a little Friday article as we enter Spring Practice
- Thread starter Coach34
- Start date
,and I guess maybe we had no choice, but I was a little surprised that we ended up signing Schuessler in this past class because it at least appears he is more Russell-like than Prescott-like and I thought Mullen would stick to more of the dual threat guys. Like I said, we probably had little choice after losing out on Liggins, but its frustrating that we seem to be going back and forth between different style QBs instead of getting guys that are interchangeable to the same basic system.
He does what every coach does....takes the best players and coaches the team around it.
I think pretty much every coach in the country would love to have a true dual threat QB. Problem is you have to be able to throw the ball well first....it's a prerequisite 90% of the time....alot of so-called "dual threats" can run it but are only average passers....the RG3s, Newtons and Tebows don't come around that often. Chris Relf's are much more common, and you see his struggles passing the ball.
I think pretty much every coach in the country would love to have a true dual threat QB. Problem is you have to be able to throw the ball well first....it's a prerequisite 90% of the time....alot of so-called "dual threats" can run it but are only average passers....the RG3s, Newtons and Tebows don't come around that often. Chris Relf's are much more common, and you see his struggles passing the ball.
We were looking for a QB, but would have declined to sign one if we didn't get one of the ones on our primary list. When Favre left, signing one became a huge priority. We missed on some (voytik, liggins, alford, etc.). Nick was the next best available. He was not our first target. He was a very good backup plan.
Goat Grindin said:
Mullen had every chance to go ahead and play Russell full-time- and wouldnt do it. He pulled Russell after good drives. He didnt even let Russell play in the Egg Bowl.
If you dont think Prescott is going to play alot next year- you havent been paying attention
Now, the fact that Mullen can now get his foot in the door at a big time Georgia HS, that's legitimate though. But it's not the whole reason you sign a QB.
and he should if he can help us. But Russell isn't going to get benched because he isn't a dual threat. If the dude can throw the ball (and he obviously can), he'll play. Relf was 2 years older than Russell, not to mention he got in a groove, was confident, won same games. So Mullen let him play, duh. He fell off, or got hurt, whichever, and Russell came in and played fairly well. He was a sophomore, give the guy a break. He's going to be a big time player for us.
Why did Mullen keep playing Lee over Relf? Probably because he was the senior and moved the ball best. Not because he was a dual threat.
Why did Mullen keep playing Lee over Relf? Probably because he was the senior and moved the ball best. Not because he was a dual threat.
You don't sign any player for the marginal possibility of getting a player next season....BUT to think Nkemdiche has nothing to do with it is foolish....that is not a coincidence. I'm not saying we will definitely get him but we have a shot and I hope our coaches don't ever take your give up before the battle has heated up attitude. Total loser mentality.
better to use our resources elsewhere. That's not a loser mentality, that's seeing reality. Let Ole Miss dream about that guy while we commit all the top MS guys.
Anyone that doesn't realize that Mullen wants a run first/pass second QB has not been paying attention. His offense works best when the QB is a serious threat to run, then the passing game opens wide up.
Watching Russell run the offense, it was clear that Mullen made some changes and called less QB counters, but he is going to run those plays and i doubt seriously Russell will be the guy to run them. It sucks for Russell but it may not suck for MSU's offense. At the end of the day as long as they are moving the chains, who cares? The bigger question is will the OL be able to keep Russell and Prescott from taking as many clean shots as Relf took this year. I think for MSU's offense to be effective they will need both QB's to be available.
Watching Russell run the offense, it was clear that Mullen made some changes and called less QB counters, but he is going to run those plays and i doubt seriously Russell will be the guy to run them. It sucks for Russell but it may not suck for MSU's offense. At the end of the day as long as they are moving the chains, who cares? The bigger question is will the OL be able to keep Russell and Prescott from taking as many clean shots as Relf took this year. I think for MSU's offense to be effective they will need both QB's to be available.
we signed Schuessler BECAUSE he was the best QB left available to us even though he is not a dual threat type guy. However, we still need to get into the position of being able to nail down a good QB that FITS the system we want to run. If Mullen prefers running the spread option with a running QB we NEED to sign QBs that absolutely fit that mold. I don't like having to change the play calling scheme every time a different QB comes in. So far we've gone Relf-dual, Russell-pro, Prescott-dual, Schuessler-pro, ??-(guess we are due for a dual threat guy). Favre was also a dual threat type guy but was a last resort signee and of course is gone now anyway.
