Once upon a time...

[RutherfordBHayes]

Once upon a time, State had their best football coach in a generation. He gave us success and then our best 2/3 year run in a lifetime. We were on top of the world.

But we followed that great run with one terrible year in a year that we expected to be pretty good. To make the losses worse, during that year most of us learned that NCAA was in town. Investigating.

The news of the investigation scared recruits and killed our next class. It was used against us at every recruiting opportunity by our rivals. It was a bad situation. So, we parted ways with some bad coaches. Some of our better coaches left for better opportunities. We ended up with young coaches that weren't ready or experienced coaches that simply weren't very good.

The next season was worse. The next recruiting class was worse. The NCAA investigation dragged on. We were in a vicious cycle.

3 consecutive bad classes means a football team with no talent. No talent and mediocre coaches, well... it was bad.

The NCAA still hadn't given us a resolution. Clearly, they had decided that we were a program and a coach that needed to go. Recruiting wasn't improving. Frankly, this was rock bottom. We parted ways with our beloved coach.

Then, we made a coaching hire mistake. In terms of win and losses, this led to the worst decade in Mississippi State football history.

I sure am glad that's ancient history. I wouldn't wish that on my worst... well, maybe not.

 

[bulldognation]

What comes around goes around... cycles and pendulums.

So my question is, will there ever be a time when we have one dominant program in state for any extended period of time?

 

[EngDawg]

What comes around goes around... cycles and pendulums.

So my question is, will there ever be a time when we have one dominant program in state for any extended period of time?

We have a chance, just need Mullen and Co. to come out full throttle and seize it.

 

[mount lefroy]

Once upon a time, State had their best football coach in a generation. He gave us success and then our best 2/3 year run in a lifetime. We were on top of the world.

But we followed that great run with one terrible year in a year that we expected to be pretty good. To make the losses worse, during that year most of us learned that NCAA was in town. Investigating.

The news of the investigation scared recruits and killed our next class. It was used against us at every recruiting opportunity by our rivals. It was a bad situation. So, we parted ways with some bad coaches. Some of our better coaches left for better opportunities. We ended up with young coaches that weren't ready or experienced coaches that simply weren't very good.

The next season was worse. The next recruiting class was worse. The NCAA investigation dragged on. We were in a vicious cycle.

3 consecutive bad classes means a football team with no talent. No talent and mediocre coaches, well... it was bad.

The NCAA still hadn't given us a resolution. Clearly, they had decided that we were a program and a coach that needed to go. Recruiting wasn't improving. Frankly, this was rock bottom. We parted ways with our beloved coach.

Then, we made a coaching hire mistake. In terms of win and losses, this led to the worst decade in Mississippi State football history.

I sure am glad that's ancient history. I wouldn't wish that on my worst... well, maybe not.

Your Point is well taken, but 2001-2010 was nowhere close to the worst decade in msu football history.

 

[KurtRambis4]

It may be not the

worst, ever, but it's certainly up there with the worst. I'd say it was the worst in the modern era.

 

[RutherfordBHayes]

Your Point is well taken, but 2001-2010 was nowhere close to the worst decade in msu football history.

Strictly in terms of W-L, I think it is. It's definitely the worst 8/9 year stretch.

Somebody do the research.

 

[QuadrupleOption]

What comes around goes around... cycles and pendulums.

So my question is, will there ever be a time when we have one dominant program in state for any extended period of time?

The bears were in the 50's and 60's. Modern era? I'm not sure. I think that scholarship limitations basically means that no team can get all the good players, so if/when they get hammered they'll be able to rebuild to at least mediocre pretty quickly.

But honestly, if they didn't have a network of dirty alums buying classes with their coaches help and blessing, does anyone really think they'd be any good?

 

[KurtRambis4]

Strictly in terms

of W/L I think the 20s may have been worse, but it's really 6 in one hand and 1/2 dozen in the other. I can't write it down, currently,but you can tally it on sports reference. Like I said, in our modern area, it certainly was.

 

[RutherfordBHayes]

of W/L I think the 20s may have been worse, but it's really 6 in one hand and 1/2 dozen in the other. I can't write it down, currently,but you can tally it on sports reference. Like I said, in our modern area, it certainly was.

We probably had longer stretches of losing seasons, but they were 5-6, 5-5 type seasons. 2001-2008 was mostly 3-9 & 2-10.

That's why I said W-L.

 

[KurtRambis4]

I'm on

your side, just saying the twenties were alot of 2-4 win seasons....but we also played less games so the w% wasn't as bad.

We really sucked from 00-09. Our w% was like .380???

