Offense: Croom vs. Mullen vs. JoMo....

[Clarence Boddicker]

S&P offensive rankings:

2006: 107
2007: 86
2008: 106

2009: 71
2010: 56
2011: 63
2012: 51
2013: 56
2014: 8
2015: 16
2016: 32
2017: 63

2018: 62

What does this mean? The following:

1) Croom sucked
2) Mullen's and JoMo's ratings were similar in the beginning with inherited personnel that didn't match their offense
3) Mullen's offense took off when he got his quarterback
4) 2017 and 2018 offensive output is similar, so weird
5) 2016 offense was better when we had Fred Ross and a healthy Donald Gray, so weird again

fart

Now, please stop spouting dumb offensive stats that cherry-pick crap and make JoMo out to be a bum. He ain't Croom, he's got the track record. S&P is a better advanced metric than all the simple crap people spew. We've played good defenses, and I remember saying to myself last year that Fitzgerald was literally all we had. He was our only offensive threat. And it's ok for a good defense to carry a team, 2010 rings a bell, that team finished top 15 which is likely where this 2018 team will finish.

Will the guy succeed? It will likely all depend on his quarterback, like every other offensive coach in the country. Recruit, recruit, recruit.

Carry on, haters. Lose to Arkansas or Ole Miss, I'll join you.

 

[Cooterpoot]

Mullen didn't have a QB in year one. He maxed out that team. That team in no way returned the type of talent this one did.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Mullen didn't have a QB in year one. He maxed out that team. That team in no way returned the type of talent this one did.

He did in year 2, Relf was not as good as Fitz but the WRs were superior. Very similar talent I would say. NFL guys all over the field. Went 8-4. Fans were happy.

Weird.

Mullen also went through a multi-year lull after that while he built the team back up, which is exactly what is about to happen to JoMo.

 

[DoggieDaddy13]

"You are what your record says you are." I am not convinced our QB, OL or receivers were really as talented as we may have believed or been led to believe.
Our DB's turned out to be more talented than we thought.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

S&P offensive rankings:

2006: 107
2007: 86
2008: 106

2009: 71
2010: 56
2011: 63
2012: 51
2013: 56
2014: 8
2015: 16
2016: 32
2017: 63

2018: 62

What does this mean? The following:

1) Croom sucked
2) Mullen's and JoMo's ratings were similar in the beginning with inherited personnel that didn't match their offense
3) Mullen's offense took off when he got his quarterback
4) 2017 and 2018 offensive output is similar, so weird
5) 2016 offense was better when we had Fred Ross and a healthy Donald Gray, so weird again

fart

Now, please stop spouting dumb offensive stats that cherry-pick crap and make JoMo out to be a bum. He ain't Croom, he's got the track record. S&P is a better advanced metric than all the simple crap people spew. We've played good defenses, and I remember saying to myself last year that Fitzgerald was literally all we had. He was our only offensive threat. And it's ok for a good defense to carry a team, 2010 rings a bell, that team finished top 15 which is likely where this 2018 team will finish.

Will the guy succeed? It will likely all depend on his quarterback, like every other offensive coach in the country. Recruit, recruit, recruit.

Carry on, haters. Lose to Arkansas or Ole Miss, I'll join you.

How is comparing scoring vs conference or vs ranked for all those seasons cherry picking? Taking just one or two game in the extreme one way or another is cherry picking.

S & P is a good stat but understand what it’s using to measure. That same stat also ranked our passing 37th in the country last year and 58th in 2016. (Fitz as QB). We are 83rd this season. But everyone says Fitz sucks as passer and we have no WR and can’t recruit those positions under Mullen, not last year according to the S & P. And the biggest change from the prior 2 years is the coaching. The S & P also rated Washington St much lower than us last season in passing and we were higher than WVU as well.

And if you or anyone tries to argue that 2016 was actually a much better offense than 2017, you are just being dishonest.

