Would you want this coach fired?
- Thread starter muddawgs
- Start date
According to the SEC of today, his record would look like this:
Season 1: 8-5
Season 2: 8-5
Season 3: 5-7
Season 4: 9-4
Season 5: 4-8
Season 6: 7-6
Not so fast. You can add a win for another non-conference game, but you also may have to take away a win and add another loss for increased difficulty of the conference schedule.
I assume that State still falls in the same place in the SEC hierarchy. Maybe the difficulty was greater back then with less teams and less parody.
But I did forget that State coaches (before Year 6) can't beat Top 22.5 teams.**
Would you want this one fired?
<tbody>
</tbody>
| 1995 | Michigan State | 6–5–1 | 4–3–1 | 5th | L Independence | ||
| 1996 | Michigan State | 6–6 | 5–3 | 5th | L Sun | ||
| 1997 | Michigan State | 7–5 | 4–4 | 6th | L Aloha | ||
| 1998 | Michigan State | 6–6 | 4–4 | 6th | |||
| 1999 | Michigan State | 9–2* | 6–2 | 2nd | Invited to Citrus* | 9* | 9* |
| Michigan State: | 34–24–1 | 23–16–1 | * <small>Saban resigned before bowl game.</small> |
<tbody>
</tbody>
In 1991, we played four teams that were ranked at the time we played them. In 1992, it was three teams that were ranked when we played them. That was true for every year through 1996 but one, where there were four.
Four is the minimum Mullen has faced, and he has faced five ranked teams twice. We also appear headed toward five top 15 teams this year. I only bring this up for purposes of showing the increased difficulty in the schedule.
I don't know if any coach in school history has faced five top 15 teams in one season, so it will be interesting to see how these five teams finish up.
Four is the minimum Mullen has faced, and he has faced five ranked teams twice. We also appear headed toward five top 15 teams this year. I only bring this up for purposes of showing the increased difficulty in the schedule.
I don't know if any coach in school history has faced five top 15 teams in one season, so it will be interesting to see how these five teams finish up.
Actually JWS SOS for those 6 years was only above 50 like once. 28th according to Sports Reference. Our SOS schedule the last five years has been much more difficult. We add one soft game year that would have helped back then however we are also averaging playing 1 extra ranked team now vs to JWS first 6 years. So I would think its at best a wash if not still more difficult over all. BTW JWS most difficult year in SOS was his 3-8 fifth year.
Good questions but because of the history that occurred after those seasons they are for the most part irrelevant. Your looking back in time already knowing the outcome that says a firing at that point would have been incorrect. It may have lead to something better but the known is too good to chance giving that up.
Depends for me too
what do the losses look like? do we lose like aTm and ole miss 2012?
Or are they losses like Auburn this year? Which I can live with if we are in it in the 4th quarter with a chance to win on the road. If we put ourselves in that position in the fourth we will win some with average coaching adjustment.
what do the losses look like? do we lose like aTm and ole miss 2012?
Or are they losses like Auburn this year? Which I can live with if we are in it in the 4th quarter with a chance to win on the road. If we put ourselves in that position in the fourth we will win some with average coaching adjustment.
I’m just saying that my thinking then would’ve been the same as it is now, which is that it’s not strictly about the W-L record. It’s also about the overall direction of the program. If things are bad, are there at least signs that they will get better?
Anyway, like HD6 said, most folks DID want Sherrill fired until he managed to get two big wins in 96.
Mullen has the opportunity to do the same thing. He beats Arkansas and Ole Miss, probably most of the pressure lets up. The team at least shows a pulse in the A&M and Bama games, so much the better.
Sherrill showed us something which said that we should give him more time. Mullen needs to do the same.
Anyway, like HD6 said, most folks DID want Sherrill fired until he managed to get two big wins in 96.
Mullen has the opportunity to do the same thing. He beats Arkansas and Ole Miss, probably most of the pressure lets up. The team at least shows a pulse in the A&M and Bama games, so much the better.
Sherrill showed us something which said that we should give him more time. Mullen needs to do the same.
I can agree with that. It's just hard when you are looking back in time already knowing what the next few years will bring. And yes without those wins he would have not lasted. Without those wins and if we had kept him the future results are probably altered as well.
