How much better will the offense be in Year #2 as compared to the present?

[VirgilCain]

Mullen has said that this year the defense will have to carry us as our team learns the new offense. I get that, and I also understand it is probably a bit of "coach-speak" too. I hate to bring up Croom b/c I hate looking backwards, but we heard this constantly with his offense and saw zero improvement from year 1 to year 5. On the flip side, we have seen several teams (ex. Auburn, Ole Miss) completely turn around an offense in only the first year under a new coach. And I can't imagine Ole Miss being any better offensively in year #2 of Nutt than the 2nd half of last year.

Obviously if we somehow pick up some excellent offensive players that would make a huge difference but my question is: With the current talent level, how much better will the offense be with next year as compared to this year?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

 

[VirgilCain]

Mullen has said that this year the defense will have to carry us as our team learns the new offense. I get that, and I also understand it is probably a bit of "coach-speak" too. I hate to bring up Croom b/c I hate looking backwards, but we heard this constantly with his offense and saw zero improvement from year 1 to year 5. On the flip side, we have seen several teams (ex. Auburn, Ole Miss) completely turn around an offense in only the first year under a new coach. And I can't imagine Ole Miss being any better offensively in year #2 of Nutt than the 2nd half of last year.

Obviously if we somehow pick up some excellent offensive players that would make a huge difference but my question is: With the current talent level, how much better will the offense be with next year as compared to this year?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

 

[Coach34]

provided he is able to bring in another QB. We will be better regardless, even if stuck with Russell and Relf. The difference in this offense and Crooms is that the players are progressing the and the defense is somewhat kept honest. Everybody in the stadium knew what we were going to run under Crooms, and our offense was always bunched up in the middle of the field for a large percentage of plays. Now, at least we are spread out and giving our guys a chance to play in space from time to time.
Our offense is way ahead of the last 5 years already- and we are just getting started. That is what has me excited

You cant compare us to Mississippi and Auburn because they have actual QB's that are supposed to play in the SEC. The QB position is the number 1 most important part of the offense in todays football. And the better the QB, the more things you can do on offense.

 

[jcdawgman18]

even if stuck with Russell and Relf

Seriously, why the hatred for Russell? He's only the most decorated quarterback we've ever signed and help put together last year's class moreso than anyone else.

 

[birdZdawg]

Mullen will still be developing a QB. Plus, we lose 3 RB's from this year's team with considerable playing time.

 

[futaba.79]

So Auburn and UM have "actual QBs that are supposed to play in the SEC," but we might be "stuck with Russell?"

As the two you mentioned are proving every week, you don't have to be a bigtime runner to thrive in the SEC or even to run a spread style attack. Russell being a successful QB at Mississippi State would do wonders for the program.

 

[DudyDog]

is right about the QB. I thought to myself while watching the Auburn game, "What would we look like if Newton were out there right now?" With Newton on this years team, I think we're a bowl team. With what we have, we're looking at 4 wins max.

Next year, we should be better even with the RB losses. I think Relf will be better because of experience. Russell should at least equal what we're getting from Lee. If we land Newton, we'll have the best offense that we've seen in a long time. It will be hard to have a better RB core with losing our top 3. A big key next year in my mind will be Rashod Henry. He is the type RB that Fla. runs their spread with. Smallish but quick as hell. As much as I like our current RB's, they have to work to get their yards behind our OL. Henry will be able to hit the hole quicker and take advantage of his speed. Same with some of our current freshmen who are redshirting. Most of the O line return as well, so experience should help there. WR should be better from an experience standpoint.

2010
QB Better
OL Better
WR Better
RB Worse

Overall = Better

 

[davatron]

"stuck" because by next season Russell will not have played a single down of SEC football (baring some drastic situation in which he's forced to play this year) and he doesn't exactly fit Mullen's system. Ideally he would have another year or two to get some time off the bench before taking over the starting position his junior or senior year.

Just a guess at what coach is thinking, though. It's highly probable that he hates Russell and thinks he is terrible football player.