 

[kired]

If you want to compare 2018 to 2010 --- which is what I thought he was doing... that 2010 team only had 7 guys starting on defense that would eventually be drafted. Cox, KJ, Chris White, Banks, Charles Mitchell, McPhee, Josh Boyd. Not to mention a pre-injury Nickoe W-HIT-ley. Also had two of the best OL to play for MSU in a long time --- Sherrod and Jackson. And a RB that was drafted a year later and started as a rookie for Indy.

No, not much talent at all on that team. And we were ecstatic when Mullen went 8-4, then beat a bad Michigan team in the gator bowl.

 

[idog]

on defense

Mullen didn't have a QB in year one. He maxed out that team. That team in no way returned the type of talent this one did.

but not on offense. Fitz is a white Relf.

let's say it how it was: Mullen's offense was great 2 out of 8 years(Dak!) and good one year(32nd). the 5 other years it was average. take Dak away and Dan probably gets fired the year we won 5 and lost to USA.

 

[the dog is on the loose]

Wait. We had a rating of 86 on ‘07? I thought Croom’s offense never dropped below 100 in any of his years. Yes we faced some good defenses this year but there is absolutely no excuse for our pathetic offensive output in our losses. What’s our average in sec games this year? 200 something ypg?

 

[Go Budaw]

Mullen didn't have a QB in year one. He maxed out that team. That team in no way returned the type of talent this one did.

I would argue that Tyson Lee would do decent in Moorhead’s offense, similar to how Fitz did well in Mullen’s. Lee wasn’t a physical specimen, but he was / is very smart and could make the quick decisions required to make the passing game plays that we are currently missing, and was slightly more accurate than Fitz. He could also run a little bit when he had to. Of course, he was average at best in Mullen’s system, mainly due to not being useful in the 3rd and Dak / Relf / Fitz package. Anyway, that’s just an example of how the fit between coach and QB is very important. Neither Mullen nor Moorhead had the fit that they needed in Year 1. OP’s point was valid.

 

[Rezdog]

The same offense players were 63rd last year. That kind of debunks all of you thinking we have so much talent that we should win 10 games this year with a cardboard cut out of Mullen.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Wait. We had a rating of 86 on ‘07? I thought Croom’s offense never dropped below 100 in any of his years. Yes we faced some good defenses this year but there is absolutely no excuse for our pathetic offensive output in our losses. What’s our average in sec games this year? 200 something ypg?

You are using antiquated stats like the other sheep. S&P goes deeper. Moot point because Croom sucked anyway, only reason we had half an offense that year is because Wes Carroll had not gotten any of McCroomveys ‘coaching’ yet.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

And if you or anyone tries to argue that 2016 was actually a much better offense than 2017, you are just being dishonest.

The difference in 2016 and 2017 was defense. Sirmon vs Grantham. The numbers back me up. You are wrong.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

The difference in 2016 and 2017 was defense. Sirmon vs Grantham. The numbers back me up. You are wrong.

Uh...you were using the Offensive S & P rankings. Our Defensive is completely irrelevant with that stat. It doesn’t pull up the offensive S & P. You understand that correct? You don’t even know the stat you are using genius. You actually think Sirmon’s defense, which was ranked by S & P 73rd in 2016 vs 19th in 2017, somehow pulled up our S & P offensive ranking? You are clueless if that’s what you think. So no, you are not correct and the number do not back you up.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Uh...you were using the Offensive S & P rankings. Our Defensive is completely irrelevant with that stat. It doesn’t pull up the offensive S & P. You understand that correct? You don’t even know the stat you are using genius. You actually think Sirmon’s defense, which was ranked by S & P 73rd in 2016 vs 19th in 2017, somehow pulled up our S & P offensive ranking? You are clueless if that’s what you think. So no, you are not correct and the number do not back you up.

I did not say that Sirmon/Grantham was the difference in the S&P rating. I said they were the difference in 2016 and 2017. You are trying too hard to find something wrong.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

I did not say that Sirmon/Grantham was the difference in the S&P rating. I said they were the difference in 2016 and 2017. You are trying too hard to find something wrong.

This is the quote you highlighted from my post to respond in the above post:

“And if you or anyone tries to argue that 2016 was actually a much better OFFENSE (put it in caps) than 2017, you are just being dishonest.”

