Toggle sidebar

berhdawg, i take issue with you on something.........

J

jacksonreb

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
458
0
0
in the "new bama" thread, if i understand your post correctly, you are saying that the reality is neither ole miss nor msu will ever be able to compete consistently at the highest level. if that is your point, i disagree. i think we both have enough resources to be "credible" contestants in the sec and beyond. we're the smallest budgets, fanbases etc, i get that but we're big enough in those respects to compete.

the key to success is people and getting the right guy to lead your program. lsu sucked for a number of years prior to saban. bama went thru tough times prior to bringing saban in. don't even get me started on the disaster that has been ND. none of those programs should ever struggle given their resources and traditions, but without the right guy leading they floundered

conversely look at TCU, boise st, vandy for goodness sake, louisville under petrino, and others who have many of the same problems we do. they found the guy and have done very well.

msu and ole miss have to find the right guy. maybe mullen is it for msu, maybe freeze is it for ole miss. time will tell and if they are the guy then our challenge will be holding onto them. that i think is our toughest challenge to overcome. if one of the big boys wants to blow us out of the water by hiring somebody for $$$ then we could have a problem. mullen professes to love msu and starkville so maybe if somebody comes calling with serious serious bucks he'll choose to stay. same for freeze if that happens, but we'll both have to pony up.

bottom line is i think most any school can compete. it's harder some places but even the schools with the most resources struggle when they make the wrong hire. and some "small" schools prosper when they get it right. both msu and ole miss can too.
 
dawgstudent

dawgstudent

Heisman
Apr 15, 2003
39,391
18,798
113
I disagree. I don't see Ole Miss and State ever being a consistent top 3 or 4 team in the SEC with 9-10 wins as the norm. You will have a step up year every so often but the state's resources with money, talent, people is not enough to be sustained.

Once we think we close the gap - the upper teams step up their game as well.
 
hatfieldms

hatfieldms

All-Conference
Feb 20, 2008
8,625
2,177
113
I agree.

With the money we are getting from television contracts I think it makes it easier to hold on to some of these coaches. They can make a lot of damn money and not have. Near the pressure other places have. After you find that guy you just have to build it up and that takes time. Especially for smaller schools
 
hatfieldms

hatfieldms

All-Conference
Feb 20, 2008
8,625
2,177
113
dawgstudent said:
I disagree. I don't see Ole Miss and State ever being a consistent top 3 or 4 team in the SEC with 9-10 wins as the norm. You will have a step up year every so often but the state's resources with money, talent, people is not enough to be sustained.

Once we think we close the gap - the upper teams step up their game as well.
Click to expand...

I Agree. My point I guess is we can constantly be a 6-8 win team with a **** at 9-10 win the stars align. I just think the days of having 3-4 wins for multiple years in a row are easier to avoid
 
dawgstudent

dawgstudent

Heisman
Apr 15, 2003
39,391
18,798
113
Yep - with proper scheduling. And I understand it if it happens every once in a while but not in consecutive years. Never should happen that way.
 
C

croomin

Redshirt
Oct 6, 2012
532
0
0
I expect MSU to compete at the Top.

You take what you've got, find a way to maximize your best attributes (e.g. properly harvesting MSU's near-proximity talent), and make it happen.

That's what competing and life is all about.

Unless you are a loser.
 
S

SheltonChoked

Redshirt
Feb 27, 2008
1,786
0
0
I'm in the middle on this...

As it currently stands, with our budgets being 1/2 to 1/3 of the big boys in the SEC (Bama, LSU, UF, UGA, A&M, AU) the Mississppi schools can only hope to be 9+ wins in a special season.

However, if the rumors of an SEC network bringing and additional $30 - 80 million a year to each school and an expanded football playoff (8+ teams) are true. We can both take the next step.

Narrowing the money gap between what MSU, and Ole Miss are able to spend on Football, and what Alabama spends on Football is the first step. To me even if the $$ number difference stays the same, diminishing returns comes to play. According to Forbes, MSU spent $38 million on fottball over the last 3 years, Alabama spends that much every year. With an extra $30 million in TV money we can double our spending easy. Schools can only build so much and with that much money all of the SEC facilities would put the NFL teams to shame.

The second part will affect scheduling. A playoff system with more than 4 teams will allow for more losses. Like the current bowl system lets 6-6 temas play in a bowl where in the past 7-4 teams were left at home. An 8 team playoff would allow a 2 loss team to get a shot and a 16 team playoff might have a 3 loss team. Like Texas A&M this year.
 
O

Optimus Prime 4

Redshirt
May 1, 2006
8,560
0
0
There's no reason either of our schools can't be consistent 6-8 win teams, with runs of 9-10 wins every now and then.
 
J

jacksonreb

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
458
0
0
i just don't think its about the budgets totally. the schools i mentioned do not have those big budgets. i do agree the consistent 9-10 win seasons will require attentive scheduling. but in every organization i am familiar with the absolute determinant to how competitive they are is the leadership. every one i know has strong runs and mediocre runs that are directly related to the leadership at the top. some small budget companies i know kick the asses of some of their bigger competitors when they have the leader. if he leaves they slip back until they can find a new right guy. same for the big boys. the only thing i will say is that in football, the bama's of the world can miss on the hire and still be ok if not dominant. we have to be dead on. no margin for error.
 
