole miss private eyes and had lost control in the locker room. That team sure didn't have a QB that was a dark horse for the Heisman.[/QUOTE

QB who were expected to have big seasons- Madkin/Fitz
Returning Tandem RB's- Dontae & Dicenzo/ Williams & Hill
Two WRs with a ton of hype- Grindle & Jenkins/ Guidry & Whop
Experienced scary DL- Tommy Kelly & Dorsett Davis/ Simmons and Sweat
Improved and veteran secondary- Banks, Wright, Byrdsong/ Dantzler, McLaurin, Abram

Now I agree with you on most parts of it and I believe our D line is truly a nightmare for any team, but to say the similarities aren't there just isn't true.

[FISHDAWG]

I sure do get tired of hearing this. Mullen did a good job for us but there are certainly several areas for improvement. We've already seen improvement in one area with Moorhead's recruiting. We're seeing another example with the depth chart - Moorhead will play the best players.

? and maybe he won't have a fetish for fake punts

[Johnson85]

[QUOTE=StarkVegasSteve;978508]

C'mon man that's absolutely asinine to think this team has comparable similarities to 2001. You want to compare teams then we are talking more 98-99. Jackie Wayne was getting harassed by ole miss private eyes and had lost control in the locker room. That team sure didn't have a QB that was a dark horse for the Heisman.[/QUOTE

QB who were expected to have big seasons- Madkin/Fitz

This was also true in 2014, 2015 and to a lesser extent 2017. Also probably Relf's final year and Russell's first year as a full time starter?

Returning Tandem RB's- Dontae & Dicenzo/ Williams & Hill

Also pretty regular occurrence.

Two WRs with a ton of hype- Grindle & Jenkins/ Guidry & Whop

If Grindle and Jenkins were both unproven and necessary for at least one of them to step up in order to have a good offense, then this is a similarity that is not necessarily common.

Experienced scary DL- Tommy Kelly & Dorsett Davis/ Simmons and Sweat
Improved and veteran secondary- Banks, Wright, Byrdsong/ Dantzler, McLaurin, Abram

Now I agree with you on most parts of it and I believe our D line is truly a nightmare for any team, but to say the similarities aren't there just isn't true.

Not many that make them any more similar than any other football team from our past.

[TrapGame]

[QUOTE=StarkVegasSteve;978508]

C'mon man that's absolutely asinine to think this team has comparable similarities to 2001. You want to compare teams then we are talking more 98-99. Jackie Wayne was getting harassed by ole miss private eyes and had lost control in the locker room. That team sure didn't have a QB that was a dark horse for the Heisman.[/QUOTE

QB who were expected to have big seasons- Madkin/Fitz
Returning Tandem RB's- Dontae & Dicenzo/ Williams & Hill
Two WRs with a ton of hype- Grindle & Jenkins/ Guidry & Whop
Experienced scary DL- Tommy Kelly & Dorsett Davis/ Simmons and Sweat
Improved and veteran secondary- Banks, Wright, Byrdsong/ Dantzler, McLaurin, Abram

Now I agree with you on most parts of it and I believe our D line is truly a nightmare for any team, but to say the similarities aren't there just isn't true.

You left out JWS. He lost control of the program in 2001. That is the number one reason 2001 was such a bust. Moorhead and his coaching staff are light years ahead of where we were in 2001. My youngest daughter was born summer of 2001. She started her senior year of high school today.

[MarketingBully]

I've heard that before and no, a NIT appearance does not get me excited for basketball. There is great potential on both teams but all potential really means is you haven't done anything yet. I'll enjoy the season much better playing the expectations game when I have a reference point.

You truly are an insufferable fan looking as negatively as you can at a situation.