Dastardly Dan or The Kang?

[blacklistedbully]

Seeing a lot of fans from other teams (especially UF) going on and on about how Muffins was the greatest coach in MSU history, taking us to unprecedented heights we had not seen before and will probably never see again now that he is gone. They talk a lot about # of bowls, # of 9 win seasons and the 10-win. So, I decided to take a quick look at how he compared to The Kang.

In order to be fair to the Kang, I think we have to remove the last 3 years of his tenure. We all know about the OM-funded smear-campaign and how the years of having the NCAA on-campus affected our recruiting/coaching, etc. If you chart his performance, it is clear the final three years were an anomaly. CJS averaged 4 wins more per year his first 10 than he did his last 3.

So, I'll compare CJS's first 10 years to Dastardly's 9. Some interesting facts:

SEC West standings:

• #1 - Kang 1, Dan 0
• #2 - Kang 2, Dan 1
• #3 - Kang 3, Dan 0
• #4 - Kang 4, Dan 3
• #5 - Kang 0, Dan 5

# of bowl games:

• Kang - 6 in 10 years
• Muffins - 8 in 9 years

Now this is a favorite mantra of those who want to tell us why we will suck without DD, while UF goes to the promised land. However, what they fail to mention is the fact that in DD's time there has been an average of 20 additional teams per year making a bowl, including 114 teams since 2009 that did not have a winning record going into the bowl.

There is no doubt that if Muffins had been operating under the same reduced bowls CJS had, we'd have missed at least 3 of the 8 bowls DD got us to. When one considers context, DD's bowl record, though still good relative to most other MSU coaches, is not really better than CJS.

While both coaches had a single 10-win season, The Kang did it in 12 games, needing to win in the Peach Bowl to get it. DD had two 9-win seasons, but The Kang had three 8-win seasons in years he had 1 fewer game than DD. It seems to me that "extra game" DD got was almost always a relative scrub...a team we would expect to beat every time.

I'm not denying DD did some really good things for us. I'm not denying that he elevated our program, raising the floor significantly over what most of our previous coaches had done. But I do think he's getting far more credit, and our program taking a much bigger hit in the eyes of many than is deserved.

 

[maroonmania]

Seeing a lot of fans from other teams (especially UF) going on and on about how Muffins was the greatest coach in MSU history, taking us to unprecedented heights we had not seen before and will probably never see again now that he is gone. They talk a lot about # of bowls, # of 9 win seasons and the 10-win. So, I decided to take a quick look at how he compared to The Kang.

In order to be fair to the Kang, I think we have to remove the last 3 years of his tenure. We all know about the OM-funded smear-campaign and how the years of having the NCAA on-campus affected our recruiting/coaching, etc. If you chart his performance, it is clear the final three years were an anomaly. CJS averaged 4 wins more per year his first 10 than he did his last 3.

So, I'll compare CJS's first 10 years to Dastardly's 9. Some interesting facts:

SEC West standings:

• #1 - Kang 1, Dan 0
• #2 - Kang 2, Dan 1
• #3 - Kang 3, Dan 0
• #4 - Kang 4, Dan 3
• #5 - Kang 0, Dan 5

# of bowl games:

• Kang - 6 in 10 years
• Muffins - 8 in 9 years

Now this is a favorite mantra of those who want to tell us why we will suck without DD, while UF goes to the promised land. However, what they fail to mention is the fact that in DD's time there has been an average of 20 additional teams per year making a bowl, including 114 teams since 2009 that did not have a winning record going into the bowl.

There is no doubt that if Muffins had been operating under the same reduced bowls CJS had, we'd have missed at least 3 of the 8 bowls DD got us to. When one considers context, DD's bowl record, though still good relative to most other MSU coaches, is not really better than CJS.

I'm not denying DD did some really good things for us. I'm not denying that he elevated our program, raising the floor significantly over what most of our previous coaches had done. But I do think he's getting far more credit, and our program taking a much bigger hit in the eyes of many than is deserved.