P

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,393
25,601
113
The schools you mentioned also don't compete in the SEC. Boise and TCU made their names in crap conferences, and when TCU moved into a BCS conference they immediately became very average. Even Kansas St. hasn't had to face the level of competition we have to go up against. OP4 and Dawgstudent are right. MSU and UM can average 6-8 regular season wins a year with a few 9-10 win seasons, but we will never be able to get to the level of the big boys in the SEC.
 
S

SheltonChoked

Redshirt
Feb 27, 2008
1,786
0
0
I do not disagree leadership at the top is most important. I fully believe that was the entirety of the differnce in MSU and Ole Miss from 1948 - 2008. Ole Miss consistently cared about Football. MSU's leadership either didn't or was inept. I think (hope) that is different now

However we have disadvantages that the schools you mentioned (TCU, boise st, vandy) do not have.

TCU does not count for this argument, they bulit up by playing in the WAC /CUSA/ whatever, not the Big 12. I'll admit I'm wrong if they can continue in the Big 12

Also Vandy is a measure of success? I think it was on outkickthecoverge that the number 1 reason kids are selecting schools is based on the education. Vandy should be doing well. and now they are putting money into the program.

None are surrounded by College football superpowers.

None are forced to play said superpowers every year.
 
R

Railin Jemmye

Redshirt
Oct 29, 2012
1,937
0
0
The ONLY way MSU/OM will EVER compete for a football national title.....

....is to have one of our 'up' years with 9-10 wins cycle around, and also get lucky with a Cam Newton/Collin Klein beast type player, preferably at QB.

MSU had a chance at a national title in 2 years in the modern era, 1999 and 2010. Much closer in 1999, and I say 2010 strictly because we were so close to landing Newton, and the amount of NFL talent on that team.
 
J

johnson86-1

All-Conference
Aug 22, 2012
14,251
4,769
113
If we ever struck lightning in a bottle with a coach, I think we could remain top 3 or 4 in the SEC for a 4 to 6 year period. Right now staying top 3 or 4 in the SEC basically means hovering around the top 5 to top 10 in the nation, and would mean being in the playoffs if they were in effect right now. But even though I expect the SEC to remain dominant, I'm not sure it will remain that dominant. I think the situation where we stay in the top 3 or 4 is a situation closer to arkansas' situation the previous couple of years. A team good enough to win any other conference, but a step behind the two (maybe three) SEC teams that are actually national championship caliber and maybe one or two teams from other conferences that are having a special year.
 
C

Coach34

Redshirt
Jul 20, 2012
20,283
1
0
Optimus Prime 4 said:
There's no reason either of our schools can't be consistent 6-8 win teams, with runs of 9-10 wins every now and then.
Click to expand...

I agree. The two Mississippi schools have to become perennial bowl teams. We are well on our way there- people keep saying "Mullen needs to take the next step"- well, that is the next step. We are at 3- he needs to get us to 6 or 7 in a row.

From there- it becomes a matter of putting together a couple of groups of recruiting classes that can put together a 10-11 win season like we did in 1999. But that is not a "step" for us- that is just a special season. Our programs need to get on solid footing to win 6-8 games a season- and then hope we can put together a group that wins 10-11 games once every 10 years.

In 21 years of the SEC in its current state- State and Ole Miss has had 42 chances to win the West- with State winning it once. 1 time in 42 chances. And with the SEC in its current state- it's getting harder and harder.
 
M

MaronMatters

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
603
0
0
johnson86-1 said:
If we ever struck lightning in a bottle with a coach, I think we could remain top 3 or 4 in the SEC for a 4 to 6 year period.
Click to expand...

And then what? If there is any hint that this "lightning in a bottle" is building something legit at either State or UM, bigger programs can and will snatch them up. Freeze is sitting at 6-6 and his name is already being unofficially thrown around for other jobs, and Mullen can be winless and his name will still be popping up on short lists. The verdict is still out on Mullen, but I believe he has done all he can do at State. Again, even if he hasn't peaked and cranks out a 10 win season, other programs are gonna seriously think about paying him a few extra bucks. Yeah, 6-8, maybe 9 wins for a few years, but then it's right back to square one when our coaches are fired or leave for a better opportunity. There's no consistency. State and UM will always be stuck scrambling to assemble head coaches and/or assistants more often than not.

Outside of UM in the 60's, neither school has ever been able to compete consistently at the highest level without something to knock us right back down into the cellar, and I don't see things changing anytime soon. I believe it's what Shmuley calls "conference retard Karma".
 
J

jacksonreb

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
458
0
0
a nat'l chp takes both a boatload of talent and a certain amount of luck. if we (msu and olemiss) never win one we can still compete for them. that's what i'm saying. i do believe we can both year in and year out be relevant to the discussion about sec championships. with the right guy.
 
