"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

[DowntownDawg]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

seems to be the mantra on NAFOOM. I am in disbelief. It's not hard to see that we are better coached, but it appeared to me that the team that we put on the field Saturday night was head and shoulders better than what they put on the field. A 31-9 score at the end of three quarters would tend to lend credence to that. Someone posed the question to their board who on Ole Miss's team would start for State. Here's what I came up with.

Offense
Masoli, Bolden (maybe), Massie (maybe), Summers over Heavens

Defense
Powe, Laurent, Shackelford (over Gatling, not White or Wright), nothing in the secondary

Special
Rose and maybe the punter (probably pretty close)

So that's potentially one offensive lineman, the quarterback, maybe the running back and one wideout along with their defensive tackles, one line backer, and a kicker. I am trying to be generous. I take our guys at every other spot. That's not to say that they don't have young talent, but the talent that started the game Saturday night is not really very close to State's talent. I thought we were the better team last year as well, but the talent was a lot closer with McCluster and Hodge. But I guess I am from the old school where the final score of a football game is the primary measuring stick of who has the "better team."

 

[EClass04]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

<p align="left">For some, I guess ignorance really is bliss.</p>

 

[ckDOG]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

This is year 2. Our talent isn't anywhere near Mullen would like it. What do you think he could do with a substantial bump in talent over the next 2 or 3 years?

 

[bonedaddy401]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Our O-Line - Better<div>Our Depth at RB - Better</div><div>Our LB - KJ + CW = Way Better</div><div>Our DB's - Not even close we are better.</div><div>
</div><div>Terrible post by you.</div>

 

[maroonmania]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

at the moment but I believe we are developing and utilizing our talent much better than they are. And I believe that is due to a superior coaching staff overall and one Matt Balis. We are still somewhat thin on talent at certain positions, especially WR and even QB and DBs, but we are playing to our strengths, developing the talent we do have and I would say that this coaching staff is getting the near max production out of what we do have overall as a team.

 

[DowntownDawg]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

....if the coaching staff has developed low talent players into high talent players, then that's great, but it doesn't mean that we aren't better. I am not talking about high school star rankings.

Again, ask yourself who for Ole Miss would start for State. There's about 1 or 2 definites on each side of the ball and a couple of more that are up in the air. That's it.

Or do it by position groups.

QB - OM
RB- Give me Ballard and Perkins over Bolden and Enricky.
OL - Not even close
WR - Probably about even as a group.
DL - State, although I'd take their tackles. Their ends killed were horrible.
LB - Not even close
Secondary - Not even close
Special teams - I'd take Ole Miss's.

 

[ckDOG]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Note that I said "hope" and didn't say that it is or isn't better. I don't know their team well enough to even make that assessment.

My point it, it doesn't even matter what the talent levels are at this point. It's pointless. Nobody gets to claim a win off of talent alone. Obviously, all that matters are scores and records at the end of the day.

If Mississippi's only argument is, "well, your talent is sub-par, but your better coaching is getting you the W", what are you really admitting? That your team will NEVER have a shot at being competitive with us given the current coaching staff. If what they say is the truth, and we are low on talent and high on coaching, that only paints an even more optimistic picture of Mississippi State's future. Look at our recruiting classes - we are upgrading our talent relative to where it was 2 years ago. It's essentially an admission their future, relative to us, isn't looking great at all. Let them have that argument - I don't care.

I swear, some of you people want to win every stupid little argument with Ole Miss fans and fail to look at the big picture. It doesn't matter if they are more talented...

Terrible response by you.

 

[tippahdog]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Ole Miss had the slowest defense we played all year.

 

[maroonmania]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

a lot of these same guys like Relf, our OL, and a lot of the same WRs all stunk under Croom. Did they all just get real talented when Mullen showed up. I don't think so, I think we are teaching and getting the most out of what these guys can do. And even Mullen says now that we are VERY limited in playmakers in this offense. On defense, we are a LOT better than we were last year and I think more of that is due to our improved defensive coaching than the fact we are just loaded with greatly talented players. We certainly DO have more natural overall talent on defense than we do on offense with guys like White, Wright, Mitchell and McPhee but heck OM has some individual talented guys on defense as well but they are still playing like crap.

 

[bonedaddy401]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

You were wrong, I was right STFU.

 

[ckDOG]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

I quit reading after about three words...