The bowl game comparison is a red herring. If you put Mullen coaching during Sherrill's time he would likely have only gone to bowls 5 of 9 years. 3 of Mullen's bowl games were after 6-6, 6-6 and 5-7 seasons. Those records would not have sniffed a bowl back during JWS's tenure. In fact, Sherrill had one team go 7-4 that didn't make a bowl.

 

[msstatelp1]

JWS is still the best in my book but Mullen is a close second. If JoMo is half the coach I think he is, this JWS VS DM will be a moot point in the not to distant future.

 

[natchezdawg]

If you give Mullen the level of talent/competition that JWS

faced in the West in the mid-to-late 90’s, Mullen goes to Atlanta at least once, maybe twice.

 

[BlueRidgeMtns]

Merlin did work some magic (heyooo) and we should all be thankful. If only he wasn't such an *** and left respectfully, people would remember him more fondly.

 

[blacklistedbully]

There would still be the glaring faults such as occasional dumbfounding play-calling, terrible clock-management, choking in big games, hard-to-grasp personnel decisions, whoring himself out for other jobs too often and allowing it to become a distraction, seeming to, "check out" at the end of some seasons, etc.

I believe he both raised the floor, but also capped our ceiling lower than it could have been.

 

[maroonmania]

faced in the West in the mid-to-late 90’s, Mullen goes to Atlanta at least once, maybe twice.

Maybe, but that's subjective. Its objective that bowls are MUCH easier to make for an SEC team today than it was 20 years ago.

 

[Dawgzilla]

I'm not willing to make that assumption. I think the odds are pretty good that he could have gotten to Atlanta, but his inability to pull upsets or even rally a team to come from behind really make me wonder. Also, his tendency to lose to Ole Miss anytime he had a good season going...

 

[blacklistedbully]

It's also assuming DD would have been able to get the same kind of recruits he got in a time where our facilities were so far behind just about everyone in the SEC that it was laughable.

 

[Willow Grove Dawg]

You cannot just ignore those last three years under JWS.

 

[Shamoan]

im going mullen. a decade of stability in the most treacherous conference in America.

 

[ronpolk]

faced in the West in the mid-to-late 90’s, Mullen goes to Atlanta at least once, maybe twice.

This is true. No comparison between the SEC West now and when Jackie was here.

 

[patdog]

It's not subjective. Jackie faced 7 top 10 SEC West teams in 13 years. Mullen faced 16 in 8 years.

 

[blacklistedbully]

Sure you can. It was clearly an anomaly...a result of the unprecedented lengthy on-campus rectal exam he received from the NCAA courtesy of the sore losers up north. If we're comparing the relative accomplishments/capabilities of the two coaches it would be silly to not extract those last 3 years.

Had there not been the extenuating circumstances, I would agree with you, as that would suggest it was just poor coaching.

 

[patdog]

You cannot just ignore those last three years under JWS.

I'll never understand the selective amnesia of some of our fans, including the moderator of this board.

 

[philduckworth]

To me, it's Jackie, and it's not that close. I appreciate what Mullen was able to accomplish though.

 

[Dawgzilla]

The simple comparison between Sherrill and Dan is that with Sherrill the highs were higher, while the lows were lower. Yes, I know that Mullen got us to a #1 ranking and all, but in the end the 2014 team was 10-3 and ranked #11, while Sherrill's 1999 squad was 10-2 and ranked #13. Give Mullen a slight edge on that particular high, but, then, I consider 1997-2000 to be a better four-year stretch than Mullen's best of 2012-2015.

Sherrill had a better SEC record than Dan during that 10 year stretch, and of course a trip to Atlanta. He gave us upsets over Texas, Florida, Arkansas, etc., and losses to Memphis, La-Tech, La-Monroe, and a tie with Arkansas St. His recruiting brought in some top talent, and then he would fill the bottom of the class with non-contributors.