 

[pDigital32Dawg]

I think you can attribute one reason to Auburn's and Ole Miss's offensive turn around so qucikly to the fact their coaches have head coaching experience. One thing about our offense slowly catching on has to deal with the team learning it along with Mullen learning the system as a head coach.

Now to answer your question. I don't see any reason why we won't be any better on offense next season. Mullen will know the players completely and will have head coaching experience under his belt. Then if like everyone else is saying if he pulls in the recruits he really wants and specifically a Cameron Newton then there could be some big things going on on the offensive side of the ball next season. It's apparent Mullen wants to win. All he has known is winning and he isn't going to stomach us not improving over the course from this year to next. Croom didn't know what the hell he was doing and he didn't show signs of being willing to change. That's one thing I think is key to this hire is Mullen feels the pressure of the fans and will make the necessary changes that will give us the best chance to win.
Only thing that can stop our improvement is offseason arrests or anything of that nature that always tends to be a big problem for us.</p>

 

[bullysleftnut]

Mullen has said that this year the defense will have to carry us as our team learns the new offense. I get that, and I also understand it is probably a bit of "coach-speak" too. I hate to bring up Croom b/c I hate looking backwards, but we heard this constantly with his offense and saw zero improvement from year 1 to year 5. On the flip side, we have seen several teams (ex. Auburn, Ole Miss) completely turn around an offense in only the first year under a new coach. And I can't imagine Ole Miss being any better offensively in year #2 of Nutt than the 2nd half of last year.

Obviously if we somehow pick up some excellent offensive players that would make a huge difference but my question is: With the current talent level, how much better will the offense be with next year as compared to this year?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

I expect that this offense will get better as the year goes on and they get more comfortable working in it. We have some freshmens receivers that need to learn to block, we have some QBs that need to get a little better at throwing the ball on those plays that call for it. I fully expect that by the end of the year we will routinely be breaking 400 yards of offense and scoring ~20 ppg on the offensive side of the ball. Yeah yeah, I know, we suck and everyone else is awesome but a real coach has his team show improvement as the year goes on and I think we have one.

Maybe I'm being wooly but while I don't expect an Ole Miss-ish turnaround I *do* expect improvement. We're already better than we were last year on the Offensive side of the ball, and that's based on the first 3 games in year 1 of a completely new system using players that weren't recruited to run it.

Baaaaa!

 

[Coach34]

So Auburn and UM have "actual QBs that are supposed to play in the SEC," but we might be "stuck with Russell?"

As the two you mentioned are proving every week, you don't have to be a bigtime runner to thrive in the SEC or even to run a spread style attack. Russell being a successful QB at Mississippi State would do wonders for the program.

that Mullen doesnt want Russell to be the QB next season. Thats not the direction he wants the offense to go. We are really counting on Newton coming in. And you can say all you want about Russell and his HS career, the fact that he cant beat out the 2 we have or even be in the mix to play tells me alot.

 

[RT23]

Coach34 wrote:
You cant compare us to Mississippi and Auburn because they have actual QB's that are supposed to play in the SEC. The QB position is the number 1 most important part of the offense in todays football. And the better the QB, the more things you can do on offense.

I understand what you are saying, but Chris Todd is by no means a good QB. He is better than any option State has this year, but he has no arm. He throws rainbows and when flushed out of the pocket he cant get the ball downfield on the run. Auburn's turnaround is contributed to Malzahn's offensive scheme, compiled with the fact that they have not played a true SEC defense yet.
Auburn is blessed with athletes at every position other than QB, which makes up the short fall of Todd.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

at least that's what I've been told by Florida fans. Apparently Meyer is revamping the offense to work around more of a pro-type QB.

For some reason there were a lot of UF fans at our tailgate for the Texas/Tech game, and we talked for a while. They told me their offense will be totally different without Tebow. I don't see why Mullen won't be as flexible.

 

[Coach34]

"stuck" because by next season Russell will not have played a single down of SEC football (baring some drastic situation in which he's forced to play this year) and he doesn't exactly fit Mullen's system. Ideally he would have another year or two to get some time off the bench before taking over the starting position his junior or senior year.

