Everybody needs to quit wetting their pants over the schedule
- Thread starter OleYeller
- Start date
I was thinking the same thing... I don't understand what more yall could want... yeah, it sucks that SC (arguably the all-time worst SEC team) is good now... and yall have the back to back @ bama games (that happens in some fashion to all the schools)...
But having KY as a perm. opponent has got to be sweet!...
But having KY as a perm. opponent has got to be sweet!...
?
I actually wish we did have ya'll back to back to get ya'll off of the same rotation as LSU, which has been talked about over and over, but that's not how I'm reading the schedule.
MISSISSIPPI STATE
Sept. 14 at Auburn
Oct. 5 LSU
Oct. 26 KENTUCKY
Nov. 2 at South Carolina
Nov. 9 at Texas A&M
Nov. 16 ALABAMA
Nov. 23 at Arkansas
Nov. 30 OLE MISS
And to the original point of this thread - I concur.
Exactly. We are in the SEC West and right now that is going to be tough... period.
Not to mention the direction Mullen has us going in.
This is not your Daddy's MSU football program.
What people are having a trouble with is that the SEC office told us we were playing Vandy and UK next year from the East... so we agreed to the OK State game. Now that we've got the OK State game, which switch in USCe for Vandy and it makes our schedule much, much tougher.
Thing is our Daddy's MSU football program
Would play Houston- a very difficult team in the late 60's, someone like Texas Tech, USM every year, as well as the gauntlet of death including games with Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Ole Miss all in a row. Oh- and most of those gauntlet of death games would either be in Jackson or on the road. That's approximately seven losses right off the bat out of ten games that they would play in the 60's.
Winning football is in part about schedule management. You have to do what it takes to put you in the best position to win. I imagine that in the 60's, if we had scheduled better like we are (were- looking at you Scott) doing, our football history would be VERY different.
Stricklin talks all the time about exposure- interestingly enough, the best exposure that we have gotten is in a year where we have played three Sun Belt teams, Jackson State, and an Auburn team that has quit. With a win against UK and UT sprinkled in there. Despite that schedule, we are 12th in the BCS and likely will continue to climb. The bottom line is winning is the best exposure a team can get and it really doesn't matter if you are a SEC team who you play non-conference.
Would play Houston- a very difficult team in the late 60's, someone like Texas Tech, USM every year, as well as the gauntlet of death including games with Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Ole Miss all in a row. Oh- and most of those gauntlet of death games would either be in Jackson or on the road. That's approximately seven losses right off the bat out of ten games that they would play in the 60's.
Winning football is in part about schedule management. You have to do what it takes to put you in the best position to win. I imagine that in the 60's, if we had scheduled better like we are (were- looking at you Scott) doing, our football history would be VERY different.
Stricklin talks all the time about exposure- interestingly enough, the best exposure that we have gotten is in a year where we have played three Sun Belt teams, Jackson State, and an Auburn team that has quit. With a win against UK and UT sprinkled in there. Despite that schedule, we are 12th in the BCS and likely will continue to climb. The bottom line is winning is the best exposure a team can get and it really doesn't matter if you are a SEC team who you play non-conference.
This
And why Scott couldn't have waited one more week on the Oklahoma State game, I don't know. I'm not going to say it was a dumb move- but it's certainly a risky move. I just hope he learns not to trust Larry Templeton ever again.
And why Scott couldn't have waited one more week on the Oklahoma State game, I don't know. I'm not going to say it was a dumb move- but it's certainly a risky move. I just hope he learns not to trust Larry Templeton ever again.
Then we need to just go ahead and join a CUSA or Sunbelt conference then if all we need are wins for exposure.
Maybe we can eventually be one of those BCS busters on a good year.
Maybe we can eventually be one of those BCS busters on a good year.
One question
How was the old way we scheduled working for us?
I prefer to be a 7-10 win SEC team every year myself. We CAN do that- IF we schedule smart and manage our team correctly. We're seeing it right now on the field for Heaven's sakes.
And I'll be honest- the years we go 6-6 and in some people's eyes "don't deserve to go to a bowl"- well, I'd rather go to an undeserved bowl than stay at home. (Not talking to you)
How was the old way we scheduled working for us?
I prefer to be a 7-10 win SEC team every year myself. We CAN do that- IF we schedule smart and manage our team correctly. We're seeing it right now on the field for Heaven's sakes.