Throw in the two probations we got from Sherrill and the three final years that you want to ignore, and I am willing to say that Dan was a better coach. What I won't admit, though, is that Dan's results over those 9 years were any better than Sherrill's results in his first 9 or 10 years, which is really what you are arguing.

The bowl situation is much different now, plus we play a 12 game sesason -- which for Mullen meant 1 extra cupcake game per year. Granted, there is no guarantee that Sherrill would have won those cupcake games if he had them on his schedule, but take away those cupcakes and Mullen's two 6-6 seasons would be 5-6 with no bowl, which really changes the perspective.

 

[blacklistedbully]

DD owns the title of, "worst record vs AP-ranked teams in history". I wonder how CJS might have recruited had we been able to upgrade our facilities to the extent we did for Mullen (and some for Croom). I suspect he'd have had even better teams than he had, thus more likely to win even more T25 games.

 

[Sapsdawg]

No Saban or Les Miles back then. JWS had 3 losing seasons before 1999 if I recall correctly ( a 3 win, a 2 win, and a 5 win). Put Mullen in JWS era and he is in Atlanta more than once. DM>JWS and it's not really close.

 

[QuadrupleOption]

You cannot just ignore those last three years under JWS.

^^^ THIS.

Those last 3 years under Jackie happened whether we want to admit it or not, and that skews your numbers towards Dan.

Here's the thing - with Jackie, you could expect uneven performances during the season as well as over the years. It's a team that could embarrass the SEC West and East champions in the same year (2000) but lose to South Carolina, LSU, and Arkansas (all mediocre teams).

Or beat Texas (#13), play like gangbusters against Tenn (#6) and Alabama (#7) then lose to Memphis in 1991.

I loved Jackie but you NEVER knew what you were going to get. And quite frankly he lost control of the team and program in 2001 and it took us a long time to recover (notwithstanding a bad hire in Croom).

Mullen made us respectable and made us a steady program. No, he didn't have a signature win against a top tier team. But he didn't lose to bad teams either. He wasn't perfect but if he'd stuck around he'd have the all-time wins record this year. He doesn't put a lot into recruiting, which was why he was never able to get over the hump.

Mullen did a good job. Mullen is a good coach. I don't understand trying to downplay what he did here.

 

[thekimmer]

Seeing a lot of fans from other teams (especially UF) going on and on about how Muffins was the greatest coach in MSU history, taking us to unprecedented heights we had not seen before and will probably never see again now that he is gone. They talk a lot about # of bowls, # of 9 win seasons and the 10-win. So, I decided to take a quick look at how he compared to The Kang.

In order to be fair to the Kang, I think we have to remove the last 3 years of his tenure. We all know about the OM-funded smear-campaign and how the years of having the NCAA on-campus affected our recruiting/coaching, etc. If you chart his performance, it is clear the final three years were an anomaly. CJS averaged 4 wins more per year his first 10 than he did his last 3.

So, I'll compare CJS's first 10 years to Dastardly's 9. Some interesting facts:

SEC West standings:

• #1 - Kang 1, Dan 0
• #2 - Kang 2, Dan 1
• #3 - Kang 3, Dan 0
• #4 - Kang 4, Dan 3
• #5 - Kang 0, Dan 5

# of bowl games:

• Kang - 6 in 10 years
• Muffins - 8 in 9 years

Now this is a favorite mantra of those who want to tell us why we will suck without DD, while UF goes to the promised land. However, what they fail to mention is the fact that in DD's time there has been an average of 20 additional teams per year making a bowl, including 114 teams since 2009 that did not have a winning record going into the bowl.

There is no doubt that if Muffins had been operating under the same reduced bowls CJS had, we'd have missed at least 3 of the 8 bowls DD got us to. When one considers context, DD's bowl record, though still good relative to most other MSU coaches, is not really better than CJS.