Just a guess at what coach is thinking, though. It's highly probable that he hates Russell and thinks he is terrible football player.

Russell just doesnt fit what we are trying to do. Mullen wants a player ay QB that can run and be used as a tailback in the offense at times. That isnt Russell.

Mullen is however, flexible enough that if we dont sign Newton, then he will adjust. We will probably have a 2 QB system next year with Relf and Russell and it would look like what we are doing now.

 

[Coach34]

its obvious Mullen likes the running QB. Not saying he wont adapt if he has to, but if we get Newton, he doesnt have to.

 

[jcdawgman18]

1)[that Mullen doesnt want Russell to be the QB next season.] 2)[Thats not the direction he wants the offense to go.] We are really counting on Newton coming in. 3)[And you can say all you want about Russell and his HS career, the fact that he cant beat out the 2 we have or even be in the mix to play tells me alot.]

1) What gives you this absolute certainty? Let's name names if we're going to make statements like that.
2) I thought we were going to fit our scheme to our talent? What happened to that plan?
3) How serious were we ever about playing him? From what I have been told by a high school coach who has seen the playbook (even after it was cut down), it is as thick as a textbook and, at least at first, the expectation was for the QBs and WRs to make reads at the line on which route to run, i.e., every single play had multiple route options for every receiver. Now, I think we have gotten away from this part. This weekend we started running a lot of "check with me", as in we line up, act like we're about to snap the ball so that the defense will show what they're lined up in, and then make the call. This takes the pre-snap read out of the equation, making it much simpler for everyone to be on the same page.
Now, I will also say that I don't believe Tyler was close to being ready to play until Auburn week. If you noticed, up until then, whenever asked about Russell, Coach Mullen would say something about him being a freshman and still catching up to the mental aspects of the game. Then, in the teleconference, he is asked and says (paraphrasing from memory, check Veazey's blog for exact quote) "he's really taken a big step forward, had a great week of practice, but we don't want to put him in a situation until we think he's ready to succeed." Still, points not to a lack of talent, but just the coaches not wanting to throw him in the fire yet.
I also have a friend who works with the team every day (equipment manager). I ask him from time to time how Russell is doing in practice. Up until that time it was things to the effect of "he's still a little gunshy against the blitz" and "he's taking too long to make his read and get rid of the ball". Last week when I asked about him, the tune had changed to "he's (referring to Coach Mullen) not going to play him to win 3 games".
So it seems that we've reached a different point here in this situation: Trying to decide if any potential help Tyler Russell could provide is worth wasting a year of eligibility. It does not seem to be, as C34 implies, that he just isn't good enough.

 

[sixpackmafia]

just talking to one of my docs y'day in columbus who is pretty tight with the athletic dept, and he (not saying he is correct, but is a credible source) says that Mullen is excited about tyler as the fans are, but he has to bulk up and get stronger......the whole notion that he is not a running qb like mullen wants is incorrect, he is a 'good runner' but needs more upper body strength....but you are right, he did say, he is not looking for tyler to play in year 2....he is leaning on cam newton or someone else to come in for year 2....tyler will be a redshirt sophmore before he really hits the field....

 

[Coach34]

1. Like you, I know a few people in Starkville.
2. If we sign Newton, we will fit our scheme to our talent. And Newton already knows the scheme.</p>

3. I've wanted to RS Russell from Day 1. I think its a good move. And if he lines up at QB next season for us, thats fine too. But if he does, the offense will be going in a different direction, with less running by the QB. Mullen prefers to use the QB as a runner as well as a passer. And he also prefers to continue the offense in the direction that it is going.

We'll see what happens during the signing period.</p>

 

[Columbus Dawg]

It looks like UT is going to be a player for Newton. It's going to be a tough battle.

 

[saltybulldog]

This time last year we were banking on Russell.

Guys, Russell is on campus and until something changes I dont see Newton being here. Too many teams are hurting for an immediate QB right now. I hope like hell we land him, but it is far from a sure thing.