 

[the dog is on the loose]

To this very day I never understood why we sank during 2001 season. We had some good players coming back and were picked pretty high in the conference then that season the freakn wheels came off. Explain that one if you dare.

 

[Digging dog]

You left out the part where the local newspaper was against us too.

 

[Faustdog]

You left out the part where the local newspaper was against us too.

The local newspaper was just doing its job. It's not Rusty Hampton's fault that Kellenberger refuses to do his.

 

[Snog]

To this very day I never understood why we sank during 2001 season. We had some good players coming back and were picked pretty high in the conference then that season the freakn wheels came off. Explain that one if you dare.

Lou Holtz exposed joe lees defense and it was pretty much over after that.

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

Lou Holtz exposed joe lees defense and it was pretty much over after that.

Well, it started with the 13 Juco signees of which about 9 were 4 star. Only 1 of those 13 produced in 01-02.

Complete recruiting class failure!

 

[MaroonState]

The local newspaper was just doing its job. It's not Rusty Hampton's fault that Kellenberger refuses to do his.

It was Rusty Hampton that had it out for Jackie and he was overzealous in his coverage of the investigation. He went way past "just doing his job" on purpose.

 

[Hoover Dawg]

Never understood why? We recruited a whole defensive line from Arizona Western. The JUCO class busted (and we had gotten to a point where we depended on them). We had good skill talent but nothing in the trenches, especially on defense.

 

[KurtRambis4]

It takes more than

being strong and fast to win at a high level.

 

[CoolDawg]

I see a strong analogy with what the Bears are now facing. I hope they have at least a decade of hibernation.

 

[Shamoan]

The catch 22 is that if they get busted on probation, they are done and they can't get croots enough to be anything other than mediocre. Can they stay disciplined enough to not cheat while their pride takes a back seat for half a decade?

 

[RutherfordBHayes]

To this very day I never understood why we sank during 2001 season. We had some good players coming back and were picked pretty high in the conference then that season the freakn wheels came off. Explain that one if you dare.

Several of the players hated each other, and we had a bunch of prima donnas. But we lost a whole lot of really close games. We weren't as bad as the record shows. But 2002 was a different story.

 

[DerHntr]

The catch 22 is that if they get busted on probation, they are done and they can't get croots enough to be anything other than mediocre. Can they stay disciplined enough to not cheat while their pride takes a back seat for half a decade?

Wait a damn second. They didn't cheat. Hey Hugh just "made mistakes."

 

[Salty Sands Dawg]

It's as close to the Charlie Shira, Paul Davis and Wade Walker error that we could get (in the modern era). As much as, I would love to see that happen to them, they're leadership is not nearly as stupid as ours was at either period that we experienced that level of ineptitude.

Your Point is well taken, but 2001-2010 was nowhere close to the worst decade in msu football history.

 

[Salty Sands Dawg]

Not likely, if history is any indication, we will screw up the golden opportunity just as we have in years past when the window of opportunity passed us by. However, if we don't take advantage of it this time, we will not likely see another chance this great in our lifetime!

What comes around goes around... cycles and pendulums.

So my question is, will there ever be a time when we have one dominant program in state for any extended period of time?

 

[Salty Sands Dawg]

01' 3-8, 2-6
02' 3-9, 0-8
03' 2-10, 1-7
04' 3-8, 2-6
05' 3-8, 1-7
06' 3-9, 1-7
07' 8-5, 4-4
08' 4-8, 2-6
09' 5-7, 3-5
10' 9-4, 4-4
43-76, 20-60

vs.

60' 2-6-1, 0-5-1
61' 5-5, 1-5
62' 3-6, 2-5
63' 7-2-2, 4-1-2
64' 4-6, 2-5
65' 4-6, 1-5
66' 2-8, 0-6
67' 1-9, 0-6
68' 0-8-2, 0-4-2
69' 3-7, 0-5
31-63-5, 10-53-5

By record, the 1960's were worse and we played less games (with far less resources) during that period of time. However, to reach a similar level of incompetence in the 21st Century should be a solid demonstration of how stupid our leadership was from Allen Hall to the Bryan Building!

Strictly in terms of W-L, I think it is. It's definitely the worst 8/9 year stretch.

Somebody do the research.

 

[Salty Sands Dawg]

Don't leave out Jim Mashek at the Sun Herald, he did everything he could to destroy Sherrill as well.

It was Rusty Hampton that had it out for Jackie and he was overzealous in his coverage of the investigation. He went way past "just doing his job" on purpose.