While both coaches had a single 10-win season, The Kang did it in 12 games, needing to win in the Peach Bowl to get it. DD had two 9-win seasons, but The Kang had three 8-win seasons in years he had 1 fewer game than DD. It seems to me that "extra game" DD got was almost always a relative scrub...a team we would expect to beat every time.

I'm not denying DD did some really good things for us. I'm not denying that he elevated our program, raising the floor significantly over what most of our previous coaches had done. But I do think he's getting far more credit, and our program taking a much bigger hit in the eyes of many than is deserved.

The wild card in any such comparison as this is objectivity. Jackie became one of us, retired one of us, and is still one of us. Don became one of us but spurned us for 'greener pastures' lured away by an MSU alum traitor who's chair had barely gotten cold.

With that said, with as much objectivity as I can muster, I think mullins gets the nod. His team's performances were much more consistent than jackie's. He faced a much stronger SEC and especially SEC west than jackie. He did not win a single division title but he got us to a #1 ranking for 4 weeks which is pretty solid. He also was the first coach in 60+ years to leave State with a winning record. I like Jackie way better but mullins turned in the better worksheet.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

The bowl game comparison is a red herring. If you put Mullen coaching during Sherrill's time he would likely have only gone to bowls 5 of 9 years. 3 of Mullen's bowl games were after 6-6, 6-6 and 5-7 seasons. Those records would not have sniffed a bowl back during JWS's tenure. In fact, Sherrill had one team go 7-4 that didn't make a bowl.

This statement is pretty true. The SEC West is much different than in those days and recruiting is far different. You nitpick a few points but it is not the same just like the 90's are far different than our "run" in the 40's.

ETA: That should read "You could nitpick"

 

[patdog]

Exactly. I LIKE Jackie better. But I recognize his flaws, and Mullen did a better job overall at MSU.

 

[maroonmania]

It's not subjective. Jackie faced 7 top 10 SEC West teams in 13 years. Mullen faced 16 in 8 years.

Its absolutely subjective to say how many times Donny would have made Atlanta playing a different set of SEC West teams. The really significant difference now from then is the consistent dominance of the current Alabama program. Everything else has been fluid.

 

[blacklistedbully]

^^^ THIS.

Those last 3 years under Jackie happened whether we want to admit it or not, and that skews your numbers towards Dan.

Here's the thing - with Jackie, you could expect uneven performances during the season as well as over the years. It's a team that could embarrass the SEC West and East champions in the same year (2000) but lose to South Carolina, LSU, and Arkansas (all mediocre teams).



Or beat Texas (#13), play like gangbusters against Tenn (#6) and Alabama (#7) then lose to Memphis in 1991.

I loved Jackie but you NEVER knew what you were going to get. And quite frankly he lost control of the team and program in 2001 and it took us a long time to recover (notwithstanding a bad hire in Croom).

Mullen made us respectable and made us a steady program. No, he didn't have a signature win against a top tier team. But he didn't lose to bad teams either. He wasn't perfect but if he'd stuck around he'd have the all-time wins record this year. He doesn't put a lot into recruiting, which was why he was never able to get over the hump.

Mullen did a good job. Mullen is a good coach. I don't understand trying to downplay what he did here.

a·nom·a·ly
əˈnäməlē/Submit
noun
1.
something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected.

10 years of results, then 3 while the program was being raped by the NCAA. It's not as if CJS oversaw a steady decline. He won 26 games the 3 seasons of '98 though '00, then won just 8 those last 3 years. He did not suddenly forget how to coach. Circumstances changed. It's a great example of what an anomaly is.


2016 South Alabama says hello, as does a bad OM from last year. Though we didn't lose, 2 closer-than-they-had-any-right-to-be wins over UMass the past 2 years, a one-point home win over 2013 Bowling Green, a 2012 6-point win over Troy, a 2011 OT win at home over LT, and a 2010 5-point home win over UAB are worthy of mention. Sometimes a win can be a little embarrassing as well.

