More Mullen love from ESPN
- Thread starter msuJD164
- Start date
You said something to the effect of we wouldn't miss Dixon because we would have a committee to take his place. It is obvious to anyone that we aren't missing Dixon as much now because Ballard has stepped up. When it was a committee including Elliott we weren't performing well.
Dawgfan61 said:
The whole thing started when I said we wouldnt miss Dixon because the system we run is more important than the actual RB. When you outnumber people in the box because your QB is also a runner, our offense has the advantage over the defense. And of course, I'm right. Meyer talked about it in an article after the game (I'll go back and find it)...
But then of course the geniuses of Sixpack start chiming in about how that is ********, the offense was successful because of Dixon, we wont be able to run like that this season, blah, blah, blah
**edited to add Meyer's quote**- The defense struggled as well, giving up 214 yards on the ground. Mississippi State ran the ball 24 consecutive times in a span from the second to fourth quarters.
"<span style="text-decoration:underline">They plus you</span>," said Meyer. "They just take that big quarterback and run right behind the offensive line
"That's hard to stop."
I also said we have not been without a good RB at State in a helluva long time and this season wouldnt be any different. And of course, I'm right about that as well.
And people get on me about not admitting when I'm wrong...pot meet kettle
Moving from a 2 QB system and a committe of RBs to Relf and Ballard has made the difference. The thing I like best about Ballard is his patience in waiting for his blocks to develop. Seems to have more vision than Dixon, but lacks breakaway speed and the muscle to run over people.
Coach34 said:
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><font face="Calibri">I’ve sat back as long as I can.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You’re just lying and playing semantics, as usual.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Most people agreed with you that our offense would still be very productive, but said we would still miss Dixon.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Both can be, and were, true.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>As Ballard has stepped up, we have missed him less.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>But we definitely struggled without him through the first 4 games.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>There is no doubt in my mind we would be 6-1 with him this year.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You blamed our start on poor play calling and “trying to sling it around”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Well, guess WHY we were doing that?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>We were looking for an identity on offense.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>We were trying to figure out the best way to replace our 2009 offense (aka Anthony Dixon).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You ignore that fact.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>With him, there would have been no doubt as to what our identity was.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Instead, we had to wait for an offensive leader to emerge, and thank Goodness Ballard finally did since it became obvious that your prediction of Super-Relf was never going to happen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>That’s another one you conveniently try to ignore.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Your predictions on Relf are completely laughable now.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>30 TDs?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Ha!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>He’s on pace for a whopping 12…..TWELVE!!!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Where’s your “oops, I was wrong on that one”?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>How about the 30 points per game?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Yes, it’s true we sit at 28.6, and may just be above 30 after Saturday, but again…semantics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You weren’t calling for a 48.33 ppg average against the likes of Memphis, Alcorn, and Houston to bolster our draw-dropping 13.75 ppg vs SEC defenses.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Your prediction was that we would run up and down the field at will all year long.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You act like our offense is what has us at 5-2 when it’s obviously a top 25 defense that’s holding opposing teams to 16 ppg.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>13.75 ppg vs real defenses is sh*t.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Relf, who you toted as our 30 TD hero had a whopping 33 yards passing this week.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>We got outgained by around 100 yards and still won…thanks to our defense.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Relf’s accuracy, contrary to your predictions, is still absolute crap (“play action, play action” – Mullen knew it was useless against Florida in the 2nd half so you FAIL there too).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>As evidenced by his inability to beat Russell out of the starting job through the first 3 games.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Now, I can and will give credit where due (unlike you).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You were right about Russell not being ready for SEC defenses yet….but that’s about it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Otherwise, this season is unfolding nothing like you expected, yet you left yourself enough wiggle room to continue playing these semantics so you can keep beating your chest like you did something.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You’re a 17’ing joke dude.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>This is a message board, you have no bearing on anything MSU.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You’re a fan like the rest of us.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>The only difference is that you were run off from a HS football positions-coach job, and most of us have only coached our kids’ peewee teams (hey, does that make me a brain surgeon too?).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Wow dude, that’s soooo impressive.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You never paint yourself in a corner so you can always play these word games to get out of being wrong.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>The only time this year you actually put some numbers on something, you pussed out of a bet based on those numbers and now they have proven to be garbage.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Relf 800-1000 yards rushing?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>On pace for just over 600.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Relf 30 combined TDs?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>LOL!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>30 ppg scoring average – you do NOT get credit here.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Our offense has underperformed by everyone’s standards.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Scoring 50 points against a CUSA bottom feeder and then 10 points against an SEC defense may come up to a 30 ppg average, but we all know that’s not the same thing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>7 of our points were a gimme from Georgia once the game was over, and that’s the only time we scored more than 14 points in SEC action.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>When we put up 30 points against an SEC defense, then we’ll re-evaluate.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Our season has evolved in a way no one foresaw, so stop trying to take some kind of credit like you knew or did something.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span></font></span></p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><font face="Calibri">As for missing Dixon – I don’t think we miss him a whole lot anymore, but we sure as hell did for the first 4 games and you know it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>You try to make it out to be some sort of obsession like we wanted him to get a 5th year of eligibility or something - all we really said was that we would have a better offense with him, and we would therefore miss him in some ways going into the season.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>That obviously proved true through the first 4 games.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Get over it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Our offense would have been improved those 4 games if he had been on it. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes"></span>No matter how we finish the season, I refuse to believe that he wouldn’t have made some difference in the Auburn game.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Personally, I think he would have pushed us over the top.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>So, even if we finish 10-2, I will feel like we could’ve been 11-1 if our offense wasn’t searching for an identity early in the season.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>Our offense therefore missed his presence.</font></span></p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 10pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><font face="Calibri">Rant over.</font></span></p>
</p>
that you have been keeping a ridiculous argument alive for 3 months. WTF does it matter? His eligibility is up. If the NCAA called Dan tomorrow and said that they screwed up and Dixon could play the rest of the year, he would be the starter then and there. But that's never going to happen; so why has this been brought up countless times since this summer? Please let it go already.