 

[Resolved]

Hey, if Penn State can come back after covering up a pedophile on staff for 20 years, ANYONE can come back. Caveat: they had a long history of prior success. Still...

 

[DawgatAuburn]

W-L stats to chew on

Ok, here you go. Some of this is a little subjective because of the disparity in the number of games played per year.

The best 10-year period of MSU football started in 1937. For those 10 seasons, we had a winning % of .730. The next best "decades" were those starting in 1936 and 1938 (.727 each). The decades starting in 1935 was slightly behind those, and our fifth best decade started in 1910. If you want to look at from pure wins, then it's the decade starting in 2007 (Thanks Crooms!) in which we compiled 73 wins albeit with only a .570 winning percentage. Four other times we've won 70 games in a decade: 1935, 1936, 1937 and 2006.

What kind of Mississippi State discussion would it be if we didn't talk about losing? Our worst decade began in 1964, when we compiled a winning percentage of only .308 over the next ten years. Other bad ones were those starting in 1966, 1959, 1962,1963 and 1960. Not that there's a lot of difference in them, but the periods starting in 1964 and 1959 saw only 30 wins over the decade. Basically if you were a fan from the late 50s through the mid 60s, that was our lowest point. Most of that period was worse than the next worst, which was the decades starting in 2000 and 2001 when we posted winning percentages of .356 and .361 respectively.

I also wondered about four-year runs. Which students saw the best of times, and who suffered through the worst of times?

The absolute peak time to be a student were the students who first enrolled from 1938 to 1942. If you enrolled in 1939, you saw Mississippi State win an unprecedented 85.4% of its games during your four years. Started in 1940? You won 84.6% of the time. Those are the only two over 80%. 1938, 1941 and 1942 are the only other three over 75%. On the other end of the spectrum, the mid 1960s were again a rough time. Freshmen in 1966 experienced victory an unimaginable 17.5% of the time. Those who started in 1965 won only 20% of the time. Save for our first five season of football in which we won only 23.5% of the time, the late Jackie/early Croom years were the next worst. Students who enrolled in 2001, 2002 and 2003 saw identical four year records of 11-35 in the time, or .239 winning percentage.

As for total wins, several of our coaches have had good runs. Allyn McKeen and Mullen each racked up 34 wins over a four year period. It has to be noted that McKeen did it in 41 games, where it took Mullen 52. Jackie won 33 games starting in 1997 (out of 48). McKeen won 32 starting in 1940, matched by Mullen in 2011 and 2013. Mullen currently sits at 25 wins over the last three years, so a 9 win season next year would tie our best four year period ever, and a 10 win season would set a record for MSU football.


If you want the data, I've posted it to Google Drive but the formulas aren't there - just the data.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KxoEdqciFgHjG0iSMCeHxBVUiIfBWtXWUOb2HnF79eU/edit#gid=0

ETA: I used the on field results for the two Tyler seasons that are officially 0-11, and I gave us the Bama loss in 93 that made us 3-6-2.

 

[RutherfordBHayes]

Ok, here you go. Some of this is a little subjective because of the disparity in the number of games played per year.

The best 10-year period of MSU football started in 1937. For those 10 seasons, we had a winning % of .730. The next best "decades" were those starting in 1936 and 1938 (.727 each). The decades starting in 1935 was slightly behind those, and our fifth best decade started in 1910. If you want to look at from pure wins, then it's the decade starting in 2007 (Thanks Crooms!) in which we compiled 73 wins albeit with only a .570 winning percentage. Four other times we've won 70 games in a decade: 1935, 1936, 1937 and 2006.

What kind of Mississippi State discussion would it be if we didn't talk about losing? Our worst decade began in 1964, when we compiled a winning percentage of only .308 over the next ten years. Other bad ones were those starting in 1966, 1959, 1962,1963 and 1960. Not that there's a lot of difference in them, but the periods starting in 1964 and 1959 saw only 30 wins over the decade. Basically if you were a fan from the late 50s through the mid 60s, that was our lowest point. Most of that period was worse than the next worst, which was the decades starting in 2000 and 2001 when we posted winning percentages of .356 and .361 respectively.

I also wondered about four-year runs. Which students saw the best of times, and who suffered through the worst of times?

The absolute peak time to be a student were the students who first enrolled from 1938 to 1942. If you enrolled in 1939, you saw Mississippi State win an unprecedented 85.4% of its games during your four years. Started in 1940? You won 84.6% of the time. Those are the only two over 80%. 1938, 1941 and 1942 are the only other three over 75%. On the other end of the spectrum, the mid 1960s were again a rough time. Freshmen in 1966 experienced victory an unimaginable 17.5% of the time. Those who started in 1965 won only 20% of the time. Save for our first five season of football in which we won only 23.5% of the time, the late Jackie/early Croom years were the next worst. Students who enrolled in 2001, 2002 and 2003 saw identical four year records of 11-35 in the time, or .239 winning percentage.

