Questions for the historians

[John Lorry]

I noticed recently that we have the worse overall record in football in the entire SEC:

#	SEC	Record	Win %	SEC Championships	Claimed National Championships
1	Alabama	864–326–43	.718	25	16
2	Tennessee	820–371–54	.680	13	6
3	LSU	771–404–47	.650	11	3
4	Georgia	788–413–54	.649	12	2
5	Auburn	749–427–47	.632	8	2
6	Florida	701–404–40	.630	8	3
7	Texas A&M	718–466–48	.602	0	3
8	Arkansas	700–484–40	.588	0	1
9	Mississippi	655–504–35	.563	6	3
10	Missouri	668–541–53	.550	0	0
11	South Carolina	587–561–44	.511	0	0
12	Vanderbilt	589–599–50	.496	0	0
13	Kentucky	593–605–44	.495	2	1
14	Mississippi State	541–562–39	.491	1	0

<tbody>
</tbody>

While Missouri and A&M (and even Arkansas and USCe) should/could be omitted, the point remains that we don't have a winning record against any of the teams in the SEC save for Kentucky and Vanderbilt. Looking back, it appears that from around 1956 to 1991, we absolutely sucked. Sure there are a couple of exceptions here and there, but overall our record was abysmal for 35 years (162-211-9). Prior to Jackie, we had gone to seven bowl games in 96 years.

Of course, during that 35 year time period Bear Bryant, John Vaught, Paul Dietzel/Charlie McClendon, etc. all landed at their respective schools and the rest is history.

In my uninformed point of view, it seems like all that separates MSU from having the same level of success during that period is pure chance (i.e. the coach). And, apart from Ole Miss, I think one could make an argument that Alabama, LSU, Florida, have enjoyed recent success in large part due to historical performance (and this isn't a needless dig at UM, but they haven't had the historical or recent success at the level of UA, LSU, UF). As an example, and I know it may be just another huge coincidence, but if Steve Spurrier doesn't play at Florida in the 1960s, does he come back to Florida in the 1990s and win the NC in 1996?

So is our football program where it is today due in large part to bad luck? Hiring ****** coach after shitting coach and creating a 35 year blackhole while other schools lucked up with the right hire? Were there other things that caused this? Or does this not have anything to do with where we are today?

TLDR - Slow season.

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

The complacency in our department between firing McKeen up until firing Croom is staggering. We had back-to-back coaches in the 1950s who went on to win national titles at other schools, but the truly awful coaches were allowed to stick around for 5 or 6 years. I think if we had not tried to fight the NCAA during the Tyler years the 1980s would have turned out very differently.

Even our winningiest coach does not have an overall winning record. It's highly likely Mullen will surpass Jackie by his 10th year at State (assuming we don't fire him first**), while Jackie coached here for 13 years.

 

[Digging dog]

The valleys were deep. Tech and 10 comes to mind.

 

[Dogariffic]

Administration apathy and not being competitive due to good old boy hires.....our AD from 1988 to 2008 was who? That's right Larry Templeton. Whether you like him or not you really can't say he truly got the job done.
Edited to add ..... Something like 32 coaches in 121 years of football....3.something years per coach average means we have not consistently found winning leadership..... But that's kinda obvious!

 

[John Lorry]

The complacency in our department between firing McKeen up until firing Croom is staggering. We had back-to-back coaches in the 1950s who went on to win national titles at other schools, but the truly awful coaches were allowed to stick around for 5 or 6 years. I think if we had not tried to fight the NCAA during the Tyler years the 1980s would have turned out very differently.

Even our winningiest coach does not have an overall winning record. It's highly likely Mullen will surpass Jackie by his 10th year at State (assuming we don't fire him first**), while Jackie coached here for 13 years.

I definitely see your point. Looks like Wade Walker in particular got the ball rolling in 1956 - he goes 22-32-2 and then sticks around as AD until 1966 while ole Paul Davis graces us with a 20-38-2 record (9-22-2 conference).

Then we turn around and do the same thing with Shira. Shira gives us a 16-45-2 overall record from 1967-1972, and then remains as AD until 1976. Just what the **** was going on. Can you imagine keeping a coach around for 5 years (even Crxxms wasn't this bad, though he was close):

Year	Team	Overall	Conference	Standing	Bowl/playoffs
Mississippi State Bulldogs (Southeastern Conference) <small style="font-size: 11px;">(1967–1972)</small>
1967	Mississippi State	1–9	0–6	T–9th
1968	Mississippi State	0–8–2	0–4–2	9th
1969	Mississippi State	3–7	0–5	10th
1970	Mississippi State	6–5	3–4	T–7th
1971	Mississippi State	2–9	1–7	10th
1972	Mississippi State	4–7	1–6	9th
Miss State:	16–45–2	5–32–2
Total:	16–45–2

<tbody>
</tbody>

ETA: Shira's **** record.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

This is a depressing thread.

