Mississippi State Football is a joke

[Across The Field]

I've said they've beaten more than 1 ranked team, which is fact. You can look it up if you want. And yes, obviously what Briles did was more impressive than Mullen, I would never dispute that.

And being ranked does matter, never disputed that. And Ferentz and Fitzgerald have done amazing work at their schools. Fitzgerald is a great coach. Fitzgerald has turned them into a top 50 program, which again is saying something since it's Northwestern, that is a hell of a job.

And in regards to Mississippi State:

Last 6 years(which is what I've claimed all along)

Massey Composite Average Ranking - 26.16
Sagarin Average Rank - 24.3
Anderson & Hester Average Rank - 28.6
Colley Matrix Average Rank - 29.3

Two AP top 15 finishes and another top 30 AP finish.

If YOU want to look at his entirety at Mississippi State, that's fine, then they aren't a top 30 program, but that isn't what I've been saying at all.

So since you can't prove that they've beaten more than 1 ranked team, for the sake of this argument they've beaten 1 ranked team. IN 7 YEARS. That is not a top 30 team. They're the benefactor of a shit schedule outside of Bama/LSU and the occasional good year from Auburn/Ole Miss/Arkansas. Otherwise, they have beaten N-O-B-O-D-Y.

They're at about the level of Northwestern, a decent top 50ish program. Nowhere near top 30. If he can manage to put together a couple more good seasons and actually beat someone, then you can start talking about them being a top 30 program overall.

 

[ericd7633]

So since you can't prove that they've beaten more than 1 ranked team, for the sake of this argument they've beaten 1 ranked team. IN 7 YEARS. That is not a top 30 team. They're the benefactor of a shit schedule outside of Bama/LSU and the occasional good year from Auburn/Ole Miss/Arkansas. Otherwise, they have beaten N-O-B-O-D-Y.

They're at about the level of Northwestern, a decent top 50ish program. Nowhere near top 30. If he can manage to put together a couple more good seasons and actually beat someone, then you can start talking about them being a top 30 program overall.

Then you can look like a dumbass and claim they've only beaten one ranked team when its a fact they've beaten more.

And you can continue to ignore literally EVERYTHING that suggests they are a top 30 program the last 6 years. Which is my point of him turning them into that. And Mississippi State is a significantly better program than NW has been the last 6 years. You'd be embarrassed if I gave you actual rankings/stats.

 

[BigFin]

Mississippi St. will always be the answer to the question: "Who had the #1 spot in the inaugural CF Playoff Poll?"

 

[Across The Field]

Then you can look like a dumbass and claim they've only beaten one ranked team when its a fact they've beaten more.

And you can continue to ignore literally EVERYTHING that suggests they are a top 30 program the last 6 years. Which is my point of him turning them into that. And Mississippi State is a significantly better program than NW has been the last 6 years. You'd be embarrassed if I gave you actual rankings/stats.

And yet you can't simply answer the question of how many ranked teams they've beaten. Looks like you're the real dumbass here.

"You're wrong and stupid but I can't prove you wrong..."

Again, they've beaten nobody and been beaten by almost anyone with a pulse. Not top 30, simply put. Many teams are behind them in the "rankings" average that are simply better programs. When the day comes that Miss St. beats ANYONE of real value, in conference or OOC, you let me know. Until then, they're simply not a top 30 program.

 

[ericd7633]

And yet you can't simply answer the question of how many ranked teams they've beaten. Looks like you're the real dumbass here.

"You're wrong and stupid but I can't prove you wrong..."

Again, they've beaten nobody and been beaten by almost anyone with a pulse. Not top 30, simply put. Many teams are behind them in the "rankings" average that are simply better programs. When the day comes that Miss St. beats ANYONE of real value, in conference or OOC, you let me know. Until then, they're simply not a top 30 program.

I have, and it's more than one. Keep looking like a dumbass. It's pretty easy to prove you wrong. Google is a great thing.

And again, they literally are top 30 the last 6 years in EVERY ranking or stat. But I'm anti B1G or whatever. lol.

 

[Across The Field]

I have, and it's more than one. Keep looking like a dumbass. It's pretty easy to prove you wrong. Google is a great thing.

And again, they literally are top 30 the last 6 years in EVERY ranking or stat. But I'm anti B1G or whatever. lol.