And I'll be honest- the years we go 6-6 and in some people's eyes "don't deserve to go to a bowl"- well, I'd rather go to an undeserved bowl than stay at home. (Not talking to you)
The thing is Todd, times are changing. The sec is growing, I don't see it stopping any time soon. LSU played Oregon in Dallas. They had a tough schedule last year. With road games to WV and such. Everybody is doing it. The sec is just going to get tougher and tougher, and there is nothing we can do about that but man up. We have some pretty easy ooc games next year too. WE dropped uab and picked up Alcorn for goodness sakes. Alcorn is not as good as uab. These type schedules is what brings kids here to play. Get used to it
Playing in Reliant stadium vs a team that just missed the NC game last year on national tv to kickoff the season is the type of exposure MSU can't afford to pass up. It's time for Dan to be winning some of the following games, Arkansas, Alabama, LSU, aTm, and South Carolina. If he can go 3-3 in those 6 games including OSU then we'll still be around 9 wins assuming we sweep the other 6 easier games.
Speaking of that how did the Bears manage to get those games split up but we are still stuck with either both on the road or both at home? I don't mind playing an OK St type game as much as I mind playing it in the same year we play AL and LSU in Starkville. When you have to use up 2 of your 4 home SEC games on arguably the 2 most talented teams in the country (teams you are unlikely to beat anywhere) then that makes everything else much tougher. That was our biggest issue in not meeting expectations in 2011. If we were playing OK ST this year we would still end up with a very good record but that is primarily because all of our toss up type games are in Starkville (Auburn, TN, A&M and Ark though Auburn has turned into a dud). Next year most of our toss up games will be on the road (Aub, A&M and Ark).
I can't argue with your logic but we will field a very good team next year and scheduling a one and done with OSU to start the season is not that bad of an idea in my book. I agree that we don't need to schedule a game like OSU every year.
What I am arguing is that Dan has built and is continuing to build depth at MSU we did not have in years past and we can schedule these type of games and get much more exposure for one game that may even put us in the top 10 talk right off the bat.
What I am arguing is that Dan has built and is continuing to build depth at MSU we did not have in years past and we can schedule these type of games and get much more exposure for one game that may even put us in the top 10 talk right off the bat.
What IBleed said. We are going to be good next year. Why not? Also, when your OOC schedule includes a SWAC team... Plus, Auburn and UK will be down.
One more thing, I look at it as another opportunity to win a big game. If we can not get past LSU and Alabama or USC and play a tough game at Kyle Field and LIttle Rock.....at least come bowl season.....we can say we won 3 or 4 SEC games PLUS a Big12 game.
Also, if we were to lose,... IF.....I doubt 7 or 8 wins with 4 wins being those three OOCs and UAB, gets you any better bowl or recruits than 6 or 7 wins playing OKState.
One more thing, I look at it as another opportunity to win a big game. If we can not get past LSU and Alabama or USC and play a tough game at Kyle Field and LIttle Rock.....at least come bowl season.....we can say we won 3 or 4 SEC games PLUS a Big12 game.
Also, if we were to lose,... IF.....I doubt 7 or 8 wins with 4 wins being those three OOCs and UAB, gets you any better bowl or recruits than 6 or 7 wins playing OKState.
I agree. Its MUCH more about winning than who you play. We may be THE featured game on College Gameday next week at 7-0 playing Bama without having played ANY ranked teams. But hey, its 7-0 against 7-0.
Another issue with the schedule next year is that in a 4 week period in November we have to travel to Columbia, SC, College Station, TX and Little Rock, AR. Anyone want to calculate the total mileage on those 3 trips that all have to be made almost back to back to back?
Last edited:
So, because everyone else in the SEC is "doing it"
we should do it? Right. Because we are in the same place as LSU and Alabama right now.
Also- we moved UAB to play Oklahoma State. Alcorn replaced MVSU on our schedule.
The "these type schedules bring kids to play here" is another made up lie from people that try to spin having a tough schedule. Look at our recruiting class. Rated 18th in the country.
The REAL reason why outsiders criticize our schedule is because they do not want MSU to succeed. If we fall for what they are buying, we will hurt ourselves.
And for the record- the Oklahoma State game doesn't upset me nearly as much as the SEC saying that we are going to play Vanderbilt and then pop South Carolina on us at the last minute after we agree to the OSU game.
we should do it? Right. Because we are in the same place as LSU and Alabama right now.
Also- we moved UAB to play Oklahoma State. Alcorn replaced MVSU on our schedule.
The "these type schedules bring kids to play here" is another made up lie from people that try to spin having a tough schedule. Look at our recruiting class. Rated 18th in the country.