 

[John Lorry]

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.**

 

[TBone.sixpack]

Oh I am well aware of it. I was a Freshman the year of Tech and 10.

Wasn't bashing your thread. Just stating the obvious. Being a State fan is not for the weak.

 

[John Lorry]

Oh I am well aware of it. I was a Freshman the year of Tech and 10.

Wasn't bashing your thread. Just stating the obvious. Being a State fan is not for the weak.

I was being sarcastic. And yeah, after looking at all this **** I had some real questions as to why I subject myself to it.

 

[RocketDawg]

That's when I was at State, so it's easy to see why I wasn't all that interested in football after I graduated in 1970. Took until the mid-90s for me to redevelop an interest, and that was when my son enrolled at MSU.

 

[engie]

Many years of really, really bad scheduling plays a role as well.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

someone posted our home and away games versus Ole Misses home and away opponents from back in the day and it was a joke. Seemed like we always had the toughest opponents in the conference and more times than not played them on their home field. In contrast OM had some freaking padded joke *** schedules.

We have been playing from behind the 8 ball our entire existence.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

Dudy Noble was known to schedule games on the road. Take a look at our schedules in the 1950s-- playing at LSU year after year after year so we could be in the black.

Link: Here.

 

[dawgoneyall]

We lost the Sixties when we fired the head coach the day before signing day.

 

[OleMissLogo]

someone posted our home and away games versus Ole Misses home and away opponents from back in the day and it was a joke. Seemed like we always had the toughest opponents in the conference and more times than not played them on their home field. In contrast OM had some freaking padded joke *** schedules.

We have been playing from behind the 8 ball our entire existence.

I can assure you there aren't large differences between historical schedules for Ole Miss and State.

Ole Miss didn't play Bama in Oxford until 1993 when the SEC took control of conference games (41st meeting). We played in Tuscaloosa 16 times before Oxford.

It's even worse with LSU. We played in Baton Rouge 53 times before '92, but only Oxford 7 times. From 1936-1951 we played only in Baton Rouge (minus 43 and 44 due to WW2).

Tennessee: played in Knoxville the first 23 meetings, only played in Oxford 5 times total (out of 64 meetings), and we would consider games in Memphis to be our "home" games.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

You assure me? Get the 17 outta here. Don't you have someone to harass on Twitter?

 

[OleMissLogo]

Yes I can assure you. As in I've actually done the research. I've looked at Ole Miss' schedules and State's and Bama's and LSU's etc. and so on.

But a cheetin bear said it so it must not be true!

 

[ArcherSPS]

You have 15,000 posts since 2014 on a MSU message-board.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

Look Cybil. I don't give a 17 about your opinion. So sell your Smarm elsewhere.

 

[Ishmael]

Since you've done the research, can you post the information? I remember seeing something showing Ole Miss SEC opponents and records historically compared to States, and it seems like State played Alabama and others many more times than Ole Miss. But my memory may be faulty and I don't feel like duplicating the work you've already done.

Edit - I decided to look myself. For the top 5 SEC teams based on historical winning percentage:

Alabama - 99 games against MSU; 60 games against Ole Miss
Tennessee - 45 games against MSU; 65 games against Ole Miss
LSU - 109 games against MSU; 104 games against Ole Miss
Georgia - 23 games against MSU; 45 games against Ole Miss
Auburn - 89 games against MSU; 40 games against Ole Miss

So, not totally lopsided, but Ole Miss was able to avoid a lot of the best teams a lot more often than State.

Plus, on the flip side, MSU has played Vandy 22 times while Ole Miss has played them 90 times.

 

[OleMissLogo]

That's an error. It's really around like 250. Just ask Kurt.

 

[engie]

^ Hillary assurances*

There is a big difference in the scheduling of the two schools providing by far the largest portion of the overall record discrepancy. You had John Vaught -- and you had 30 years of easy schedules while we did Bama, Auburn, LSU, and OM back-to-back every season. That combined with the 34 game swing from our 75-77 forfeits provide the difference.

As I posted before(TBone referenced above) -- when I interpolated actual on-field WP from one team over to the other -- the difference wasn't nearly what the simple numbers would have you believe.

 

[engie]

VS the Big6:

You played Bama 59 times -- 36 times in Alabama.
We played them 96 times -- 59 times in Alabama.

You played Auburn 40 times -- 21 times in Alabama.
We played them 88 times -- 62 times in Alabama.

You played LSU 99 times -- 64 times in Louisiana.
We played them 106 times -- 67 times in Louisiana.

You played Tennessee 65 times -- 54 times in Tennessee.
We played Tennessee 45 times -- 33 times in Tennessee.

You played Georgia 45 times -- 24 times in Georgia.
We played Georgia 23 times -- 14 times in Georgia.

You played Florida 24 times -- 14 in Florida.
We played Florida 54 times -- 32 in Florida.

You played the Big6 332 times -- 213 times in their home state.
We played the Big6 412 times -- 267 times in their home state.