You haven't at all. It's been several posts now, so just post the actual number. Pretty simple and it'll keep you from looking like such a dumbass already. You can't call someone out for being a dumbass and then refuse to prove them wrong. All that does, as I mentioned, is make you look like a dumbass.

The B1G had literally the most ranked teams last year, yet you called them the 4th best conference. Can't have it both ways. Either rankings mean a lot or they don't.

I can make this simpler for you to understand. Miss St. plays in the SEC, which automatically gives them the benefit of the doubt among the pollsters. They don't have to beat anyone good (which, they don't), they just have to beat the 7-9 shit teams on their schedule every year and occasionally beat a decent team, and they'll get ranked. This has been their formula under Mullens. You put Northwestern in their position, and you'd be singing Northwestern's praises. They've accomplished nothing at all except for beating shitty teams. That doesn't make you a top 30 program, that makes you the beneficiary of a complete bullshit schedule and the position of sacrificial lamb to some of the top programs in the country. That's Miss St. You're being fooled into thinking they're some great team, when everyone else in this thread sees them for what they are - a paper tiger. If you can't understand that, that's on you. As I said, when they actually beat some good, ranked teams, you let me know.

 

[ericd7633]

You haven't at all. It's been several posts now, so just post the actual number. Pretty simple and it'll keep you from looking like such a dumbass already. You can't call someone out for being a dumbass and then refuse to prove them wrong. All that does, as I mentioned, is make you look like a dumbass.

The B1G had literally the most ranked teams last year, yet you called them the 4th best conference. Can't have it both ways. Either rankings mean a lot or they don't.

I can make this simpler for you to understand. Miss St. plays in the SEC, which automatically gives them the benefit of the doubt among the pollsters. They don't have to beat anyone good (which, they don't), they just have to beat the 7-9 shit teams on their schedule every year and occasionally beat a decent team, and they'll get ranked. This has been their formula under Mullens. You put Northwestern in their position, and you'd be singing Northwestern's praises. They've accomplished nothing at all except for beating shitty teams. That doesn't make you a top 30 program, that makes you the beneficiary of a complete bullshit schedule and the position of sacrificial lamb to some of the top programs in the country. That's Miss St. You're being fooled into thinking they're some great team, when everyone else in this thread sees them for what they are - a paper tiger. If you can't understand that, that's on you. As I said, when they actually beat some good, ranked teams, you let me know.

I refuse to tell you because it's funny thinking you're correct. I know for a fact they've beaten more than one ranked team. Only a dumbass would actually think they've beaten one, when it's proven they've beaten more.

Yes, and the B1G also had a bunch of shitty teams. They were the 3rd or 4th best conference last year, won't argue it either way, didn't think they were 1st or 2nd.

And jesus christ, here we go with you thinking I think they're great. I don't think they're a great program. I think they are a top 30 program the last 6 years. And literally EVERY ranking or stat is on my side, but I'm the biased one. lol.

 

[Across The Field]

I refuse to tell you because it's funny thinking you're correct. I know for a fact they've beaten more than one ranked team. Only a dumbass would actually think they've beaten one, when it's proven they've beaten more.

Yes, and the B1G also had a bunch of shitty teams. They were the 3rd or 4th best conference last year, won't argue it either way, didn't think they were 1st or 2nd.

And jesus christ, here we go with you thinking I think they're great. I don't think they're a great program. I think they are a top 30 program the last 6 years. And literally EVERY ranking or stat is on my side, but I'm the biased one. lol.

You refuse to tell me because you can't prove it. Truly the sign of an idiot - "I'm right and you're stupid but I can't prove it at all, but you're still the dumbass!"

The SEC also had a bunch of shitty teams, ones that Miss St. was able to take advantage of playing against. Just like they have for literally the entirety of Dan Mullen's tenure as coach.

Being a top 30 program means you're a damn good program. Simply put, Miss St. isn't a damn good program. They're better than what they used to be, obviously, and I'll give Mullens credit for pulling them up from the shit, but they're not a top 30 program right now. Do they have a decent overall record in the last 6 years? Sure. But other teams that have a worse record in the last 6 years are actually improving and are simply better programs. Miss St. is sitting in neutral. We thought they were special in 2014 but obviously we were wrong.

Are you not able to refute the fact that they've only pretty much beaten shitty teams? If you can't, then you're argument is moot.

 

[navamind]

Why should you get credit for playing a difficult schedule, if you lose all your difficult games?