Or it may be that you are constantly patting youself on the back about how right you always are. You are right more than you are wrong, but you are still wrong quite often.
I am convinced that if you could clone yourself, we would never see another post from you because you would be too busy 17ing yourself.
</p>
Or it may be that you are constantly patting youself on the back about how right you always are. You are right more than you are wrong, but you are still wrong quite often.
I am convinced that if you could clone yourself, we would never see another post from you because you would be too busy 17ing yourself.
</p>
I think everyone realizes that the spread and the zone read are more effective w/ a running QB, that's common sense. But Dixon played WITHOUT a running QB on probably 75 plus percent of the snaps last year.
Also, in SEC games Dixon averaged 5.32 ypc, compared to Ballard's 4.14 (and our top 3 backs collectively average 3.93) Our offense in SEC games is averaging around 9 points and 100 yards less than last year's average, which points to our defense as the main reason for the turnaround.
Also, in SEC games Dixon averaged 5.32 ypc, compared to Ballard's 4.14 (and our top 3 backs collectively average 3.93) Our offense in SEC games is averaging around 9 points and 100 yards less than last year's average, which points to our defense as the main reason for the turnaround.
I am not bothered by the argument, I am bothered by you taking every little chance you can get for the last 3 months to point out some shortcoming of Dixon's, like he is playing 3rd string, etc.
As it has been said many times, you would rather our players (and alumni apparently) fail than be wrong.
As it has been said many times, you would rather our players (and alumni apparently) fail than be wrong.
A. "You’re just lying and playing semantics, as usual"
What did I lie about? Show me what I lied about?
B. "Most people agreed with you that our offense would still be very productive, but said we would still miss Dixon"
Not really- people constantly mentioned how teams would load the box against us with Ralph at QB and since we didnt have Dixon- our running game was going to suffer. Remember that? That was a main reason for the Tyler Russell push to be QB- to have a passing game so we would be able to run the ball.
Here's a quote from me from this past Spring:
"Our running game will be just as good or even better, we will make bigger plays in the passing game, win 7, maybe 8 games next year, and then everybody on the board will post about how they knew we were going to be better offensively this year even without Dixon...It's the Sixpack way... "
Thank you for not disappointing me
C. "You blamed our start on poor play calling and “trying to sling it around”. Well, guess WHY we were doing that? We were looking for an identity on offense. "
Myself and other posters have shown this to be ******** by simply looking at the drive charts. Were we looking for an identity Saturday night against Fla when they turned it over on downs in our territory and then we threw 3 straight passes? The playcalling has been ****** at times and you know it.
D. "Your predictions on Relf are completely laughable now. 30 TDs? Ha"
I NEVER <span style="text-decoration:underline">predicted</span> Ralph would have 30 TD's.
E. "How about the 30 points per game? Yes, it’s true we sit at 28.6, and may just be above 30 after Saturday, but again…semantics."
How is it semantics? Either we average 30 damn points or we don't. Nobody ever said anything different parts of the schedule. That statement by you right there shows what true dumbass you are. And also your obsession. You are really sad
F. "30 ppg scoring average – you do NOT get credit here"
aGAIN- you are a dumbass
What a waste of my time proving your idiocy- you should be on read-only
What did I lie about? Show me what I lied about?
B. "Most people agreed with you that our offense would still be very productive, but said we would still miss Dixon"
Not really- people constantly mentioned how teams would load the box against us with Ralph at QB and since we didnt have Dixon- our running game was going to suffer. Remember that? That was a main reason for the Tyler Russell push to be QB- to have a passing game so we would be able to run the ball.
Here's a quote from me from this past Spring:
"Our running game will be just as good or even better, we will make bigger plays in the passing game, win 7, maybe 8 games next year, and then everybody on the board will post about how they knew we were going to be better offensively this year even without Dixon...It's the Sixpack way... "
Thank you for not disappointing me
C. "You blamed our start on poor play calling and “trying to sling it around”. Well, guess WHY we were doing that? We were looking for an identity on offense. "
Myself and other posters have shown this to be ******** by simply looking at the drive charts. Were we looking for an identity Saturday night against Fla when they turned it over on downs in our territory and then we threw 3 straight passes? The playcalling has been ****** at times and you know it.