T

Todd4State

Redshirt
Mar 3, 2008
17,411
1
0
If that happens, it happens

MaronMatters said:
And then what? If there is any hint that this "lightning in a bottle" is building something legit at either State or UM, bigger programs can and will snatch them up. Freeze is sitting at 6-6 and his name is already being unofficially thrown around for other jobs, and Mullen can be winless and his name will still be popping up on short lists. The verdict is still out on Mullen, but I believe he has done all he can do at State. Again, even if he hasn't peaked and cranks out a 10 win season, other programs are gonna seriously think about paying him a few extra bucks. Yeah, 6-8, maybe 9 wins for a few years, but then it's right back to square one when our coaches are fired or leave for a better opportunity. There's no consistency. State and UM will always be stuck scrambling to assemble head coaches and/or assistants more often than not.

Outside of UM in the 60's, neither school has ever been able to compete consistently at the highest level without something to knock us right back down into the cellar, and I don't see things changing anytime soon. I believe it's what Shmuley calls "conference retard Karma".
Click to expand...

But with the new commitment to football and actually doing it right- improving facilities, paying our head coach, and scheduling properly- it's going to be harder for a school to just swoop in and steal a coach from us.

Sure- we have things we need to improve- such as paying our assistants more and getting rid of Bracky Brett- but we're making tangible progress.

Now, if we do have a coach stolen from us by another school- at least we would be in a pretty darn good position to hire someone else. Certainly better than before.
 
J

jacksonreb

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
458
0
0
by attentive scheduling i just mean paying attention

to OOC scheduling to pick up at least 3 pretty easy wins if not 4 and get a break from getting your *** kicked by sec schools week in and week out.
 
J

jacksonreb

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
458
0
0
all i can say is look at lsu and bama without the saban and ND without kelly. i say without meaning any rancor...i hope msu as a whole agrees with you. nobody ever surprises themselves very much by exceeding their own expectations. if you guys really don't believe then that just makes it easier for us. i may go to my grave never seeing it but i believe it will be because we don't ever find the guy. it can be done.
 
R

Railin Jemmye

Redshirt
Oct 29, 2012
1,937
0
0
I think what South Carolina is doing right now is about the top of the line. Arkansas in 2010 and 2011. Unless you get that beast player that puts you over the line.
 
P

patdog

Heisman
May 28, 2007
56,393
25,601
113
LSU and Bama are 2 of the 11 winningest football programs in Div. I-A history. Pretty sure Saban wasn't at either school that long. 5 of the 12 winningest programs in history are in the SEC, and 5 of the 20 winningest programs in history are in the SEC West. Nobody outside the SEC faces anywhere near that level of competition. As for Notre Dame without Kelly, they're the 3rd winningest program in history.
 
A

Angry Pirate

Redshirt
Dec 17, 2012
25
0
0
Agreed. Looking back now to the 90s, we see how weak the West was and neither team was able to capitalize. Each came close, once. For MSU, the stars aligned with a nationally ranked defense, and Ole Miss had a once in a generation QB.

I think with the changes in offense, both teams can be more competitive on an annual basis but we'll never be able to make that leap to the top when teams like Bama, LSU, and either Auburn or A&M continue to load up with elite talent and exceptional coaching.
 
H

HiLo.sixpack

Redshirt
Aug 24, 2012
28
0
0
The root problem

for State and Ole Miss is not coaching or lack thereof, or small budgets. The albatross around their necks is having 3 Div I schools in a state with 490,000 K-12 students. This is a small number compared to surrounding states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, etc. who have fewer SEC schools, but larger talent pools to choose from.
 
J

jacksonreb

Redshirt
Aug 22, 2012
458
0
0
thank you. you make my point...lsu had a run of about 12 losing seasons or at least not winning from the early 90's to the coming of the saban. bama had a very mediocre run prior to saban also. ND hasn't been relevant since '88 so it isn't just the money or the tradition. its the coaches...
 
S

skb124

Redshirt
Jul 20, 2008
1,270
0
0
I've always wondered, how does Alabama's huge budget give them such an advantage over us? Like what does their extra money do that ours doesn't allow us to do? I just really don't know all the fiscal details of college athletic departments.
 
S

skb124

Redshirt
Jul 20, 2008
1,270
0
0
The thing is, Saban only went to Bama because they are Alabama. Saban wasn't going to leave the Dolphins to come to Mississippi State. It is about tradition for those schools. Alabama was bad at the time, but they were still Alabama. LSU was a dormat national power when Saban went there. LSU hired him because Jimmy Sexton told them he was the best college football coach in the nation. He was willing to go to LSU because it is LSU. As for Notre Dame, they have been getting top 10 recruiting classes for as long as I can remember. Their talent is very good, their coaches have just sucked. Kelly actually has the talent playing like it should now. However, I think this Notre Dame season is a perfect storm for them. They really aren't that GREAT of a team. Beating Pitt in 3OT by a field goal, Purdue by a field goal, Michigan and Stanford by 7, and another unranked team by a field goal just doesn't scream national champ caliber to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.