So we have two choices....

[CadaverDawg]

Who cares though? At long as we win enough to be a mid-tier SEC program (virtually no coaches are going to be able to do better with the talent/recruiting situation), I don't care what offense we run.

Then just say your vote is for #1 in my OP. You are ok with being mediocre. That's all you had to say. It's why you and I disagree so much. You think our budget determines our status, and I don't. That's why you're fine with an offensive guru with no offense, as long as we keep that bowl win streak alive, and get another empty Music City Bowl game against Louisville that nobody watches or cares about. Its fine if you feel that way. It holds us back, but it's fine. If a majority of our fan base feels the same way you do, maybe it can convince me to quit caring since nobody else does. That's why I asked

[Quaoarsking]

Then just say your vote is for #1 in my OP. You are ok with being mediocre. That's all you had to say. It's why you and I disagree so much. You think our budget determines our status, and I don't. That's why you're fine with an offensive guru with no offense, as long as we keep that bowl win streak alive, and get another empty Music City Bowl game against Louisville that nobody watches or cares about. Its fine if you feel that way. It holds us back, but it's fine. If a majority of our fan base feels the same way you do, maybe it can convince me to quit caring since nobody else does. That's why I asked

If I recall correctly, you liked the Mullen Era as much as I did? Stability, being one of the top "non-elite" SEC schools year after year, not having bad non-bowl years like all the rest of them do. What changed? Why is it "mediocre" now when the same results weren't then?

I would love to win the College Football Playoff one day, but programs like us don't get there unless they build their way up, and going to 13 straight bowls without down years is how we can do that. Current recruits have never known of a year when we weren't a "decent" team, and that's a testament to Mullen and Leach.

[CadaverDawg]

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or serious, but yes, Tulsa is a far better program than Miami (OH), and Louisville is a decent power 5 program. (?)

Stop playing dumb like you don't understand the point. Louisville may be better than Tulsa who is better than Miami.....but regardless, nobody is watching those teams play, and if you're playing them in a bowl game, you aren't in one that matters.

[CadaverDawg]

If I recall correctly, you liked the Mullen Era as much as I did? Stability, being one of the top "non-elite" SEC schools year after year, not having bad non-bowl years like all the rest of them do. What changed? Why is it "mediocre" now when the same results weren't then?

I would love to win the College Football Playoff one day, but programs like us don't get there unless they build their way up, and going to 13 straight bowls without down years is how we can do that. Current recruits have never known of a year when we weren't a "decent" team, and that's a testament to Mullen and Leach.

I liked Dan building us up, but once he proved he couldnt get over the hump, he got stale too. Mullen's biggest flaw was he wanted to bully teams in the trenches (which I loved) but he didn't have the hosses to bully the best teams and couldn't adjust. That's why I mentioned if he had a top 15 recruiting profile he could have won big here. He didn't recruit hard enough for his style to work enough to break through. And he job hunted too much.

I can't stand a coach that does the same exact thing over and over again against teams with more talent, and continue to watch it fail year after year. I feel like for $5 mil a year, you should at least be able to change it up, try something different, or something.

[Quaoarsking]

Let me put it this way ... if there's a coach out there that we can get who can do better than averaging 7-5, then by all means fire Leach tonight and hire him.

I'm just extremely skeptical that there is. I think if we make a good hire, it's probably someone who will average 7-5 like Mullen and Leach, and a bad hire is someone who averages much worse, and it's really hard to know if you have a good hire or a bad one in the interview.

I'd rather just keep our current 7-5 coach (whom I happen to like a lot personally, but that's beside the point) instead of playing Russian Roulette hoping to get another 7-5 coach but likely getting a worse one.

[Todd4State]

So we have to go through 3 more years of this shit and hope Parson sticks around before we get to see him? No thanks.

"This shit" is better than what Texas A&M, Auburn, and Arkansas have right now.

What I don't want to see is us fire Leach and then say "well damn we should have given him time."

[CadaverDawg]

Let me put it this way ... if there's a coach out there that we can get who can do better than averaging 7-5, then by all means fire Leach tonight and hire him.

I'm just extremely skeptical that there is. I think if we make a good hire, it's probably someone who will average 7-5 like Mullen and Leach, and a bad hire is someone who averages much worse, and it's really hard to know if you have a good hire or a bad one in the interview.