Maybe you missed the offense part

 

[Go Budaw]

Regarding 2016 vs. 2017 offense, we actually averaged 3 ppg more in conference play in 2016 than 2017. So, its not just the advanced stats that show us having a better offense that year. Looking past the horrendous start and Fitz getting his feet under him the first 3 or 4 games, that team ended the year being hell to deal with on offense. Definitely helped to have Fred Ross and Donald Gray over the **** show we are now dealing with. Almost 30 ppg in SEC play. 17ing Sirmon though.

 

[cheewgumm]

Is there a stat that shows pts scores against conference opponents?

I’m asking. That’s what I’d like to compare.

 

[msstate7]

Here's some other things I gathered from S&P...

1. Washington and ND are better defenses than us.

2. Fresno st is the #9 team in the country

3. Utah st is the #10 team in the country

4. Washington is #11 team in the country

5. App st is the #14 team in the country

6. Wisconsin and north Texas are both top 25

7. OM is the #6 offense in the country (OM is the 6th best team in scoring offense in the sec in conf only games)

8. Wisconsin is the 14th best offense in the country. (Wisconsin is the 8th best scoring offense in the big 10)

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaa

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

This is the quote you highlighted from my post to respond in the above post:

“And if you or anyone tries to argue that 2016 was actually a much better OFFENSE (put it in caps) than 2017, you are just being dishonest.”

Maybe you missed the offense part

2016 offense WAS better. The numbers show that. So, knowing that, you have to account for why we went 5-7 rather than 8-4. That reason was the defense.

So what part of "you are wrong" did you misunderstand? I don't know if we were "much better" or just better, and don't care. We were in the sixties in 2017 and thirties in 2016. Take from that what you will. The likely reason is Fred Ross and Donald Gray.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Here's some other things I gathered from S&P...

1. Washington and ND are better defenses than us.

2. Fresno st is the #9 team in the country

3. Utah st is the #10 team in the country

4. Washington is #11 team in the country

5. App st is the #14 team in the country

6. Wisconsin and north Texas are both top 25

7. OM is the #6 offense in the country (OM is the 6th best team in scoring offense in the sec in conf only games)

8. Wisconsin is the 14th best offense in the country. (Wisconsin is the 8th best scoring offense in the big 10)

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaa

I'll take advanced statistics over simple ones any day of the week.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Regarding 2016 vs. 2017 offense, we actually averaged 3 ppg more in conference play in 2016 than 2017. So, its not just the advanced stats that show us having a better offense that year. Looking past the horrendous start and Fitz getting his feet under him the first 3 or 4 games, that team ended the year being hell to deal with on offense. Definitely helped to have Fred Ross and Donald Gray over the **** show we are now dealing with. Almost 30 ppg in SEC play. 17ing Sirmon though.

2016 was definitely a 7-5 type team with just a marginal defense. The L to USA was avoidable, as was the Ls at Kentucky and BYU. Maybe could have beaten Arkansas too. If I recall, they didn't punt in that game.

 

[thf24]

Anyone alleging that Moorhead is on a similar level to Croom has to be borderline braindead. Forget the numbers, save that comparison until Moorhead is struggling against and losing to FCS schools.

 

[the dog is on the loose]

You are using antiquated stats like the other sheep. S&P goes deeper. Moot point because Croom sucked anyway, only reason we had half an offense that year is because Wes Carroll had not gotten any of McCroomveys ‘coaching’ yet.

Lol, well this antiquated “sheep” doesn’t need a fancy metric chart to tell me how bad our antiquated offense was this year in sec games. Nice try though.

 

[patdog]

It's been a strange season. In the 4 games we've lost, the offense has been about as bad as Croom's offense was. In the 6 games we've won, we've averaged 40 points per game. And it's not like we've played total pushovers in the 6 we won either.