The REAL reason why outsiders criticize our schedule is because they do not want MSU to succeed. If we fall for what they are buying, we will hurt ourselves.
And for the record- the Oklahoma State game doesn't upset me nearly as much as the SEC saying that we are going to play Vanderbilt and then pop South Carolina on us at the last minute after we agree to the OSU game.
Yes, because everybody else is doing it, and because we are NOT up there with bama and LSU. But that's where we want to be. And yes because everyone else is doing it. Why do you think we spend so much money improving facilities? It's because everyone else is doing it. It's all about keeping up with the joneses. Let one thing slip and you spend years trying to just catch back up where you can compete. That's where we have been for decades. You want to play with the big boys? Then pull those panties off and put your big boy pants on. If not, then just stay at home cry and keep wetting your panties
We are improving because we are winning
And we are winning because we are managing ourselves better. That includes the schedule. Were you crying in your "big boy"- loosely used- pants after we went 5-7 and lost to Georgia Tech and Houston? Or were you bragging to people about how tough our schedule was while they were going to a bowl game? If you did, you probably looked retarded- which would explain why you are wearing "big boy" pants to start with.
And I've got news for you- WE DO PLAY WITH THE BIG BOYS. Look at who has won the past few BCS championships.
The thing that people like you don't get is we are still building. We made this EXACT same mistake in the late 1990's early 2000's. We went 1-7 against BYU, Oregon, Georgia Tech, and West Virginia. Yes- those teams were bad MSU teams, but that also proves my point that we were NOT ready to take on that schedule.
I do believe we can get there- but we are simply not there quite yet in my opinion. It's going to take several years of going to bowls and finishing in the top 25 every year to build out program to where we can schedule like the LSU's and Bama's of the SEC. It's not a matter of being "scared"- it's a matter of wanting what's best for MSU so that we can get up to that level.
I pray that people like you don't get a reality check next year.
And we are winning because we are managing ourselves better. That includes the schedule. Were you crying in your "big boy"- loosely used- pants after we went 5-7 and lost to Georgia Tech and Houston? Or were you bragging to people about how tough our schedule was while they were going to a bowl game? If you did, you probably looked retarded- which would explain why you are wearing "big boy" pants to start with.
And I've got news for you- WE DO PLAY WITH THE BIG BOYS. Look at who has won the past few BCS championships.
The thing that people like you don't get is we are still building. We made this EXACT same mistake in the late 1990's early 2000's. We went 1-7 against BYU, Oregon, Georgia Tech, and West Virginia. Yes- those teams were bad MSU teams, but that also proves my point that we were NOT ready to take on that schedule.
I do believe we can get there- but we are simply not there quite yet in my opinion. It's going to take several years of going to bowls and finishing in the top 25 every year to build out program to where we can schedule like the LSU's and Bama's of the SEC. It's not a matter of being "scared"- it's a matter of wanting what's best for MSU so that we can get up to that level.
I pray that people like you don't get a reality check next year.
We're winning because we are getting the recruits to do it with, and a coach that knows how to develop them. We're getting those recruits because we play in the sec, and we're keeping up with, not getting ahead of, the rest of the sec. And I didn't like losing to them guys, but I didn't go around crying because we had to play 'em. And how did you know my big boy pants fit so loosely, nervously peeking out window now.
And thanks for pointing out about the bcs championships, that's exactly what I'm talking about
I understand we are STILL building. We've been building most of my life. That's why we have to do it. And no, that's not the mistakes we made in the 90's and early 2000's. That losing was a process started by our friens up north and the reslt of an ncaa investigation over nothing that lasted 2 YEARS!. I'll agree it was bad timing, but that was something that couldn't be helped. Which reminds me, when is the news about that over with and done investigation by the ncaa going to come out? I think we're getting jacked around again.
We got to do these things inorder to get there. If not now, when? We're not going to be able to keep going to bowls and finishing in the top 25 every year if we don't do these things while everyone else is. We're gonna be left at the train station.
It is people who think like you that have gotten us left at the train station in the past. The whole conference left us behind after WWII.
We're recruiting well because we are a SEC team that WINS games
Recruits want to go to a winning team. Back when we were playing a killer schedule, did you ever read on Genespage about some recruit wanting to go to MSU because the schedule was tough? NO.
You may very well understand that we are a building program- but you don't understand HOW to build. The problem with people like you is you think after a couple of bowls and things looking like they're headed in the right direction that it is all of a sudden time to take on national powerhouses. It doesn't work that way. It takes longer than three bowl seasons- we were just 7-6 last year. Dan hasn't even had a full class of fifth year players that have played under him. Scheduling like we did after three bowl seasons (98, 99, 00) didn't work for us then- why would it work for us now? Because Dan has us going in the right direction like Jackie did back in the day?