Russell is a better fit for a more conventional offense.
Personally, love option football. I have fond memories of Felker, Threadgill, Bond, Smith, Sleepy all running option. On the other hand, I'd also like to see Russell lead us to a bowl. It would be great for the program to have a Mississippi kid be successful at QB. I realize we can't have both option football and Russell at QB. So whatever we can win with suits me.
Personally, love option football. I have fond memories of Felker, Threadgill, Bond, Smith, Sleepy all running option. On the other hand, I'd also like to see Russell lead us to a bowl. It would be great for the program to have a Mississippi kid be successful at QB. I realize we can't have both option football and Russell at QB. So whatever we can win with suits me.
Definitely one of our biggest question marks coming in to this season.
Are we expecting anyone other than these two to contribute?
Are we expecting anyone other than these two to contribute?
Russell is just a bad fit for Mullen's offense. For everyone that keeps saying he is going to tailor the offense to fit the personnel, they are just lying to themselves. Mullen has an offense. He is going to run that offense. Sure, there are some wrinkles that fit Russell fine, but overall the offense is not a great fit for Russell.
Now Russell isn't immobile, but he also isn't a punishing runner. Mullen runs the ball with his QB. Hell Tyson Lee ran it 74 times in 2009, and he weighed about 180 lbs soaking wet. Regardless, Mullen ran his offense which requires the QB to run the football.
Look, I don't think Coach is saying Russell is a bad QB, he isn't. I don't think Coach is saying Russell won't have plays that he can perform well in Mullen's offense, I think what he is saying is that Mullen is going to run the ball with the QB at least 150 times a season. That is a bare minimum. The reason I know this is that he has done that every season since he has been a coach at MSU. I don't see that changing. Anyone that thinks that the MSU offense is served best with Russell running the ball that many times with his career 2.3 ypc is simply not thinking correctly. Now I think the MSU offense can be fine with Russell and Prescott splitting time at QB. Now this is good for MSU, but sucks for Russell, but who cares as long as MSU is playing well. At the end of the day, Russell is not a good fit for MSU's offense, that doesn't mean he isn't a good QB. Eli would be a terrible fit for MSU's offense, so would Aaron Murray or Tyler Wilson. The kid clearly loves MSU and wants to see what he can do and maybe he is a tougher runner than he has shown in the past.
Now Russell isn't immobile, but he also isn't a punishing runner. Mullen runs the ball with his QB. Hell Tyson Lee ran it 74 times in 2009, and he weighed about 180 lbs soaking wet. Regardless, Mullen ran his offense which requires the QB to run the football.
Look, I don't think Coach is saying Russell is a bad QB, he isn't. I don't think Coach is saying Russell won't have plays that he can perform well in Mullen's offense, I think what he is saying is that Mullen is going to run the ball with the QB at least 150 times a season. That is a bare minimum. The reason I know this is that he has done that every season since he has been a coach at MSU. I don't see that changing. Anyone that thinks that the MSU offense is served best with Russell running the ball that many times with his career 2.3 ypc is simply not thinking correctly. Now I think the MSU offense can be fine with Russell and Prescott splitting time at QB. Now this is good for MSU, but sucks for Russell, but who cares as long as MSU is playing well. At the end of the day, Russell is not a good fit for MSU's offense, that doesn't mean he isn't a good QB. Eli would be a terrible fit for MSU's offense, so would Aaron Murray or Tyler Wilson. The kid clearly loves MSU and wants to see what he can do and maybe he is a tougher runner than he has shown in the past.
Prescott is going to be too good and bring too much to the table to stay on the sideline- and Russell's arm and experience bring too much for him to be the back-up. Managing a 2-QB system is not very easy though- and becomes a nightmare for the playcaller- because you have to watch that you dont get in a pattern with each of them.
