So I'm Hearing Chris Wilson to TAMU
- Thread starter Dinkle
- Start date
got their info about this from coachingsearch.com. I'll let others comment on the accuracy of that site if they wish.
Honestly, if he does leave for TAMU b/c of money, I'll be very disappointed in Stricklin. Wilson is a key cog in our recruiting efforts, and besides that has earned another significant raise with his work this season.
Honestly, if he does leave for TAMU b/c of money, I'll be very disappointed in Stricklin. Wilson is a key cog in our recruiting efforts, and besides that has earned another significant raise with his work this season.
Even though boy-wonder is an "offensive guru", objective folk identify MSU football with aggressive, ball-hawking defense. If this program is to climb the ladder, it must maintain that identity.<div>
</div><div>An old coach was telling me today that Mullens can't seem to decide on MSU's identity offensive identity. One minute it looks like he wants to be a power between-the-tackles team, and the next thing you know he's trying to run the spread. And if that wasn't confusing enough for a guy like Relf with his limitations, Mullens decides he wants to add some option to the equation.</div><div>
</div><div>Last night the offense was pretty common against a pretty common defensive team. Thank the football gods for the two homeruns by Ballard. And while we are at it, we can all be thankful Relf has used up his eligibility. He's pretty common himself.</div><div>
</div><div>BTW, remember the geniuses that told us Mullens' spread would mask any deficiencies MSU might have on the offensive line? Anybody still buying that line of BS?</div><div>
</div><div>Mullens has a chance to make a mark, but he really needs to get his head out of his *** and coach the game the way its supposed to be coached. That decision at the end of the first half was one of the worst I've seen in awhile. If he keeps doing stuff like that, he's going to have a hard time climbing the ladder.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
</div><div>An old coach was telling me today that Mullens can't seem to decide on MSU's identity offensive identity. One minute it looks like he wants to be a power between-the-tackles team, and the next thing you know he's trying to run the spread. And if that wasn't confusing enough for a guy like Relf with his limitations, Mullens decides he wants to add some option to the equation.</div><div>
</div><div>Last night the offense was pretty common against a pretty common defensive team. Thank the football gods for the two homeruns by Ballard. And while we are at it, we can all be thankful Relf has used up his eligibility. He's pretty common himself.</div><div>
</div><div>BTW, remember the geniuses that told us Mullens' spread would mask any deficiencies MSU might have on the offensive line? Anybody still buying that line of BS?</div><div>
</div><div>Mullens has a chance to make a mark, but he really needs to get his head out of his *** and coach the game the way its supposed to be coached. That decision at the end of the first half was one of the worst I've seen in awhile. If he keeps doing stuff like that, he's going to have a hard time climbing the ladder.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div>
Give me a break. I know I've seen him do it up close personally and I may not have liked the display..but they're grown men and all should hold one another accountable. If anyone on this staff wants out, they have no problems with doing so. I don't ever rule anything out of the realm of possibility, but that just sounds rather lame especially coming from you since you always have an agenda of wanting to push Hud into place.
This comment has been distorted. At the time, we were experiencing Croom's offensive line getting pummeled by the landsharks and everyone else. The comment was that the spread itself would be easier on our OL than Croom's offense and it's 1,004 reads per second (execution, anyone?). <div>Ol Blue said:
</div><div>Bottom line, our offense is LIGHT YEARS better than it was back then. Don't take this **** for granted. Like someone else said, our two most prolific offensive seasons in history have been the past two.</div><div>
</div><div>So basically, you, and anyone who shares your opinion, are full of ****.</div>
and that was Hudspeth. And it wasn't that they really disagreed....it was an ego deal because Hud had already been a head coach before. Who cares who was at fault? That's the bottom line.<div>
</div>
</div>
So I take it you're a coaching guru yourself since you know how to do it exactly. Why are you on a message board again?<div>
</div><div>Some of the **** you people say absolutely kills me..</div>
</div><div>Some of the **** you people say absolutely kills me..</div>
because our top rated recruits continue to be on that side of the ball. We already have a 5 star guy (Autry) coming in next year and have other guys like Quay Evans and Nick James committed. And we really need to ensure Wilson remains with us not only because he did a good job a D coordinator but also because he is a top grade recruiter. We also have other 4 star guys on defense like Cox, Boyd, and Mitchell. Other than Bumphis and Russell (neither of whom have really lived up to their rating) I'm not sure we had anyone on our offense this year that was rated higher than 3 star when we signed them.
It wouldn't matter if he ran the spread or the Bobby Hall and three yards of dust. He didn't know what the heck he was doing. I've even talked to a former player that played under Croom and even he told me that Croom didn't know what he was doing. As if that wasn't apparent.
And not only that- his assistants on offense sucked as well. McCorvey, Grimes, Felker, and Washington- Reed Stringer was probably the best one and Croom had him coaching freaking special teams. Just a circus. If he had someone on offense that could coach and left them alone- like he did with Ellis Johnson and the defense- he probably would have been OK. Didn't happen that way, though.
On top of all that, he couldn't recruit. At least not until year five and by that time it was too late.
So yeah, Dan is better, but it isn't like the bar has been set real high. All Dan has to do is finish in the top 100 on offense.
And not only that- his assistants on offense sucked as well. McCorvey, Grimes, Felker, and Washington- Reed Stringer was probably the best one and Croom had him coaching freaking special teams. Just a circus. If he had someone on offense that could coach and left them alone- like he did with Ellis Johnson and the defense- he probably would have been OK. Didn't happen that way, though.