As for total wins, several of our coaches have had good runs. Allyn McKeen and Mullen each racked up 34 wins over a four year period. It has to be noted that McKeen did it in 41 games, where it took Mullen 52. Jackie won 33 games starting in 1997 (out of 48). McKeen won 32 starting in 1940, matched by Mullen in 2011 and 2013. Mullen currently sits at 25 wins over the last three years, so a 9 win season next year would tie our best four year period ever, and a 10 win season would set a record for MSU football.


If you want the data, I've posted it to Google Drive but the formulas aren't there - just the data.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KxoEdqciFgHjG0iSMCeHxBVUiIfBWtXWUOb2HnF79eU/edit#gid=0

Excellent work. So, 2001 was not the worst but it is in the conversation.

The point remains, the NCAA cloud, poor on field performance, poor recruiting, and staff turnover created a perfect storm of circumstance that brought us to new lows and nearly a decade of ineptitude.

 

[FlotownDawg]

I was a student at State from 2001-05. I always thought that four year period was one of the worst in school history. You have now confirmed it for me.

 

[Resolved]

Good work. I think it's interesting (and obvious) to note that one of the worst periods in MSU football coincided with the Vaught era. Take it from me, that was a tough time to grow up a Bulldog fan.

Edit: Wouldn't it be nice to make them taste that same ineptitude over the next decade.

 

[BiscuitEater]

We probably had longer stretches of losing seasons, but they were 5-6, 5-5 type seasons. 2001-2008 was mostly 3-9 & 2-10.

That's why I said W-L.

Sorry Rutherford, you're WRONG again. 1960 - 1969, win % = 32.98 (SEC win % = 15.87) 2000 - 2009, win % = 35.59 (SEC win % = 25%)

 

[BiscuitEater]

I was a student at State from 2001-05. I always thought that four year period was one of the worst in school history. You have now confirmed it for me.

Nope, you may have suffered with losing teams while in school BUT they won 14 games from '01 - '05. The five year period from 1965 -1969, MSU won 10 games.

Those years included the 1967 one win team and the 1968 team that went 0-8-2 and had a 17-17 'moral victory' tie with om.

 

[dogmatic]

I don't believe so. We'd both rather be on probation than dominated by our rival

What comes around goes around... cycles and pendulums.

So my question is, will there ever be a time when we have one dominant program in state for any extended period of time?

As long as both programs have resources and the variable will to use them, there will always be parity similar to that which currently exists. As one program excels, the will to more freely use resources rises within the other. Eventually will tips the scales from good judgement toward good short term results.


If the two were playing and recruiting in a vacuum, it would be a much more interesting question, but we're not.

 

[dogmatic]

While I'm no believer in conspiracies, there's no doubting lone gunmen. The personal loathing Mashek exhibited for Sherrill was palpable. It seemed personal. I know Sherrill spent time in Biloxi, I believe, during his youth, and there was Mashek on the coast. I always wondered if Sherrill had poked some girl Mashek was sweet on or something. It was that kind of personal rancor Mashek seemed to exhibit.

 

[Salty Sands Dawg]

Mashek was an outsider that took a job with the Herald during the Sherrill years. There was no previous connection between the two of them from Sherrill's youth growing up and graduating from Biloxi. Subsequently, By the turn of the Century, Maskek was being taken care of by a few key TSUN coast alumni, which contributed to his demeanor/bitterness.

 

[chem1970]

I was at State from the fall of 1966 to the spring of 1970. My four years are the worst in history, but thank goodness for Texas Tech:

66' 2-8, 0-6
67' 1-9, 0-6
68' 0-8-2, 0-4-2
69' 3-7, 0-5

I was a student at State from 2001-05. I always thought that four year period was one of the worst in school history. You have now confirmed it for me.

 

[MedDawg]

To this very day I never understood why we sank during 2001 season. We had some good players coming back and were picked pretty high in the conference then that season the freakn wheels came off. Explain that one if you dare.

Overrated juco players, but also bad luck/close losses. We lost something like 4 games by a total of 10-12 points and another by 7.

 

[KurtRambis4]

You can go to Sports-Reference and

If you want the data, I've posted it to Google Drive but the formulas aren't there - just the data.

see all of our historical W/L numbers.