 

[ShrubDog]

S&P offensive rankings:

2006: 107
2007: 86
2008: 106

2009: 71
2010: 56
2011: 63
2012: 51
2013: 56
2014: 8
2015: 16
2016: 32
2017: 63

2018: 62

What does this mean? The following:

1) Croom sucked
2) Mullen's and JoMo's ratings were similar in the beginning with inherited personnel that didn't match their offense
3) Mullen's offense took off when he got his quarterback
4) 2017 and 2018 offensive output is similar, so weird
5) 2016 offense was better when we had Fred Ross and a healthy Donald Gray, so weird again

fart

Now, please stop spouting dumb offensive stats that cherry-pick crap and make JoMo out to be a bum. He ain't Croom, he's got the track record. S&P is a better advanced metric than all the simple crap people spew. We've played good defenses, and I remember saying to myself last year that Fitzgerald was literally all we had. He was our only offensive threat. And it's ok for a good defense to carry a team, 2010 rings a bell, that team finished top 15 which is likely where this 2018 team will finish.

Will the guy succeed? It will likely all depend on his quarterback, like every other offensive coach in the country. Recruit, recruit, recruit.

Carry on, haters. Lose to Arkansas or Ole Miss, I'll join you.

All of this is nice and it looks like you spent some time.

E L E V E N Points in SEC play


Jomo may turn it around next year or the year after but the problem is we suck now. N O W

 

[StillTbonewannabe]

You do realize that these stats take into account how good the defense you faced and where you played?

So if you want to use basic stats, this team scored 7 against the #11 scoring defense on the road. Last year we scored 3 points against the same statisical defense. What those stats say is we have played tougher defenses this year. Bama is more an anomaly last year. Everything else is pretty equal. People just can't wrap their heads around UK and UF actually being good this year when they had those as automatic wins.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

2016 offense WAS better. The numbers show that. So, knowing that, you have to account for why we went 5-7 rather than 8-4. That reason was the defense.

So what part of "you are wrong" did you misunderstand? I don't know if we were "much better" or just better, and don't care. We were in the sixties in 2017 and thirties in 2016. Take from that what you will. The likely reason is Fred Ross and Donald Gray.

Goodness. Please research what this stat algorithm is measuring. It’s a good stat and a good tool. For its formula, that is how it ranks teams. It also throws out garbage time points. A lot of alaytics do so and should. The problem is 2016 you have multiple games where the algorithmic formula should have been stopped. USA was a good offensive performance? No, it should have been a blow out the plays counted in this formula stopped by the 4th quarter. In 2017 you lose plays and points in an unusual LSU game which hurts the opponent strength component of the formula. BYU games in 2016 wasn’t a good offensive game but is going count more than the big win in 2017 because you went to OT. If you are playing more close games, like in 2016, especially vs weak opponents, the alogrthim has to account for more of those plays compared to a blow out win, like LSU in 2017.

The S & P also states that in 2017 we were ranked 37th in passing and Washington State (who was 2nd in the nation in passing last season) was really 63rd in passing last season. Does that mean we were a much better passing team in 2017 than WSU? If you think that’s true then you are just being foolish or dishonest.

It’s a good stat and tool to use, but the developer never intended or stated it was for ranking who is the best, in order. It was developed to make weekly predictions, analyze tendencies, break down match ups, etc. Tried to mirror what Vegas does. And that is a big part of what’s at the heart of the S & P. And while good, it hits about 51-54% against the Vegas spread. It’s a prediction tool not a set ranking.

 

[kired]

If in general you just want to compare our points scored vs. what our SEC opponents gave up in conference games (if I did this right). Our worst offenses under Mullen would have 2010 - 2013 by this comparison.

2018 - MSU vs. SEC = 11.2
2018 - Opponents defense = 20.0 (not including Arkansas or UM... they are giving up ~40ppg each)

If we average 40 in the next two games, it'll will likely be 18.4 vs. ~25-26 depending on what other teams do these next two weeks.