Again, I don't have a problem playing tough teams- but I do have a problem if it is too soon because it could hurt what we have built up already.
And hell yes, what happened with our schedule in the early 2000's could have been helped because our AD was the one who made it out. What did an NCAA investigation have to do with us playing Oregon? The NCAA didn't tell us to play West Virginia- although a road game there appears to be a suitable punishment since they aren't doing the death penalty anymore.
And to answer your question- it's going to take us more like five to eight years of top 25 finishes and bowls before we can schedule more difficult teams every year like Bama.
It is hilarious that you are saying that I am going to get us left behind at the train station when you are suggesting that we do the very same thing that LT did. And we all know how forward thinking he was. What I am suggesting is going to give us a long term base for success in football.
And back to the BCS- we have scheduled the way that I have said we should and we are now currently 12th in the BCS and have really only played UT. And now we are in the discussion of going into Tuscaloosa at 7-0 with a possibly Gameday assignment. Please leave me behind at this train station. And you can say that we may start out more quickly playing someone like OSU- that may be true, but it really doesn't matter where you start- it matters where you finish. And that means beating Bama and LSU- playing games where we can rest our starters and build confidence and depth is the best way to have a chance to do that.
And hey- you were the one talking about your big boy panties, so I'm just taking your word for it.
Recruits want to go to a winning team. Back when we were playing a killer schedule, did you ever read on Genespage about some recruit wanting to go to MSU because the schedule was tough? NO.
You may very well understand that we are a building program- but you don't understand HOW to build. The problem with people like you is you think after a couple of bowls and things looking like they're headed in the right direction that it is all of a sudden time to take on national powerhouses. It doesn't work that way. It takes longer than three bowl seasons- we were just 7-6 last year. Dan hasn't even had a full class of fifth year players that have played under him. Scheduling like we did after three bowl seasons (98, 99, 00) didn't work for us then- why would it work for us now? Because Dan has us going in the right direction like Jackie did back in the day?
Again, I don't have a problem playing tough teams- but I do have a problem if it is too soon because it could hurt what we have built up already.
And hell yes, what happened with our schedule in the early 2000's could have been helped because our AD was the one who made it out. What did an NCAA investigation have to do with us playing Oregon? The NCAA didn't tell us to play West Virginia- although a road game there appears to be a suitable punishment since they aren't doing the death penalty anymore.
And to answer your question- it's going to take us more like five to eight years of top 25 finishes and bowls before we can schedule more difficult teams every year like Bama.
It is hilarious that you are saying that I am going to get us left behind at the train station when you are suggesting that we do the very same thing that LT did. And we all know how forward thinking he was. What I am suggesting is going to give us a long term base for success in football.
And back to the BCS- we have scheduled the way that I have said we should and we are now currently 12th in the BCS and have really only played UT. And now we are in the discussion of going into Tuscaloosa at 7-0 with a possibly Gameday assignment. Please leave me behind at this train station. And you can say that we may start out more quickly playing someone like OSU- that may be true, but it really doesn't matter where you start- it matters where you finish. And that means beating Bama and LSU- playing games where we can rest our starters and build confidence and depth is the best way to have a chance to do that.
And hey- you were the one talking about your big boy panties, so I'm just taking your word for it.
And Mississippi is making that same mistake right now. If they hadn't scheduled Texas, they'd be looking at a pretty sure bowl bid this year. With Texas on the schedule, they're 50-50 at best.
So wait, in one thought you say we need to play a tougher non-conference team for exposure. Then in the very next thought you state Dan needs to be able to start beating Ark, Bama, and LSU who we play every season and who are all arguably bigger names than OSU.
Wouldn't it be better to beat a few no name teams and to then consistently beat the ridiculously difficult teams with unreal exposure that we play every year?
What would you like best: A) going 9-3 with losses to Bama, LSU, and the first game of the year loss to OSU; or B) going 10-2 with only losses to Bama and LSU and some no name wins on the schedule?
Wouldn't it be better to beat a few no name teams and to then consistently beat the ridiculously difficult teams with unreal exposure that we play every year?
What would you like best: A) going 9-3 with losses to Bama, LSU, and the first game of the year loss to OSU; or B) going 10-2 with only losses to Bama and LSU and some no name wins on the schedule?