I'd rather just keep our current 7-5 coach (whom I happen to like a lot personally, but that's beside the point) instead of playing Russian Roulette hoping to get another 7-5 coach but likely getting a worse one.

Ok. So again, you're ok not competing to be the best. We have different thoughts, and that's ok. I would rather keep trying someone new until we can break through, than to just accept 7-5 bc we're scared we will do the same or worse if we change coaches.

What if when Croom was here we accepted having a coach that went to a bowl once every 5 years like he did? At the time, that was actually better than most of our coaches. Thank goodness we decided we could do better and fired him even after a bowl win.

If you aren't playing for Championships, why play? If you want to know why we are battling Vandy for the worst attendance figures this year despite having 6 wins....look no further than a bunch of people that go in to a season knowing there is no shot at a Championship of any kind. Not the West, not the SEC, not the National...probably not even the Egg Bowl. Even South Carolina fans came in to the year thinking they could compete in the East. They couldn't, but they had hope. The only teams whose fans truly knew going in they didn't have a shot, was ours and Vandy's...so we shouldn't be surprised that we do t fill the stadium much more than they do.

It's actually somewhat sad for those of us that truly think we can win big and want to do what it takes to try...are surrounded by people that don't. We probably waste our time getting invested, when the majority is probably cool with 6 wins and a holiday trip to Birmingham or Nashville

[Lord McBuckethead]

And his resume isn?t that good either as a head coach.

[Todd4State]

1. Leach's staff has a lot of the same recruiters. And they may recruit harder, but the results are the same, or worse

2. Compared to Leach, Dan's offense was extremely balanced.

1. The results are the same because of what we as a university invest in it. Even Dan was able to put together top 10-15 classes at Florida which is bad for them but better than here because of resources. Just like Leach recruits better here than he did at Wazzu.

2. And? Leach's offense is averaging more PPG than most of Dan's too. Would you rather score more or tell other fans that we run the ball the same amount of times as we throw it? I'll take score more please.

[CadaverDawg]

"This shit" is better than what Texas A&M, Auburn, and Arkansas have right now.

What I don't want to see is us fire Leach and then say "well damn we should have given him time."

Like Quars, you're in the #1 group in the OP. You're fine with 6-6/7-5. Don't want to risk losing the bowl streak to try and improve. That's fine, just ain't me. I actually respect A&M for trying to go out and get a guy they thought could win big. Hell, he beat Bama....but was ultimately a bust. It happens. But I guarantee A&M will win the West before we do. Why? Most will say "becasue they have the money"....but I disagree. I say it's because they have the commitment. Yes money is helpful, but they're willing to spend it, and eventually they'll find their guy and they'll win big. Why? Bc they don't accept 8-4 as their ceiling. They expect more, and are determined to get it...even if they have a few 4 and 5 win years along the way.

Could they have stayed with Sumlin and gotten the same or better results...yes. But they didn't want the same results. They wanted to win a Championship. And they will one day. We won't...bc we aren't as committed. Got to get outside your comfort zone if you want to improve from your status quo

[Todd4State]

Ok. So again, you're ok not competing to be the best. We have different thoughts, and that's ok. I would rather keep trying someone new until we can break through, than to just accept 7-5 bc we're scared we will do the same or worse if we change coaches.

What if when Croom was here we accepted having a coach that went to a bowl once every 5 years like he did? At the time, that was actually better than most of our coaches. Thank goodness we decided we could do better and fired him even after a bowl win.

If you aren't playing for Championships, why play? If you want to know why we are battling Vandy for the worst attendance figures this year despite having 6 wins....look no further than a bunch of people that go in to a season knowing there is no shot at a Championship of any kind. Not the West, not the SEC, not the National...probably not even the Egg Bowl. Even South Carolina fans came in to the year thinking they could compete in the East. They couldn't, but they had hope. The only teams whose fans truly knew going in they didn't have a shot, was ours and Vandy's...so we shouldn't be surprised that we do t fill the stadium much more than they do.