2017 - MSU vs. SEC = 26.3
2017 - SEC opponents defense = 26.6

2016 - MSU vs. SEC = 29.3
2016 - SEC opponents defense = 25.8

2015 - MSU vs. SEC = 26.3
2015 - SEC opponents defense = 24.4

2014 - MSU vs. SEC = 33.8
2014 - SEC opponents defense = 27.6

2013 - MSU vs. SEC = 22.4
2013 - SEC opponents defense = 28.7

2012 - MSU vs. SEC = 25.3
2012 - SEC opponents defense = 28.2

2011 - MSU vs. SEC = 18.1
2011 - SEC opponents defense = 22.1

2010 - MSU vs. SEC = 18.9
2010 - SEC opponents defense = 26.6

2009 - MSU vs. SEC = 22.5
2009 - SEC opponents defense = 21.8

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

It’s a good stat and tool to use, but the developer never intended or stated it was for ranking who is the best, in order. It was developed to make weekly predictions, analyze tendencies, break down match ups, etc. Tried to mirror what Vegas does. And that is a big part of what’s at the heart of the S & P. And while good, it hits about 51-54% against the Vegas spread. It’s a prediction tool not a set ranking.

Derp De Derp Derp

This guy wants some theoretically good offense, rather than one that can perform well against the competition.

Again, you are losing.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

All of this is nice and it looks like you spent some time.

E L E V E N Points in SEC play


Jomo may turn it around next year or the year after but the problem is we suck now. N O W

#11 SOS. Next question please.

By the way, 5 minutes copying those rankings above. Probably spent less time than you did coming up with the average points per SEC game.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

It's been a strange season. In the 4 games we've lost, the offense has been about as bad as Croom's offense was. In the 6 games we've won, we've averaged 40 points per game. And it's not like we've played total pushovers in the 6 we won either.

Couldn't possibly be good defenses, could it?

Kentucky #9
Florida #34 (outlier as I've said many times, plus former coach knew our personnel)
LSU #8
Alabama #5

But no....you think it's 'strange'. Derp.

 

[Drebin]

Derp De Derp Derp

This guy wants some theoretically good offense, rather than one that can perform well against the competition.

Again, you are losing.

No, he is right and you are losing, and embarrassing yourself in the process.

I can't wait until the point you do get onboard with the sentiment of some of us "haters." It will happen eventually. When it happens I'm not going to back off because of how insufferable you've been to those who see it already.

 

[patdog]

Those defenses aren't THAT good. Those defenses give up 17 points per game. We scored 16 total in 4 games against them. By any standard, that's pathetic. Even Croom could have done that.

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

No, he is right and you are losing, and embarrassing yourself in the process.

I can't wait until the point you do get onboard with the sentiment of some of us "haters." It will happen eventually. When it happens I'm not going to back off because of how insufferable you've been to those who see it already.

Oh look the resident JoMo hater.

Look, you and your sheep-herder pal should just acknowledge that there are viable statistics out there that don't back up your line of thinking. Move on.

Furthermore, anything less than 8-4 and I'll be there with you. However, that won't happen because we will physically assault Arkansas and Ole Miss and you know it.

 

[Drebin]

I'll take advanced statistics over simple ones any day of the week.

You'll take anything that buffers your argument.

As a wise man once said, "there are lies, there are damned lies, and there are statistics." You can find a stat or make a stat to support just about any argument in existence.

I recommend you trust what you see instead of digging for something that isn't there.

 

[Prediction? Pain.]

Goodness. Please research what this stat algorithm is measuring. It’s a good stat and a good tool. For its formula, that is how it ranks teams. It also throws out garbage time points. A lot of alaytics do so and should. The problem is 2016 you have multiple games where the algorithmic formula should have been stopped. USA was a good offensive performance? No, it should have been a blow out the plays counted in this formula stopped by the 4th quarter. In 2017 you lose plays and points in an unusual LSU game which hurts the opponent strength component of the formula. BYU games in 2016 wasn’t a good offensive game but is going count more than the big win in 2017 because you went to OT. If you are playing more close games, like in 2016, especially vs weak opponents, the alogrthim has to account for more of those plays compared to a blow out win, like LSU in 2017.

The S & P also states that in 2017 we were ranked 37th in passing and Washington State (who was 2nd in the nation in passing last season) was really 63rd in passing last season. Does that mean we were a much better passing team in 2017 than WSU? If you think that’s true then you are just being foolish or dishonest.