I do like that we are in a situation that we will play 2 QB's because they both can play- and not because they both suck and we are trying to get the best from each.
But one thing I'm 100% sure about- Mullen's QB is going to run the football. That's as certain as death and taxes
I do like that we are in a situation that we will play 2 QB's because they both can play- and not because they both suck and we are trying to get the best from each.
But one thing I'm 100% sure about- Mullen's QB is going to run the football. That's as certain as death and taxes
excited" over one scrimmage......not so much. What is differance about this article and everyone of the former coach's post?</p>
about signing Schuessler. The only way a 6'4 190 pound guy is going to do well in our offense, which requires the QB to run quite often, is if he puts on about 30 to 40 pounds.
until he gets plenty ofexperiencethroughoutthe season, there is a big difference between playing high school football inShreveportand playing against a SEC defense. My thought is that he will notchallengeRussell until the 2013 season if he turns out to be a decent QB. The jury is still out on that.
when you consider thattwo of your three QBs are pro style passers and ... are 'bad fits' for Mullen's offense (your words). I think that Mullen has enough 'experience' to modify his gameplan to 'fit' the stengths of each. Right now, the ONLY QB with any game experience is Russell. I'm impressed with Dak, BUT as a 'dual' threat QB, he is one hit away from leaving us with ONLY pass first QBs. We better practice a lot as a 'pass first' team or we will be stuck in a one dimension ... go to the RB team.OMlawdog said:
you are brain dead.
Mullen has had alot of success with Tebow and Alex Smith. But it was because they were GREAT QBs, not because Mullen only knows how to run one offense.
You and Coach saying you know these things for fact is just off base. You don't. Tyson Lee is what proves you wrong. Yes, he ran the ball and so will Russell. But he didn't do anything that a typical 'dual threat' would do. Most of Lee's big runs were wide open because no one was covering him. He was not a punishing runner.
"Russell is not a good fit for Mullen's offense" is asdumb as reading Coach34's article. Mullen's offense has not been what was holding Russell back. It's because he was a sophomore and we had OL problems last year. Russell has not performed that badly anyway.
Not sure why you're on that bandwagon. I know why Coach34 is, he is just an idiot trying to stir drama like a female. I think you may be trying to convince us to not be hopeful about our team.
</p>
Mullen has had alot of success with Tebow and Alex Smith. But it was because they were GREAT QBs, not because Mullen only knows how to run one offense.
You and Coach saying you know these things for fact is just off base. You don't. Tyson Lee is what proves you wrong. Yes, he ran the ball and so will Russell. But he didn't do anything that a typical 'dual threat' would do. Most of Lee's big runs were wide open because no one was covering him. He was not a punishing runner.
"Russell is not a good fit for Mullen's offense" is asdumb as reading Coach34's article. Mullen's offense has not been what was holding Russell back. It's because he was a sophomore and we had OL problems last year. Russell has not performed that badly anyway.
Not sure why you're on that bandwagon. I know why Coach34 is, he is just an idiot trying to stir drama like a female. I think you may be trying to convince us to not be hopeful about our team.
</p>
Hopefully we put together some really nice blowout wins early on and it gives Dan an easy reason to insert Dak in and see what he can do. I really like Russell and I just hate it for the guy, but I think deep down he wants MSU to win and will not pout if Dak starts gaining more and more PT throughout the year. I think that's why everyone wants to see him lead us to a good year and have success.
But it certainly backfired on us last year. Aside from Arkansas, Russell did quite well every time he saw the field. He especially saved us from shitting the bed against UAB and had some measure of success against LSU and Bama compared to Favre. I certainly hope Prescott is everything you've hyped him to be, but I'll be honest to God shocked if he can step into an SEC game his RS Frosh year and make some big plays with his feet and arm.
I feel like our QBs will live or die by the success of the OL, RBs and WRs. If the OL can protect and open holes for the RBs, and if the WRs can get separation then we're going to have one hell of a year. Otherwise, we're in for a year of hell.
I feel like our QBs will live or die by the success of the OL, RBs and WRs. If the OL can protect and open holes for the RBs, and if the WRs can get separation then we're going to have one hell of a year. Otherwise, we're in for a year of hell.