It's actually somewhat sad for those of us that truly think we can win big and want to do what it takes to try...are surrounded by people that don't. We probably waste our time getting invested, when the majority is probably cool with 6 wins and a holiday trip to Birmingham or Nashville

Wait. We "accepted" Croom for one bowl in five years? We fired him for that. Croom wasn't better than Jackie, Emory, or Tyler. We fired Felker after five as well and Croom went to one more bowl than he did. There was no accepting. We have him a fair opportunity and he failed. There's nothing more he could have asked for.

Leach hasn't done that. We'll be going to our third bowl under him. He's only had one losing season so far.

And you're going to sit here and tell people that are saying we should invest more in recruiting and getting better players that WE are accepting mediocrity because you want to watch us run the ball more? Really? GTFO.

[CadaverDawg]

1. The results are the same because of what we as a university invest in it. Even Dan was able to put together top 10-15 classes at Florida which is bad for them but better than here because of resources. Just like Leach recruits better here than he did at Wazzu.

2. And? Leach's offense is averaging more PPG than most of Dan's too. Would you rather score more or tell other fans that we run the ball the same amount of times as we throw it? I'll take score more please.

Scoring more doesn't matter when you're scoring 19 and losing by 30. I want to win, and one dimensional teams don't win in this league. That's my point. It's like a pitcher that throws 105 mph but only throws a fastball. Eventually, everyone catches up to it bc they know what's coming and how to prepare.

Bottom line is, Mullen raised our program to the level it is now. Now we need to find that guy that can take it to the next level, like from Croom to Mullen. We can take it to another level, but only if we commit. Some might say money leads to better results, but with the current results we aren't bringing in much money and our stadium isn't filling up much either. Cohen left and NIL money went up. Would fan support go up if we hired a different coach? Who knows.

State fans are pretty good about awarding a product we believe in and have hope in. Look no further than Jans. I guarantee our attendance is better this year than any year under Howland when it's all said and done. Why? Bc he coaches hard, and our guys play hard...and so far it's led to winning. Funny how that happens. So im not surprised that the crowd isn't showing up to watch a finesse offense, led by a non athletic, no contact QB, and an emotionless goofy coach with 5 plays, lose in a fashion that they could have scripted prior to the game.

[CadaverDawg]

Wait. We "accepted" Croom for one bowl in five years? We fired him for that. Croom wasn't better than Jackie, Emory, or Tyler. We fired Felker after five as well and Croom went to one more bowl than he did. There was no accepting. We have him a fair opportunity and he failed. There's nothing more he could have asked for.

Leach hasn't done that. We'll be going to our third bowl under him. He's only had one losing season so far.

And you're going to sit here and tell people that are saying we should invest more in recruiting and getting better players that WE are accepting mediocrity because you want to watch us run the ball more? Really? GTFO.

Your reading comprehension sucks.

1. You misread the Croom stuff. I said thank God we DIDNT accept it.

2. If you took my "balanced" take as "we need to run it more!"...you're either trying to misunderstand, or just aren't worth debating. It's less about running and more about not being one dimensional. If we had a 95% run team I'd tell you we need more of a pass threat. I don't give a shit how we win, as long as we win....BUT....have you ever seen a team win in the SEC that is one dimensional??? No. Why? Because SEC DC's spend their entire year trying to make you one dimensional, bc that's how they beat you. We do it for them. It's a losing strategy.

So take that as "run Morrr", if you want...but that's not my point.

And yes, you are accepting mediocrity if your reasoning for keeping Leach is "at least we aren't A&M". Well, as long as we aren't the worst, who cares, right?!

[Todd4State]

Scoring more doesn't matter when you're scoring 19 and losing by 30. I want to win, and one dimensional teams don't win in this league. That's my point. It's like a pitcher that throws 105 mph but only throws a fastball. Eventually, everyone catches up to it bc they know what's coming and how to prepare.

Bottom line is, Mullen raised our program to the level it is now. Now we need to find that guy that can take it to the next level, like from Croom to Mullen. We can take it to another level, but only if we commit. Some might say money leads to better results, but with the current results we aren't bringing in much money and our stadium isn't filling up much either. Cohen left and NIL money went up. Would fan support go up if we hired a different coach? Who knows.

State fans are pretty good about awarding a product we believe in and have hope in. Look no further than Jans. I guarantee our attendance is better this year than any year under Howland when it's all said and done. Why? Bc he coaches hard, and our guys play hard...and so far it's led to winning. Funny how that happens. So im not surprised that the crowd isn't showing up to watch a finesse offense, led by a non athletic, no contact QB, and an emotionless goofy coach with 5 plays, lose in a fashion that they could have scripted prior to the game.