In 96, it was obvious toward the end of the season that we were moving in the right direction. Sometime about midseason, Joe Lee's first defense at MSU gelled and started kicking serious *** on an elite level(10.2ppg -- including a victory over a 10-2 Alabama team that still had hopes of a Sugar Bowl when we beat them). To me, that was the turning point...
Jackie had been here six years, and had had losing seasons in three of them, including 1996. A couple of those years had been pretty rough, including losses to Memphis and Louisiana Monroe. And it wasn't time to fire him, nor was it in 1995 when we went 3-8 and lost our last three, including the Egg Bowl. If 97 had not gone well, I'm sure he'd have been fired.
was it obvious when we lost to Arkansas the following week at home
that finished 4-7? Right now we rank 41st in offense and 22nd in Defense. We have been in every game we have played so is it not obvious that Mullen has our program headed in the right direction?
that finished 4-7? Right now we rank 41st in offense and 22nd in Defense. We have been in every game we have played so is it not obvious that Mullen has our program headed in the right direction?
We rank 55th in the BCS and are likely to drop. That's the ranking that I care about.
No, it's not obvious that our program is going in the right direction.
You are also using a program that was likely ranked #100 or lower in revenue at the time(we were #77 as recently as 2008 to make a comparison to one that is WELL on it's way to being comfortably inside the top 30 in 2014.
Fact of the matter is -- MSU is not yet a "have" program -- but it's also no longer a "have not" program. We're somewhere in the middle. What I do know is that we're no longer defined by the limitations of the past...and will have to redefine expectations and limitations for the future.
Last edited:
what did we rank in 96?
You said it was obvious in 96 that we were moving in the right direction because Joe Lee Dunn's defense had become elite. What you failed to mention was that we only played 1 team with a winning record and had losses to 4-7 Kentucky and 4-7 Arkansas. Our only losses this season have been to 7-1 Osu, 8-1 Auburn, 7-2 Lsu and 7-2 South Carolina. that's a combined 29-6. So again, I'm curious what was so obvious in 96 from today? We are ranked 21st in pass defense with basically all first year starters. We lost 4 senior Wr's and our best OL. Most people predicted a 5-7 or 6-6 season. We have been in EVERY game this season. So I guess I don't see why if you thought it was obvious we were going in the right direction in 96 why you wouldn't think we were now?
I wonder where we rank in the SEC in revenue? Because that's who we compete against year in and year out.
You said it was obvious in 96 that we were moving in the right direction because Joe Lee Dunn's defense had become elite. What you failed to mention was that we only played 1 team with a winning record and had losses to 4-7 Kentucky and 4-7 Arkansas. Our only losses this season have been to 7-1 Osu, 8-1 Auburn, 7-2 Lsu and 7-2 South Carolina. that's a combined 29-6. So again, I'm curious what was so obvious in 96 from today? We are ranked 21st in pass defense with basically all first year starters. We lost 4 senior Wr's and our best OL. Most people predicted a 5-7 or 6-6 season. We have been in EVERY game this season. So I guess I don't see why if you thought it was obvious we were going in the right direction in 96 why you wouldn't think we were now?
I wonder where we rank in the SEC in revenue? Because that's who we compete against year in and year out.
Correct.
If Mullen beats Alabama and Ole Miss this year, I'll say he's moving in the right direction too. Bottom line, over the last 5 games, we had one of the 5 best defenses in the country in 96 and that earned the right to see if we could get an offense to complement it going forward.
Our only decisive victories came against Troy and Alcorn St.
Again -- beating Alabama buys a ton of good will in Starkville, MS.
That's because teams are running it down our throats to the tune of 4.4 yards per carry right now, which may possibly be the worst MSU rush D in the modern era. And it's damn sure going to get worse with 4 very good rush teams left on the schedule.
Best OL? Who? You mean the guy that started 4 games for us last year and took 10% of the snaps?
That just shows that expectations have fallen apart in the past two years here. There's a difference between a "prediction" that you expect to happen -- and "what it would take to make you happy". I was never going to be "happy" with anything less than 7-5 this year -- even if 6-6 was the prediction.
What planet are you living on? Auburn is the ONLY of the 4 losses that we had the chance to win in the 4th. Average margin of defeat in the other 3 - 23 points. The fact that you can look at those games and say "we had the talent to give us a chance to win" simply makes getting blown out in all 3 that much worse. Being "in" every game = MSU 2010 and 2011(sans @ Arky). Go back and look at those scores.
Already explained it in detail.