Lastly, I have credited him with being a good coach. This isn't a thread claiming he was anything less than a good coach. It's about putting things in perspective and considering context as a way to counter these absurd claims by others that our program was never anywhere as good as we were under Mullen and most likely will never be again now that he is gone.

 

[patdog]

3 years isn't an anomaly. It's a change in the normal.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

Its absolutely subjective to say how many times Donny would have made Atlanta playing a different set of SEC West teams. The really significant difference now from then is the consistent dominance of the current Alabama program. Everything else has been fluid.

ISN'T THE WHOLE 17'ING ARGUMENT SUBJECTIVE???

You trying to call one thing subjective over another thing in an argument that is entirely subjective brings nothing to a table and I mean no disrespect by that, pal.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

I think this is a great comparison. I go with JWS!!!

 

[blacklistedbully]

3 years isn't an anomaly. It's a change in the normal.

Last 3 years in a 13-year stretch, and a 3 years under which his ability to coach and recruit was clearly hampered by the OM-abetted NCAA investigation is absolutely an anomaly. You cannot look at it in a vacuum. As said before the change was so abrupt and so aligned with the 30-month investigation we were going through, it would be criminal to not consider it an anomaly.

 

[Willow Grove Dawg]

Same logic would say you could throw out 2009, 2013, & 2016 for Millernz. JWS gave us higher highs & lower lows. Don was much more consistent.

 

[StillTbonewannabe]

No Saban or Les Miles back then. JWS had 3 losing seasons before 1999 if I recall correctly ( a 3 win, a 2 win, and a 5 win). Put Mullen in JWS era and he is in Atlanta more than once. DM>JWS and it's not really close.

We had to beat UM for a share of the SEC West and possibly a playoff game. Mullen **** the bed against Bama and UM. Mullen almost always **** the bed in big games. He was able to beat almost every team when he had more talent. I doubt Mullen would have magically been able to win a big game.

 

[blacklistedbully]

Nothing in my OP is subject to whether CJS was "one of us" or "liked more". I provided stats and facts. Please highlight the parts of the post that are obviously tainted by feelings.

 

[Todd4State]

I wish I could combine Jackie's memorable wins and Dan's consistently beating teams we should beat without very many embarrassing losses into one coach. Hopefully that's what Joe Moorhead can do.

 

[Lou3000]

Mullen happened to take over during an era of college football that was absolutely unprecedented. Nationally, and especially in the SEC, there was a massive increase in brand exposure and money. A lot of Mullen's success happened as a result of that increase, though both he and the ADs should be commended for not getting left behind.

At the end, being #1 was amazing, but going to Atlanta was a bigger accomplishment. Yes the last 3 years of JS were bad, but the last 3 weeks of every Mullen season was usually a disaster. He just didn't accomplish enough on the field for me. The Mullen era will be remembered for its great game day atmosphere, the Junction, Davis Wade expansion, and an increase in national exposure. But was that Mullen's influence or was that just the era in which he was at State? I think you could ask whether Mullen, who recruited/produced the arguably the greatest quarterback in Mississippi State history, did enough with what he was given?

Losing that Ole Miss game in 2014 will forever be the stain that tarnished Mullen's career at State.

There can only be one Kang.

 

[maroonmania]

ISN'T THE WHOLE 17'ING ARGUMENT SUBJECTIVE???

You trying to call one thing subjective over another thing in an argument that is entirely subjective brings nothing to a table and I mean no disrespect by that, pal.

Sorry pal, but if you can't see the difference in the objectivity of the number of wins to make a bowl in a certain era versus the subjectivity of what a coach MIGHT have accomplished or games he MIGHT have won had he played different competition from a different time then we might as well end the discussion. Geez, I think some of you like to argue just for the sake of arguing.

 

[natchezdawg]

But to answer the original question...