On top of all that, he couldn't recruit. At least not until year five and by that time it was too late.
So yeah, Dan is better, but it isn't like the bar has been set real high. All Dan has to do is finish in the top 100 on offense.
Because most of our upperclassmen that were big time recruits were on the defensive side of the ball- like Charles Mitchell, Cox, Boyd, and then there were a couple that have been diamonds in the rough that we got like Banks and Whitley that have turned out pretty well.
But our bigger offensive recruits are just now becoming juniors and seniors- like Tyler Russell, Bumphis, Chris Smith, and then Perkins has been pretty good.
It has just taken a little longer because dumbass Croom neglected that side of the ball for awhile and it has taken a little longer to build up on that side of the ball.
I think we'll be pretty good on offense next year- Tyler/Dak > Relf/Tyler. Holley and Siddoway are key guys- if they shore up our o-line, and I think they will, we should be fine. We should be able to pass better which should mean better years from Smith, Arceto, Bumphis, Malcolm Johnson, and then we'll see what Joe Morrow and Jameon can do. RB is a question mark, but Perkins is pretty solid and then I like Griffen, and we'll see what Robinson and Milton bring to the table. Biggest thing is avoiding injuries.
But our bigger offensive recruits are just now becoming juniors and seniors- like Tyler Russell, Bumphis, Chris Smith, and then Perkins has been pretty good.
It has just taken a little longer because dumbass Croom neglected that side of the ball for awhile and it has taken a little longer to build up on that side of the ball.
I think we'll be pretty good on offense next year- Tyler/Dak > Relf/Tyler. Holley and Siddoway are key guys- if they shore up our o-line, and I think they will, we should be fine. We should be able to pass better which should mean better years from Smith, Arceto, Bumphis, Malcolm Johnson, and then we'll see what Joe Morrow and Jameon can do. RB is a question mark, but Perkins is pretty solid and then I like Griffen, and we'll see what Robinson and Milton bring to the table. Biggest thing is avoiding injuries.
and I remember vividly posting "I have a lot of concern for our offensive line because of the absence of our sure leaders, Sherrod and Brignone, and we lost some key depth." I was met with that very argument that the play action, option, and stretch plays, combined with Relf's mobility we were sure to run would mask any O-Line deficiencies and I was blasted pretty hard by people saying "Our O-Line will be fine because of.... whatever (depth, we only had 2 lineman graduate, Carmon, Saulsbury, Tobias Smith, etc... pick your reason)." <div>
</div><div>Like blue said, we had a hard time finding our identity. We wanted to be a sharp passing team with Russell, so we hardly ran the ball when we needed to, we were a strictly running team with Relf, and a WTF offense with mini-Favre. Defensively, we have our identity... we don't on offense... combined with an O-Line that struggled to find a rhythm all year, and you end up with a team that struggles passing and running the ball because we can't establish either phase of offense. </div>
</div><div>Like blue said, we had a hard time finding our identity. We wanted to be a sharp passing team with Russell, so we hardly ran the ball when we needed to, we were a strictly running team with Relf, and a WTF offense with mini-Favre. Defensively, we have our identity... we don't on offense... combined with an O-Line that struggled to find a rhythm all year, and you end up with a team that struggles passing and running the ball because we can't establish either phase of offense. </div>
I don't fall into anybody's corner. I thought Crooms was a bad hire from day one because of the red flags Bama threw up - twice. And I think Mullens has a lot to learn.was21 said:
we did have poor OL play for most of the season- thats a fact. <div>We squeezed every bit out of Chris Relf at QB that we could</div><div>oem said:
</div><div>and to Ol Blew who commented about Mullen and Spread masking the deficiencies of the players- how can you not see he has?</div><div>
</div><div>We have a QB that couldnt read a defense with an interpreter and an average OL at best- and we still have averaged 75 more yards/game and a helluva lot more points than we did at any time during the Crooms Era. So yes, he has taken the limited offensive talent available- and made the most of it.</div><div>
</div><div>When Prescott is ready to play, and we have a QB that can pass and run- you will damn well see the difference</div>
If Wilson is who Sumlin wants (good chance it is) he is as good as gone. We will not be able to match what TAMU can offer. We can throw as much money at him as we can afford, but our bank account cannot compete with theirs.
money to go elsewhere and we aren't able or willing to accommodate them, then they will probably leave. It's a credit to Dan that he has an eye for coaching talent.It's probably going to be a continuing problem as long as money is the issue, and it will be. Mississippi State is not a destination job for a lot of coaches. I don't like to admit it but it's true. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not.
One thing I love about MSU fans is that if they like a coach, they always have a ****** coach from the past to compare him too.<div>Goat Grindin said:
</div><div>Today, the sheep can justify Mullens being the next Urban Meyer because he's better than Crooms.</div><div>
</div><div>I'm not down on Mullens yet. He's young and he has a lot to learn. But Crooms was one of the worst - if not the worst - coaches in the history of SEC football. They only way MSU could have done any worse is if they had hired Peaches.</div><div>
</div>
heck I thought it was ridiculous that even as of a couple of years ago the Bears were paying Nix, a guy that was essentially told while in SC to find another job, around 550K/yr while at the same time we were paying our DC under 300K. If our program wants to play with the big boys we need to pay with the big boys. What good does it do to spend millions and millions of dollars on new and expanded football facilities if we continually lose our most coveted assistants every year. And I can understand losing them to real promotions but NOT to making a lateral move to the same position in the same conference. Its obvious right now that Wilson is the assistant we can least afford to lose.