Almost $20 million ahead of Ole Miss -- I know that much.
We're not changing each other's minds. Your point is one that I, myself, would and probably have made prior to this season kicking off. It's a fair point. I pleaded for patience too. Then I saw the same coaching mistakes being made in year 5 as years 1 and 2, beating square pegs in round holes with the "Russell" offense not being adjusted to him, and basically what I see as totally quitting on recruiting -- and I changed my mind on him. At this point, anything less than a 7-5 finish and top 30 recruiting class isn't going to change my mind back. If he sneaks up and gets to 6-6, I'll get back on the fence...
The bottom line is, the faction that wants Mullen to stay will point to our past as the reason. And the portion that wants him gone will point to the circumstances of the present saying the past no longer defines us. The truth is somewhere in the middle...
Last edited:
I don't know about a top 5 defense in the country in those last five games in 1996. Those were some very bad offenses we played. ULM huge shut out. Lose to 4-7 Kentucky who had the 110th offense that year averaging 12.5 pts per game. They scored 24 on us. Bama had the 60th offense avg 24.3 pts per game. Held them to 16. Arkansas 101st avg 15.8 per game. They scored 16. Then Ole Miss the 91st offense avg 18.5 per game. Blanked them and that was a good defensive game. Finished the year 34th on defense in the country. All of the good offenses we played early that year. I think they got better as well and held those last three to below their average or right at it but that was some awful offenses we played down the stretch as well.
Beat Alabama? You're talking about doing something that what, 5 teams have done since 2009(counting both LSU teams)? 2 of those teams played for the national title and 1 of them had the first freshman heisman winner EVER, and another one made it to Atlanta.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion re: what we should do about Mullen now, but I think you are really twisting in knots to try to reconcile it with the early years of Sherrill's tenure.
96 was Sherrill's sixth year. This is Mullen's fifth year. In Sherrill's fifth year, we were 3-8 and that was his second losing season. In Mullen's fifth year, we are currently 4-4 and this would be his second losing season if things go as you predict. Forget about the wins over Bama and Ole Miss in Sherrill's sixth year, what justified keeping him in the fifth? We had wins over Kentucky, Baylor, and Memphis, a loss against Louisian Monroe, and gave up scores of 52, 48, and 65 against Tennessee, Auburn, and South Carolina.
If you are looking for a few games to show that we are on the right track, what indication was there in that year that we were on the right track?
96 was Sherrill's sixth year. This is Mullen's fifth year. In Sherrill's fifth year, we were 3-8 and that was his second losing season. In Mullen's fifth year, we are currently 4-4 and this would be his second losing season if things go as you predict. Forget about the wins over Bama and Ole Miss in Sherrill's sixth year, what justified keeping him in the fifth? We had wins over Kentucky, Baylor, and Memphis, a loss against Louisian Monroe, and gave up scores of 52, 48, and 65 against Tennessee, Auburn, and South Carolina.
If you are looking for a few games to show that we are on the right track, what indication was there in that year that we were on the right track?
If Sherrill coached in the SEC of today, he would have had a great chance of being fired in 95. End of story. Just the reality of mega-money win now football.
That said, the initial argument didn't have anything to do with 95. If it would have ended there in the OP, I would have bought that it was time for him to go. But, he instead included 96, and Sherrill's fortunes turned late in 96 where there was reasons for optimism going forward.
If Mullen's turn for the better in late 13, I'll be in favor of keeping him around too. If they don't, I'm still in favor of firing him now and leaving the next guy with a stacked deck for the first or second time in MSU history.
My perception of Mullen goes WAY beyond just what's happening on the field though. He hasn't scheduled a SINGLE official visit yet. OM has had 10 from 4 and 5*s -- and we don't even have one on the books...
well 2 other teams did
They followed that up with a nice 4-7 team in 97. and then 5 losses the next year. Yeah Bama then is exactly like Bama now.
My point with this thread is one of the coaches that our fans praise lost to teams he shouldn't have every year. Hell in 98 we lost to 2 teams that finished below .500 and Kentucky. Sherrill was 8-5 against Kentucky and we won't Dan fired because he barely beat Kentucky this season. Sherrill only had 3 seasons where he didn't lose to a team with a losing record. Dan hasn't lost to a team with a losing record yet. Let that sink in. We had people that said they would be happy with Mullen if he won the games he's suppose too. Now we have fans pissed because he can't beat a top 25 team and only beats the teams he's suppose to beat. We are a fickle fan base.