That's where margin of victory comes into play.

 

[ericd7633]

You refuse to tell me because you can't prove it. Truly the sign of an idiot - "I'm right and you're stupid but I can't prove it at all, but you're still the dumbass!"

The SEC also had a bunch of shitty teams, ones that Miss St. was able to take advantage of playing against. Just like they have for literally the entirety of Dan Mullen's tenure as coach.

Being a top 30 program means you're a damn good program. Simply put, Miss St. isn't a damn good program. They're better than what they used to be, obviously, and I'll give Mullens credit for pulling them up from the shit, but they're not a top 30 program right now. Do they have a decent overall record in the last 6 years? Sure. But other teams that have a worse record in the last 6 years are actually improving and are simply better programs. Miss St. is sitting in neutral. We thought they were special in 2014 but obviously we were wrong.

Are you not able to refute the fact that they've only pretty much beaten shitty teams? If you can't, then you're argument is moot.

lol, the games have already happened, therefore, it's been proven as a fact it's more than one ranked win. If you're too stupid to figure out how to research it and find out for yourself, well, I just can't help you then.

And I've said they've beaten a bunch of shitty teams, and have lost to a lot of great teams. I'm not saying they are a great program. I'm just saying something that is backed up by every ranking and stat the last 6 years. I mean you think Tennessee has been a better program the last 6 years, that's laughable.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Just to make it clear to everyone in this thread...it's Dan "Mullen" not Mullens.

Carry on.

 

[Across The Field]

lol, the games have already happened, therefore, it's been proven as a fact it's more than one ranked win. If you're too stupid to figure out how to research it and find out for yourself, well, I just can't help you then.

And I've said they've beaten a bunch of shitty teams, and have lost to a lot of great teams. I'm not saying they are a great program. I'm just saying something that is backed up by every ranking and stat the last 6 years. I mean you think Tennessee has been a better program the last 6 years, that's laughable.

I don't think Tennessee has been a better program for the entire last 6 years, but they're undoubtedly a better program right now. They're one very good example of a team that is passing Miss St. by even though they've been behind them record-wise for most of the last 6 years.

The burden of proof isn't on me. You're the one that came out and said 1 ranked win was wrong, so the burden of proof is on you. That's how it works, very simple stuff here. How do you not know that?

 

[theboardref]

I don't think Tennessee has been a better program for the entire last 6 years, but they're undoubtedly a better program right now. They're one very good example of a team that is passing Miss St. by even though they've been behind them record-wise for most of the last 6 years.

The burden of proof isn't on me. You're the one that came out and said 1 ranked win was wrong, so the burden of proof is on you. That's how it works, very simple stuff here. How do you not know that?

I actually went through and did the research two years ago, it depends on if you are saying a team was ranked at seasons end OR at the time the teams played.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Btw...Dan Mullen's record vs ranked teams at Miss St is 4-29.

Best win is defeating #2 Auburn in 2014

 

[DHoey]

I actually went through and did the research two years ago, it depends on if you are saying a team was ranked at seasons end OR at the time the teams played.

At the end.

 

[Across The Field]

Btw...Dan Mullen's record vs ranked teams at Miss St is 4-29.

Best win is defeating #2 Auburn in 2014

Auburn was not #2 in 2014. Ranking at the time of the game is irrelevant, the only ranking that matters is the one at the end of the year. Auburn was #22 in 2014.

 

[theboardref]

Btw...Dan Mullen's record vs ranked teams at Miss St is 4-29.

Best win is defeating #2 Auburn in 2014

So a .137 winning percent against ranked teams, thanks.

 

[Shanemansj13]

Auburn was not #2 in 2014. Ranking at the time of the game is irrelevant, the only ranking that matters is the one at the end of the year. Auburn was #22 in 2014.

Yeah but when they beat them they were #2, so it doesn't tell the whole story but they still get credit for it.

 

[Across The Field]

Yeah but when they beat them they were #2, so it doesn't tell the whole story but they still get credit for it.

No they don't. If they were #2 when they faced them but then fell apart and ended the season unranked, Miss St. would not get credit for beating a ranked team. The only thing that matters is what they're ranked at the end of the year.

 

[bamabear82]

Auburn was not #2 in 2014. Ranking at the time of the game is irrelevant, the only ranking that matters is the one at the end of the year. Auburn was #22 in 2014.