It’s a good stat and tool to use, but the developer never intended or stated it was for ranking who is the best, in order. It was developed to make weekly predictions, analyze tendencies, break down match ups, etc. Tried to mirror what Vegas does. And that is a big part of what’s at the heart of the S & P. And while good, it hits about 51-54% against the Vegas spread. It’s a prediction tool not a set ranking.

Definitely have to look at what S&P+ was designed to do before trying to compare it to traditional stats. And while it's predictive instead of backward-looking, it does try to get at what teams are playing the best football at any given time. From the horse's mouth:

I have created a system called the S&P+ ratings that can be used to make weekly predictions, analyze tendencies, break down matchups, and home in as closely as possible on a team’s true strengths, assets, and liabilities . . . . It is, at its heart, a tempo- and opponent-adjusted measure of what college football teams can most consistently do to win football games.

As for your Wash. St. example, I'm guessing the disparity goes to what people mean when they talk about what makes one team "better" at passing than another team. WSU was 2nd in the nation in total passing yards last year, but all that really means is that they pass the ball more than everyone else, not that they do so better or more efficiently than every other team. While they were 2nd nationally in total passing yards, that makes sense given that they were 1st nationally in total passing attempts. They were also 50th nationally in QB rating, 92 nationally in yards per attempt, 120th in interceptions, 83rd in adjusted sack rate, and 98th in sack rate on passing downs. MSU was likely ranked higher in Passing S&P+ because of efficiency -- we were 62nd nationally on passing downs last year, Wazzu was 106th. (Helps when your O-line is 7th nationally in adjusted sack rate like ours was.)

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Those defenses aren't THAT good. Those defenses give up 17 points per game. We scored 16 total in 4 games against them. By any standard, that's pathetic. Even Croom could have done that.

OK, I'll engage you further. The 3 big ones were on the road in hostile environments. Raining in Kentucky while they were peaking, Fitz throws 4 INTs at LSU, refs totally screw up in Tuscaloosa. JoMo dropped a turd vs Flarrda, can't debate that one.

 

[Drebin]

Oh look the resident JoMo hater.

Look, you and your sheep-herder pal should just acknowledge that there are viable statistics out there that don't back up your line of thinking. Move on.

Furthermore, anything less than 8-4 and I'll be there with you. However, that won't happen because we will physically assault Arkansas and Ole Miss and you know it.

Am I supposed to be offended by your childishness? I just want to make sure, because I'm actually laughing at you.

As for the next two games, yes, we should physically assault both teams. And I expect us to. But then again, we should have physically assaulted Kentucky and Florida too. Of course, folks like you have moved the goalposts after those results to argue that those were great teams - a Florida team that got pillaged by Mizzou and a Kentucky team that lost embarrassingly to Tennessee. We were double digit favorites in both of those games. By the way, since you love S+P so much, why don't you tell us what their "advanced metrics" said about expected outcomes in those games? I'll wait patiently for that.

In the meantime, this "hater" will be sitting in section 5 row 30 like he has every week for years, and he will be sitting in section Q of VHS on Thanksgiving...still supporting the dawgs and putting my money where my mouth is, but calling it like I see it as well.

 

[patdog]

I know you're not really this dumb, but I'll play along.

Raining in Kentucky - it rained on them too and they still scored 28

Fitz throws 4 INTs at LSU - that's pretty 17ing terrible and Croom-esque, which is my whole point that in those 4 games this is a Croom level offense
refs totally screw up in Tuscaloosa - refs didn't screw up, they did exactly what they intended to, but yeah, we should have had 14-17 points in that game

JoMo dropped a turd vs Flarrda - agree​

[SUB][SUP]<strike>
</strike>[/SUP][/SUB]​

[SUB][SUP]<strike>
</strike>[/SUP][/SUB]​

 

[Clarence Boddicker]

Am I supposed to be offended by your childishness? I just want to make sure, because I'm actually laughing at you.

If I were you, I'd be more offended at your insistence to question a valid point.

But then again, we should have physically assaulted Kentucky and Florida too.

We should have beaten Flarrda, as I've stated countless times. Got out-coached.