I love Jackie Sherrill, but I have to give the edge to Mullen.

He did a phenomenal job. Only one season with less than 6 wins. Players in the NFL. Fletcher Cox is one the highest paid players in the league. We have a former QUARTERBACK starting for the Dallas Cowboys! We were #1 in the nation for a month. We played in the Orange Bowl. All this while playing in a DIVISION that produced 6 national champions and 4 Heismam trophy winners during his tenure.

I love JWS but all that trumps what he did...even winning the West.

 

[johnson86-1]

Seeing a lot of fans from other teams (especially UF) going on and on about how Muffins was the greatest coach in MSU history, taking us to unprecedented heights we had not seen before and will probably never see again now that he is gone. They talk a lot about # of bowls, # of 9 win seasons and the 10-win. So, I decided to take a quick look at how he compared to The Kang.

In order to be fair to the Kang, I think we have to remove the last 3 years of his tenure. We all know about the OM-funded smear-campaign and how the years of having the NCAA on-campus affected our recruiting/coaching, etc. If you chart his performance, it is clear the final three years were an anomaly. CJS averaged 4 wins more per year his first 10 than he did his last 3.

So, I'll compare CJS's first 10 years to Dastardly's 9. Some interesting facts:

SEC West standings:

• #1 - Kang 1, Dan 0
• #2 - Kang 2, Dan 1
• #3 - Kang 3, Dan 0
• #4 - Kang 4, Dan 3
• #5 - Kang 0, Dan 5

# of bowl games:

• Kang - 6 in 10 years
• Muffins - 8 in 9 years

Now this is a favorite mantra of those who want to tell us why we will suck without DD, while UF goes to the promised land. However, what they fail to mention is the fact that in DD's time there has been an average of 20 additional teams per year making a bowl, including 114 teams since 2009 that did not have a winning record going into the bowl.

There is no doubt that if Muffins had been operating under the same reduced bowls CJS had, we'd have missed at least 3 of the 8 bowls DD got us to. When one considers context, DD's bowl record, though still good relative to most other MSU coaches, is not really better than CJS.

While both coaches had a single 10-win season, The Kang did it in 12 games, needing to win in the Peach Bowl to get it. DD had two 9-win seasons, but The Kang had three 8-win seasons in years he had 1 fewer game than DD. It seems to me that "extra game" DD got was almost always a relative scrub...a team we would expect to beat every time.

I'm not denying DD did some really good things for us. I'm not denying that he elevated our program, raising the floor significantly over what most of our previous coaches had done. But I do think he's getting far more credit, and our program taking a much bigger hit in the eyes of many than is deserved.

Six of one, half dozen of the other. Jackie benefited from weaker competition in the SEC West, so that explains somewhat his highs being higher than Mullen's. Mullen benefited from an extra cupcake per year and way more bowls (which inflated his bowl appearances compared to performance) and also benefited from the TV money separating major conferences from the G5 conferences, which explains somewhat his higher lows than Sherrill's.

 

[maroonmania]

This statement is pretty true. The SEC West is much different than in those days and recruiting is far different. You nitpick a few points but it is not the same just like the 90's are far different than our "run" in the 40's.

I am only nitpicking that it required more wins back then to go to a bowl than it does now. That is just FACT. I made NO comment on how difficult wins were to come by back then versus now. I did not even make a statement to which I think is the better coach, just making the point that there is very little use in comparing how many bowls each made when the criteria for making a bowl now is so much different than it was then.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

I'll never understand the selective amnesia of some of our fans, including the moderator of this board.

View attachment 10699

 

[BigDog72.sixpack]

Yes, but imagine how well Dom would have done under the tutelage of LT??? With facilities and AD leadership that JWS dealt with, imagine what JWS could have done with all that Mullen had to work with now. Night and day. Jackie coached, and yes he was bullheaded, but players loved that guy. Dom? Not so sure.