I think recruits want to go where there is a potential to win games. You and I can agree on that. No, I never read that on Genes page, but I have read that recruits wanted to sign with us because we played in the sec. Guess what? That is a tough schedule.
I think I have as much understanding of HOW to build as you do. Do you work for the athletic department? No? I didn't think so. Perhaps you should put in an application, I'm sure they would jump on it, since it is obvious they are missing such a vast knowledge of HOW to build a program. OSU is NOT a national powerhouse. Oh wait, have they had 5-8 years of finishing in the top 25? Which is your criteria for being a powerhouse team. Hell, I don't even think they are ranked this year. And I will reiterate, we had a lot more problems "back then" then scheduling. I'm not advocating going out and loading up all 4 ooc games, but one game a year shouldn't kill us. I can't imagine the bed wetting you're going to do when we start playing 9 conference games every year.
The NCAA had nothing to do with who we played, but it had a tremendous effect on how we played. For instance when we traveled to Oregon, (btw, they were in the same place we are now as far as their program was concerned) we didn't have Fant. He had to sit that game because of the NCAA. The NCAA did everything they could to damage our program so Jackie would eventually have to go. That was their goal to begin with, to drive Jackie out of coaching college football. They accomplished that along with a little help from our "friends". It also took a big toll on our head coach who had to spend more time fighting the NCAA then he did coaching, which in turn led to the downward spiral that caused us to have a decade of losing.
We didn't get left behind at the station during LT's tenure. We got thrown off the train. We got left behind back in the late 40's, and we have been trying to play catch up ever since. This is a new era. We have more money then we have ever had, thanks to TV contracts with the SEC. I don't won't to be left behind again due to small timid thinkers like you.
I will admit that our schedule has helped us tremendously this year. But the bcs is on its way out, so that is not going to continue to be the case going forward in the future. We have to continue to plan for the future, not the past. I agree, we have to have more depth. We accomplish that by recruiting. We will never catch bama or lsu in recruiting by NOT scheduling one game a year ooc that captures the media's attention. I agree if we never win one of them, it will make no difference. It wold probably hurt more than help, bit if we slip up against one of these pushovers, like we almost did against Troy, it will hurt us even more. We can talk about how Troy is no pushover, etc, etc, but on the national scene, they are perceived as one and hat is what will count. And I agree about where you finish. Wasn't it the bear who said "It's not what you do in September, but what you do in November that people remember"? If we win that game against OSU next year, it will jump start us into the national spotlight. Not to mention it will get our foot in the door of some recruits in Texas that we wold not normally have a chance with.
And hey - I won't mention you wetting your panties anymore as long as you leave my big boy pants out of the conversation.
I'm excited to play OSU in the Texans stadium. I think it's a unique opportunity that MSU can't pass up. It's not because I think we need a tougher non-conference game. If the game was at OSU I'd say hell no. Would you pass it up if it was in the Dallas Cowboys stadium? Reliant stadium on national TV is pretty damn awesome. It's a bad *** bowl game to kick off the season basically. I bet the top 6 SEC teams all have atleast 1 OOC game similar to this level.
The biggest advantage to playing in Houston to open the season in the first Texas Kickoff Classic is recruiting exposure in Texas.
Texas is filthy with recruits. I don't think we will garner the attention of the 5 star guys that UT, Oklahoma and aTm get but there are a lot of other solid players available in this state. I see really good players every Friday night on the highlight shows here in Austin that are already playing the offense Dan brought in. I would love to pick up some of the WRs and other offensive skill players available here. Not to mention the state media will push this game simply because it is a good opening matchup and the first Texas Kickoff Classic.
It will be a neutral site game and you will see a LOT of Texas MSU alumni making that trip. I know my crew will be there and I have a great deal of non-MSU friends who are going to have an excuse to go to a good game and hang out in Houston.
It's a good one and done to see if we can make any inroads in the Texas recruiting scene.
Texas is filthy with recruits. I don't think we will garner the attention of the 5 star guys that UT, Oklahoma and aTm get but there are a lot of other solid players available in this state. I see really good players every Friday night on the highlight shows here in Austin that are already playing the offense Dan brought in. I would love to pick up some of the WRs and other offensive skill players available here. Not to mention the state media will push this game simply because it is a good opening matchup and the first Texas Kickoff Classic.
It will be a neutral site game and you will see a LOT of Texas MSU alumni making that trip. I know my crew will be there and I have a great deal of non-MSU friends who are going to have an excuse to go to a good game and hang out in Houston.
It's a good one and done to see if we can make any inroads in the Texas recruiting scene.