The Big6 makes up 5 of our top 7 most played series -- along with you and Tulane. They make up 2 of your top 7 along with us, Vandy, Tulane, Arkansas, and Memphis.

Our road game number is closer to your total meetings against the elites -- than your overall number is to ours. But, yeah, other than that -- SOS is identical.

You've played Vandy 86 times compared to our 22. Your permanent opponent, right?
You've played Kentucky 42 times to our 43.

To be clear -- I'm faulting our scheduling model for contributing to our perception. Not OM's. OM's plays equally in the positive direction.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

Looks like a pretty big difference to me.

 

[tatedog]

I was just sitting back waiting on you to rip them a new one on this. Well done.

 

[Digging dog]

"Shirley" didn't help scheduling Maine when they were a powerhouse ****

 

[was21]

From the time Vaught took over from 1947 thru 1970 or whatever...check the schedules of these teams and observe how State got screwed along that line. OM didn't play Alabama or Auburn..for example. Instead played Vandy, Georgia when they weren't worth a ****, etc. The only games they played perrenially that gave them a game were lsu, tennessee, and maybe another one or two..thx.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Otherwise, it's not easy to be a State Fan.

Never has been, in my life time.

Other than a few seasons, AND much of the Kang's reign, & until The Mullen Era.

It's not easy being Maroon.

 

[TaleofTwoDogs]

I wondered how long this thread would go before it became the usual pissing contest between State & UM. The scheduling disparity was a symptom of a greater disease at State, namely instutional apathy due to poor leadership and compounded by the limited Mississippi capital funding for the step-child, MSU. Between the good ole boy network and later Templeton's lack of vision and aggression, we were pushed to the bottom the the SEC pile and stayed there until Gen Foglesong changed our future. The ninja, Mullen, Sticklin and others have that winning attitude and are backed by SEC Network money that has elevated us to mid-pack parity.

 

[SwampDawg]

Ah yes, Paul Davis. We would always punt on third down - "We have to play for the breaks," which meant we weren't good enough to get a first down. We would go to the games not hoping to get a win, but just to beat the point spread. Then in the Sunday Clarion Ledger, sports writer Carl Walters would say something like "Mississippi State really looked good yesterday while losing to (fill in the blank) The spread was 28 and they only lost by 21." We all drank a lot.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

Dudy Noble was known to schedule games on the road. Take a look at our schedules in the 1950s-- playing at LSU year after year after year so we could be in the black.

Link: Here.

Templeton had no problem selling out a couple of Florida home games either.

 

[TBone.sixpack]

If State-Ole Miss 'pissing matches' annoy you then Internet message boards may not be the place for you.

Our histories are interconnected. And for a large part of our history we have gotten the **** end. Hell even today the local State paper and media STILL try to keep that old order as far as the state hierarchy.

I for one am glad State people are calling ******** and fighting back.

 

[John Lorry]

I wondered how long this thread would go before it became the usual pissing contest between State & UM. The scheduling disparity was a symptom of a greater disease at State, namely instutional apathy due to poor leadership and compounded by the limited Mississippi capital funding for the step-child, MSU. Between the good ole boy network and later Templeton's lack of vision and aggression, we were pushed to the bottom the the SEC pile and stayed there until Gen Foglesong changed our future. The ninja, Mullen, Sticklin and others have that winning attitude and are backed by SEC Network money that has elevated us to mid-pack parity.

This is the kind of information I was looking for.

It looks like we had a systematic failure at the administrative level for 3+ decades, while other schools in the SEC were heavily investing in their football programs. I think it's difficult to argue against the concept of "success breeds success" in this instance.

Kind of puts everything in perspective as we're clearly not just overcoming the general money/resource disparity but also remediating decades of neglect and self inflicted damage.

 

[FlotownDawg]

And we named a building after that guy!

 

[John Lorry]

Ah yes, Paul Davis. We would always punt on third down - "We have to play for the breaks," which meant we weren't good enough to get a first down. We would go to the games not hoping to get a win, but just to beat the point spread. Then in the Sunday Clarion Ledger, sports writer Carl Walters would say something like "Mississippi State really looked good yesterday while losing to (fill in the blank) The spread was 28 and they only lost by 21." We all drank a lot.

Wow.

I can't think of many other institutions, business or otherwise, that would have a similar tolerance for failure of as we apparently did. It almost seems like it was intentional, or at least grossly negligent.

I guess in most circumstances, SEC programs that are demonstrably more successful on a consistent basis have had the benefit of years of good players, strong fanbases (which in turn means more money and resources), and obviously coaches. In other words, its cumulative and that makes it all the more difficult to turn the program around to reach "critical mass."

This is probably old news for most on here, but I definitely never realized the extent of the hole we dug ourselves into.

 

[vhdawg]

Don't forget the Bob Tyler forfeits. We gave up 19 wins between 1975-1977, so the on-the-field record is actually about 14 games above .500.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

Hey look, facts!