 

[Bulldog Backer]

is right about the QB. I thought to myself while watching the Auburn game, "What would we look like if Newton were out there right now?" With Newton on this years team, I think we're a bowl team. With what we have, we're looking at 4 wins max.

Next year, we should be better even with the RB losses. I think Relf will be better because of experience. Russell should at least equal what we're getting from Lee. If we land Newton, we'll have the best offense that we've seen in a long time. It will be hard to have a better RB core with losing our top 3. A big key next year in my mind will be Rashod Henry. He is the type RB that Fla. runs their spread with. Smallish but quick as hell. As much as I like our current RB's, they have to work to get their yards behind our OL. Henry will be able to hit the hole quicker and take advantage of his speed. Same with some of our current freshmen who are redshirting. Most of the O line return as well, so experience should help there. WR should be better from an experience standpoint.

2010
QB Better
OL Better
WR Better
RB Worse

Overall = Better

...the only area of concern should be RB. Every other area should be much better. We lose three senior RB's, Brandon McRae, and Tyson Lee. At RB, we have Robert Elliott and 2 redshirt freshmen coming back. The likely RB tandem should be Elliott, Montrell Conner, and Ladarious Perkins. Elliott told me he was up to 204 at "Fan Day," so he may be 210 by next year. We also have a commitment from Rajion Neal from Sandy Creek, GA, and he was recently upgraded to a 4 star by Rivals. I think we will have talent at RB, but inexperience.

The entire offensive line will be back, all WR's except McRae, who is not 100% this year, and all the TE's. We should continue to see improvement this year. If Tobias Smith doesn't get hurt again, we may have a real SEC offensive line by the end of the season.

 

[ckDOG]

It looks like UT is going to be a player for Newton. It's going to be a tough battle.

UT just got this guy to commit. Other than height, he is pretty much the antithesis of Cameron Newton. I think recruiting him speaks volumes as to where they are headed with their offense. I wouldn't be shocked, but I'd be surprised if Kiffen is going to hit up Newton hard. Granted, UT should take him if he just simply wants to go there - you don't turn down a freak athlete if one comes knocking on your door. But, if Cameron wants to make an immediate impact at a school with a system that fits him best - MSU is the hands down no brainer. I think he is ours to lose.

 

[FlabLoser]

[No message]

 

[Columbus Dawg]

That kid is a string bean out of high school. He will have no bearing on UT's recruitment of Newton. UT needs a QB to step in next year.

Also, Newton considers himself a pro-style QB. He is a passer who can run, not the other way around.

 

[AROB44]

I think we will have talent at RB, but inexperience.

If they run North/South.........they should do just fine. Good RB's should be able to play as freshmen. The only reason to redshirt them is if you don't need them.

 

[msumhsfan]

I watched Russell play in most of his games last year. He can run the ball. He ran over guys just like tebow. Russell needs to bulk up in his upper body.

Russell last year: 95 attempts, 355 yrds, 8 td's for 3.7 yards per carry
Tebow last year: 176 attempts, 673 yrds, 12 td's for 3.8 yards per carry

Your telling me Russell doesnt fit mullen's offense?!!?

first post

 

[patdog]

you can't seriously be comparing him to Tim Tebow. I think he's an adequate runner for this offense, but running the ball will never be his strong point. And BTW, here's a more relevent statistical comparison:

Russell last year: 95 attempts, 355 yrds, 8 td's for 3.7 yards per carry
Tebow his sr year of HS: 183 attempts, 1,163 yrds, 21 td's for 6.4 yards per carry

Still want to compare Russell to Tebow?</p>

 

[birdZdawg]

to compare what Russell did in HS to what Tebow does in the SEC.
</p>

 

[4suredog]

I'm still curious to see where Stengall (sp?), kid from the mets, will fit into all this... Looks to me like his HS numbers were better than Tyler's for this system and closer to Tebow's, plus his size and maturity. Anybody have those numbers for comparison sake? Agreed, Newton would solve many of these problems!