D. "Your predictions on Relf are completely laughable now. 30 TDs? Ha"
I NEVER <span style="text-decoration:underline">predicted</span> Ralph would have 30 TD's.
E. "How about the 30 points per game? Yes, it’s true we sit at 28.6, and may just be above 30 after Saturday, but again…semantics."
How is it semantics? Either we average 30 damn points or we don't. Nobody ever said anything different parts of the schedule. That statement by you right there shows what true dumbass you are. And also your obsession. You are really sad
F. "30 ppg scoring average – you do NOT get credit here"
aGAIN- you are a dumbass
What a waste of my time proving your idiocy- you should be on read-only
when it comes to Dixon or Tyler Russell. If they fail at something, you want to point it out to prove you are right and to me - that's a dick move. Especially considering Dixon is a rookie and Russell is a RS Freshman.
And add to the fact that Dixon's NFL performance has no bearing on the running production for State.
And add to the fact that Dixon's NFL performance has no bearing on the running production for State.
I'm pretty sure I backed you in to a corner and gave me 6 points...after getting badgered by some other posters....
I didn't think archiving it would be necessary.
Do you even remember what we bet?
I didn't think archiving it would be necessary.
Do you even remember what we bet?
I tried searching for it, but couldn't find it...
lemme know if you can... otherwise, I'll trust your memory over mine...
lemme know if you can... otherwise, I'll trust your memory over mine...
whatever said:
needs a little more time to play out. Ballard has had to run against Georgia instead of Vandy like Dixon did. Ballard has 175 yards on 34 carries in his last 2- which is 5.14...now that they quit rotating backs and play Ballard like they should, we are getting the production from that spot. The staff had to let Robert Elliot play his way out since he had been here for 3 years before installing Ballard as THE guy.
Ballard has gone against the 1, 3, 4, and 8 rush defenses in the SEC- he still gets to run against 5, 6, 10, and 11 this season...I'd look for that average to come up- wouldnt you?
he will continue to argue without fact or reason. Always does. It's like watching the Hindenburg explode over and over.
..why don't you grow one & ban this ******* once & for allthisso we can get HD6 back on this board.
I wouldnt be such a dick if I didnt have to deal with so many idiot responses on things...
The 30 points a game is a prefect example- I predicted 30 and Pain acts like thats the craziest thing ever and makes an idiot out of himself with the 500 bet...now you have Idiot #2 in Markymark saying I get no credit for the 30 ppg prediction because we are doing it, but it's not against the right teams.
Dont try to rub **** in my face and then get mad when I do it to you. If you dish it, prepare to take it.
I'm prepared to take it if we dont average 30 ppg
I'm prepared to take it if Ralph doesn't get to 800 yards
But when we had numerous threads about how we wouldnt be able to run as well without Dixon, and we clearly are, dont get mad when I or Chris Low bring it up
The 30 points a game is a prefect example- I predicted 30 and Pain acts like thats the craziest thing ever and makes an idiot out of himself with the 500 bet...now you have Idiot #2 in Markymark saying I get no credit for the 30 ppg prediction because we are doing it, but it's not against the right teams.
Dont try to rub **** in my face and then get mad when I do it to you. If you dish it, prepare to take it.
I'm prepared to take it if we dont average 30 ppg
I'm prepared to take it if Ralph doesn't get to 800 yards
But when we had numerous threads about how we wouldnt be able to run as well without Dixon, and we clearly are, dont get mad when I or Chris Low bring it up
We "would not miss Dixon" because the RBs and QBs in 2010 would run for more combined yardage than the RBs and QBs in 2009. However, in looking at this I failed to pin Coach down on whether sacks should count, since they count against the rushing totals of QBs, and in the case of 2009 Tyson Lee you are talking about 170 yards, or over 14 yards per game.
By my reckoning, the 2010 Bulldogs are a little behind schedule. Discounting lost yardage by the QBs, I have the 2010 QBs and RBs averaging 204 ypg, while the 2009 version averaged just under 237 ypg. The 2010 gang might catch up quite a bit in the next couple games, though, and could make a killing against Arkansas.
By my reckoning, the 2010 Bulldogs are a little behind schedule. Discounting lost yardage by the QBs, I have the 2010 QBs and RBs averaging 204 ypg, while the 2009 version averaged just under 237 ypg. The 2010 gang might catch up quite a bit in the next couple games, though, and could make a killing against Arkansas.
"Relf <span style="text-decoration:underline">might</span> end up being a 1,000 yard rusher with 135-140 carries"
vs
"I do <span style="text-decoration:underline">expect</span> Relf to average at least 12 carries a game- so thats 144 at a minimum"
get back to me when you learn the difference when someone thinks they might do something and when they expect to do something
vs
"I do <span style="text-decoration:underline">expect</span> Relf to average at least 12 carries a game- so thats 144 at a minimum"
get back to me when you learn the difference when someone thinks they might do something and when they expect to do something