They followed that up with a nice 4-7 team in 97. and then 5 losses the next year. Yeah Bama then is exactly like Bama now.
My point with this thread is one of the coaches that our fans praise lost to teams he shouldn't have every year. Hell in 98 we lost to 2 teams that finished below .500 and Kentucky. Sherrill was 8-5 against Kentucky and we won't Dan fired because he barely beat Kentucky this season. Sherrill only had 3 seasons where he didn't lose to a team with a losing record. Dan hasn't lost to a team with a losing record yet. Let that sink in. We had people that said they would be happy with Mullen if he won the games he's suppose too. Now we have fans pissed because he can't beat a top 25 team and only beats the teams he's suppose to beat. We are a fickle fan base.
Funny that you look at the next season -- but not the season Jackie beat them when they were the equivalent of an 11-win team today -- nor the previous 5 seasons when they were dominant.
And? He also beat teams he shouldn't almost every year. That was the trade-off with Jackie -- you never went to a game sure you would win -- but you ALWAYS felt like you had a chance to win. His tenure was the very definition of a roller coaster ride.
It's not ok to almost lose to what is soon to be a back-to-back 2-10 team on your home field. I don't care what Sherrill did. It's also not ok to let them outrecruit you -- which never once happened under Jackie's watch.
Again -- skewing to paint an agenda you want people to see. Jackie also just went a few seasons without beating someone he "didn't have a prayer" against as well. If you are going to show one side of the coin -- show them both.
It's not being "a fickle fanbase" to expect "relentless effort" from a team and coaching staff that we haven't seen in AT LEAST 14 games now.
The problem with "beating the teams we're supposed to beat" is that our crappy recruiting guarantees that there are fewer and fewer "teams that we're supposed to beat". See - Mississippi. "Beating the teams we're supposed to beat" this year = 5-7 or 4-8. I fail to see how that's supposed to magically self-correct itself next year.
When Jackie's back was against the wall, he cleaned house with assistants, friendships be damned -- and cleaned up in recruiting. Mullen has thusfar shown us no desire to do either.
I'm not the one with the agenda. 91 Sherrills best win was against a 5 win team. 92 we beat a 9-4 Florida team at home and Dan beat an 8-5 Florida team on the road but that's not a good win because it's a down year for them. 93 was a 5 win team against our rival. 94 was an 8 win Tenn. team. 95 a 7 win Baylor team. whoa 96 a 10 win bama team. So it took Sherrill 6 years to beat a "good" team. 97 we beat a 10 win Auburn team. 98 we beat 9 win arkansas team. 99 our best win was 8 win ole miss team. 2000 was Sherrills best year with a win over 10 win Florida team and 9 win Auburn team. 2001 our best win is 7 win Ole Miss. 2002 a 4 win Troy team. 2003 a 9-4 Memphis team.
so out of 13 years Jackie had upsets in only 5 seasons. that's almost not every year. that's not even half.
If Jackie cleaned up in recruiting and lost to Kentucky 5 times out of 13, then I will take Mullen's recruiting and not losing to them. Haven't Mullen's last 2 classes been in the top 25? I thought I read that somewhere.
I guess someone needs to call spurrier up and let him know it's not ok to almost lose to a future 2-10 Kentucky team. Like I said, I'm not the one with the agenda. You said it was obvious in 96 we were on the right track, but yet you don't see a bright future in Dan when Dan has shown more upside. You said Sherrill upset a team almost every year and that's ********. He lost to a hell of a lot more teams that he shouldn't have than he upset teams he shouldn't have beat.
The pieces are in place next year whether you see it or not for Dan to do something special. Will he do it? Who knows, but he deserves the chance to see if he can. Dan has representative this University about as good as a head coach can while taking us to 3 straight bowls, and yet we have fans wanting to get rid of him because he can't beat a top 25 team. Dan has made some bonehead decisions but he's a young head coach. it's to be expected. I remember 2 years ago fans were begging Mullen to not go anywhere, and now we are 4-4 and fans hope he takes another job or gets fired. And you say if he beats Bama and Ole Miss you are back on the Dan the man train. That is the very definition of "Fickle" my friend.
I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm just trying to understand why people praise Jackie, but Dan will be more successful than Jackie if he stayed here 13 seasons, and yet some fans want him gone?