The attendance dropped when Dan was still coaching. It's chicken and the egg. For us to take the next step we need support. That's more on the AD than it is the coach. A&M has the most boring team in the league. Yet I guarantee their attendance is still very good.

A lot of our fans have this warped view that well we just need a new coach to generate excitement and run this fancy entertaining offense and we'll be good. Guess what? MSU has done that before. And the results are the same won/loss wise.

Heck- I think it was Dan who said that for the program to be successful the fans have to show up. Not "I need to win so the fans show up".

It's ultimately the athletic department's job to get fans to go to the games. It's their job to pump money into recruiting so the coaches can get great players.

So let's actually pump money into recruiting and do things to get fans to go to the games. Hell half the people there are there to show off their new dress or get drunk. You think those people care what our run to pass ratio is or that we ran a counter option? Hell no.

[CadaverDawg]

Been fun. It's 2am, I'm going to bed. I'll respond to any other comments tomorrow. Thanks for the debate...was more interesting than the game tonight, that's for sure. Nothing makes me want to get my ass in Davis Wade for ETSU like knowing we will throw it 50 times and look like world beaters against a cupcake, only to be whooped on thanksgiving by our rival again as they cruise to 10 wins while we celebrate another 7 win season and a Texas bowl berth versus UConn. Can't imagine why we aren't filling the stadium and pumping in crazy NIL numbers.*

Goodnight y'all. I really enjoy the debate. I respect yalls opinions, even though I differ on mine greatly.

[Todd4State]

Your reading comprehension sucks.

1. You misread the Croom stuff. I said thank God we DIDNT accept it.

2. If you took my "balanced" take as "we need to run it more!"...you're either trying to misunderstand, or just aren't worth debating. It's less about running and more about not being one dimensional. If we had a 95% run team I'd tell you we need more of a pass threat. I don't give a shit how we win, as long as we win....BUT....have you ever seen a team win in the SEC that is one dimensional??? No. Why? Because SEC DC's spend their entire year trying to make you one dimensional, bc that's how they beat you. We do it for them. It's a losing strategy.

So take that as "run Morrr", if you want...but that's not my point.

And yes, you are accepting mediocrity if your reasoning for keeping Leach is "at least we aren't A&M". Well, as long as we aren't the worst, who cares, right?!

No again- you don't get it. No let me rephrase that- you don't like it because my solution doesn't involve getting rid of Leach.

Pumping in more money to get better players is totally the same as "well as long as we aren't the worst". Newsflash- bringing in better players gets us closer to Alabama and Georgia than it does the bottom of the league. That's logic. So if my reading comprehension sucks then your logic sucks.

[Cowbell]

Miami of Ohio is who you get when you go 5-7, not 7-5. Why exaggerate and overstate your case?

Dude we played Tulsa two years ago

[Patrick Tibbons]

"This shit" is better than what Texas A&M, Auburn, and Arkansas have right now.

What I don't want to see is us fire Leach and then say "well damn we should have given him time."

Exactly. A large portion of our fanbase lets the success of Ole Miss determine their self worth.

If Ole Miss hadn?t gone to the Sugar last year and were currently 4-6 Cadaver wouldn?t have made this thread.

[Cowbell]

Most of our fans were comfortable with Mullen (equal to Leach) and a lot of them were comfortable with Moorhead (clearly worse). I think that the Leach hatred is primarily driven by Ole Miss having a couple of good years and not anything that Leach has done himself. Why are we letting Ole Miss live in our heads and affect our own opinions so much?

Leach is in no way equal to Mullen at this point. Mullen had us atleast knocking on the door

[Cowbell]

"This shit" is better than what Texas A&M, Auburn, and Arkansas have right now.

What I don't want to see is us fire Leach and then say "well damn we should have given him time."

Anybody that thinks time is going to fix this doesn't understand the game of football on a complex level. It would take an epiphany of epiphanies for leach to realize what he needs to do to improve his scheme and make it work against good teams consistently. It ain't happening. The man hasn't changed in 25 years.

You pay a coach to do the best he can with what he has. And he could do much better.