 

[Coach34]

comparing Russell running in HS to Tebow in the SEC is just plain dumb. Kudos to Patdog for a much better comparision

 

[PBRME]

Our problem right now is not a running qb. Our problem is we don't have a qb that is accurate over 10 yards. Tyler is the answer throwing and Conner is the future tough yardage back. This year is a wash with or without him playing, so it's no need to waste a year on him when we can afford a redshirt. </p>

 

[Hotel Roosevelt]

then I'll be expecting big things from the offense next season. But I don't want to get ahead of myself either. If he's as good as everyone says he is, then there is a mighty strong chance we M-State it up and don't get him. Even without Newton or any other new QB, we should be better at the position than this year. Relf will have an entire year of experience under his belt and another off-season to improve. Probably most importantly, Russell will be ready to start taking snaps. If no one new comes in, we'll probably see another dual QB system, this time with Relf and Russell. At worst, at least Russell can see over the o-line. How quickly we go to a one quarterback team all depends on Russell and his progress. Maybe Stegall could provide another option as well. No matter what, I think we'll be better here.

 

[ArrowDawg]

Mullen has said that this year the defense will have to carry us as our team learns the new offense. I get that, and I also understand it is probably a bit of "coach-speak" too. I hate to bring up Croom b/c I hate looking backwards, but we heard this constantly with his offense and saw zero improvement from year 1 to year 5. On the flip side, we have seen several teams (ex. Auburn, Ole Miss) completely turn around an offense in only the first year under a new coach. And I can't imagine Ole Miss being any better offensively in year #2 of Nutt than the 2nd half of last year.

Obviously if we somehow pick up some excellent offensive players that would make a huge difference but my question is: With the current talent level, how much better will the offense be with next year as compared to this year?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

In the first place, just about every program makes more drastic improvement under their first-year head coach than MSU ever does. It's a given, just like it's a given that every other program seems to always have a quarterback, including all the non-BCS mid-major schools.

Secondly, you're forgetting the basic, cardinal rule of MSU football. You have to give Mullen(or any other new coach) at least four years to show significant improvement. It isn't asking a lot of the fans to wait 15 or 20 years to get the program back on track.

 

[HD6]

razorbladeku

 

[hatfieldms]

Mullen has said that this year the defense will have to carry us as our team learns the new offense. I get that, and I also understand it is probably a bit of "coach-speak" too. I hate to bring up Croom b/c I hate looking backwards, but we heard this constantly with his offense and saw zero improvement from year 1 to year 5. On the flip side, we have seen several teams (ex. Auburn, Ole Miss) completely turn around an offense in only the first year under a new coach. And I can't imagine Ole Miss being any better offensively in year #2 of Nutt than the 2nd half of last year.

Obviously if we somehow pick up some excellent offensive players that would make a huge difference but my question is: With the current talent level, how much better will the offense be with next year as compared to this year?

I'll hang up and listen to your response.

In the first place, just about every program makes more drastic improvement under their first-year head coach than MSU ever does. It's a given, just like it's a given that every other program seems to always have a quarterback, including all the non-BCS mid-major schools.

Secondly, you're forgetting the basic, cardinal rule of MSU football. You have to give Mullen(or any other new coach) at least four years to show significant improvement. It isn't asking a lot of the fans to wait 15 or 20 years to get the program back on track.

Damn you are annoying. You have turned into the fishwater99 of football.

 

[homeydclown]

You needs a big hit of shrooooooooooms to chill. Just mix them in with you Vienna sausage dip for you pork rinds.

 

[BigMotherTucker]

I 17ing hate the grammar police but....

Jesus Christ homey, learn to form a sentence.

/seriously

 

[Coach34]

sorry, I had to

 

[youngster]

at least that's what I've been told by Florida fans. Apparently Meyer is revamping the offense to work around more of a pro-type QB.

For some reason there were a lot of UF fans at our tailgate for the Texas/Tech game, and we talked for a while. They told me their offense will be totally different without Tebow. I don't see why Mullen won't be as flexible.

what does florida's offensive scheme have to do with us? other than when we play them.