Try reading the entire post the next time. Ideas typically are better understood when read in their entirety.

What was I wrong about again?

 

[bonedaddy401]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

if you have to "hope" we are more talented then you don't know what you are talking about.

 

[dawgstudent]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

that overall - our talent levels are basically on par with each other. I think the coaching is just that much better.

 

[ckDOG]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

The OP said that the Ole Miss argument is: "State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Then, I replied that I "hoped" that was the truth. Then, I explained why I thought that was a good situation for us to be in. It paints a very optimistic view of our future knowing that we are competing with talent that is expected to be upgraded over time. If we are competitive in a landscape of more talented teams because we are very well coached, then what can we expect when our talent level is upgraded over time? Answer: Great things. I don't view the low talent/great coaching "insult" and insult at all.

This is not a difficult concept to grasp. It is in your best long-term interest as an MSU fan to hope they are right on this one. Let them have their dumb excuse that makes them feel better in the short-term. In reality, their own statement gives a very pessimistic view of their future and ours a bright one.

 

[bonedaddy401]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Our O-Line is way better. We have a First round draft pick at left tackle and JC willprobablymake a team.<div>Our RB depth is better. Bolden is good but he is all they have there.</div><div>Our WR's, while bad are no worse than Ole Miss's.</div><div>
</div><div>Based on Saturday night, I would take Relf over Masoli. There I said it. Masoli's decision making was terrible.</div><div>
</div><div>On defense, I would take Pern, Cox, Boyd and Carmon over Powe, Lockett and whoever else they plug in. Powe is a BA but who else is on that line thats worth a ****?</div><div>At LB - Please. Even Gatling is better than the no names they have out there. (And don't throw Shackelford at me, please.) Having two future NFL LB's in White and Wright widens the "Talent" gap even farther than it is now.</div><div>
</div><div>At DB - Charles Mitchell, Nickoe Whitley. Nuff said. Plug in Banks, Broomfield, Langston, Bonner, Anderson. I will take our unit overtheirs8 days a week.</div><div>
</div><div>The players they have may have been more highly recruited than ours out of high school but thatdoesn'tmean ****. As of today our team is more talented than they are. We looked more physical and faster than they did by a long shot.</div><div>
</div><div>Whats yourargumentfor Ole Miss being equal with us talent wise?</div>

 

[dawgstudent]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

our talent levels are the same. Just 2 years ago - our OL was porous. Ole Miss was playing a lot of younger players on the OL. I never thought in my wildest dreams that Saulsberry would be a decent OL. Even Sherrod was getting murdered in 2008.

Now I do think we can increase our talent level even more. I just think if you win - your talent level suddenly jumps miraculously. We are just playing well.

 

[tenureplan]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

As can a good strength coach.

We have a better team players and coaches collectively, but I think we are on par with them in terms of raw talent.</p>

 

[bonedaddy401]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Does Ole Miss have ANYONE that is going to be drafted this year outside of Powe? We have 4 locks (Sherrod, White, Pern, Wright) and J.C. could get drafted.<div>
</div><div>We are the more talented team today November 30th 2010. Period.</div>

 

[dawgstudent]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

I cussed KJ Wright left and right in 2008. I think the thing is they got older along with a lot better coaching.

 

[bonedaddy401]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Coaching develops talent. Have better coaching. We are more talented.

 

[Johnson85]

"State's not any better than us talent wise, they are just better coached"

Offensive line we are clearly better, butis this line that different from the one that sucked in the 45-0 route? Some ofthe improvement was inevitable since we were young then, butI think a ton of credit should be given to the strength coach, and a good bit of credit goes to our system and coaching.

Relf and Masoli don't look that different right now, but you putRelf under Nutt, and he's probably atrocious and Masoli under Mullen probably looks like the third best qb in the SEC behind Newton and Mallette.

UM on defense looks is relatively young and our talent overall looks better, but I think Diaz could put together a decent defense with their D-line.Tough for them to compete with K.J. and White, but I still think UM's Dcould be decent with a good coach.

Bottom line, I think if you look at the history, the talent on these two teams was close enough that UM wouldlikely have won this game at homewithout the coaching disparity.

Regardless of whether there is a huge talent disparity this year, the bottom line is outside of LB and LT (where we'll likely take a step backwards), we should be either as good or better at every position next year, and the cupboard is more full than it has been in a while, so there should be more talented overall just about everywhere in two years.