Why I Don’t Believe In Ole Miss
A look at the early polls and preview mags show Ole Miss to be a consistent top ten pick. The conventional wisdom is that last year's team will improve with an experienced Snead under center and that they are the front-runner in the SEC West race. Admittedly, a lot of this has to do with their schedule.
I want to go on record here with this prediction (and you should know how we feel about predictions here ATVS): Ole Miss will not win the West.
I'm not really anti-Ole Miss. I don't dislike their team and I actually think Nutt is a terrific coach. Snead really is a hell of a quarterback who is going to make a lot of money one day. The Grove is a good scene, even if a tad overrated, but whatever. I'm even happy that they are getting preseason hype. It's been a long time since anyone wrote anything about Ole Miss, so it's nice that their fans get to puff out their chests a bit for once. Hey, enjoy the hype.
Just know, it's probably not going to end the way y'all think. Here's the rundown on why I think Ole Miss is not going to win the West.
Hey, last year wasn't that great.
Ole Miss went 9-4 (5-3) last year. That's a good year, but it's not superlative. They improved as the year went on, winning their last six games including a convincing Cotton Bowl win over Texas Tech. But they did lose to Vanderbilt and South Carolina. They weren't a top ten team last season. They won five games in a down year for the SEC which is nice, but no one's gonna write a song about that.
Let's also not forget that in 2007, Ole Miss went 0-8 in the SEC. Oh for eight. That 5-3 conference record was a massive improvement as the team enjoyed having a decent coach on the sideline. Now, it is time to introduce all of you to Bill James' "plexiglass principle" which essentially states that a team that has a sudden improvement is likely to slide back the next season. It's really a simpler way of saying "regression to the mean".
I believe that Ole Miss under Ed Orgeron grossly underachieved, so improvement was likely last season. But how much of this radical improvement was the team achieving its true potential and how much was just the excitement of having a new staff? Once the new coach smell is gone, does Ole Miss continue to play at the same level, which really isn't an elite level yet.
To compare this to LSU's rise in the late 1990's, progress is often sporadic and frustrating. DiNardo, who brought back the magic after the dismal Hallman years, followed up a ten win season in 1996 and a nine win season in 1997 with perhaps the most frustrating season of my life, the 1998 4-7 season. LSU was a preseason top ten and it was the first time in a long time LSU had any expectations. And we cratered. Hard. Saban followed his first ten win season with an 8-5 year. Both of our national title teams gave us forgettable encores the next year. Improvement is rarely linear.
Graduation hurts more than you think.
Ole Miss lost two first round talents in the offseason, one on each side of the line. That is not a loss a team easily recovers from. Snead is awesome, so their most important player returns. Ole Miss is relying on reliable production from Powe and Hardy on defense, and while both are supremely talented, the talented headcase can be a terrible thing to pin your hopes on.
But the real loss is Oher. Speaking of talented headcases, Oher finally put it all together last season and he was an impressive left tackle. In order to replace him, Ole Miss is playing musical chairs on the line. It's not like there is no talent or experience there, but it's hard to think the line will actually be better without Oher.
I should mention the offense does return the truly electric Dexter McCluster. If I'm a Rebel fan, he's the guy, outside of Snead, I am most excited about returning. The guy is an explosive player and a threat to score almost every time he touches the ball. He's also 165 pounds and it seems like it was a minor miracle he stayed healthy for a full season after some injury problems as an underclassman.
Everyone is better
A lot is being made of Ole Miss' schedule. And it is pretty light for an SEC school. They don't play either Florida or Georgia, the two best teams out East. They get LSU, Bama, and Tennessee (arguably their three toughest games) all at home. That's about as nice as a team can hope for in the SEC.
Ole Miss deserves a lot of credit for taking advantage of a down year, but it was still a down year. LSU suffered through its worst season in about a decade, Arkansas was awful at times, and Auburn was a soap opera. All three teams should be better this year. Auburn and Arkansas, in particular, should see massive improvement in their offensive outputs on the simple ground that it couldn't be worse.
There just won't be as many "easy" wins on the schedule. Sure, they don't have to play Florida, but they have to play improved teams throughout the year. I absolutely guarantee that Auburn's offense will be greatly improved this year and they will give everyone a much tougher game. Maybe not a return to the top 25, but Auburn certainly will not be the speed bump on the schedule they were last season.
....
There's just a lot of factors working against Ole Miss this year. 2008 was a near perfect storm for the Rebels, and it's difficult to believe all of the stars will align for them again. Will they be good? Of course. Nutt's a good coach, they have some playmakers on defense, and the best quarterback in the SEC who does not go home to sit by the right side of the Father.
But this is a team that has to improve in order to win the division, and I don't see that improvement. I believe that it will be a major challenge to merely maintain the massive improvement the program made last season. I actually believe Nutt is up for that challenge, but expecting more seems a tad unrealistic. The jury is still out on whether last season was a one-year aberration or a new level for Ole Miss. The most likely answer is that the truth lies somewhere in between.
Before we anoint Ole Miss is a top ten team, let's see it on the field first. It's not like it can't happen, but Ole Miss has done nothing in the past forty years of football to warrant the benefit of the doubt (yes, there was the obligatory cheap shot). I'm taking a wait and see approach to this Rebels squad, but color me skeptical.
OK, I promise not to talk about Ole Miss again for at least a week. I swear I'm not obsessed.
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well, huh
They get everyone at home. I mean Evil Empire, LS-poo, and Kiffykins are all going to Ole Miss. Oh. You noted that.
I know you probably feel like last year was an anomaly (yea I had to google that to spell it right, what about it?) for LSU but do you really see LSU becoming that much better than last year? And I love my Bama but do I honestly see us plowing through undefeated to the title game again?
Ole Miss deserves the looks they’re getting and part of the reason it is such a big deal is that people are USED to saying LSU should win the west and Alabama had a revival year last year that could be the precursor to something warm and fuzzy and glorious but then again may make me retreat to the deep dark unhappy places of my mind
Ole Miss deserves to be considered a favorite by a lot of people, if not for their surge last year than for LSU’s stumbles last year and Bama’s performance against the Mormons.
Mojo ball deserves to be in their court right now. But hey sometimes you don’t want the mojo ball
Just ask Mark Richt and his black jerseys
WARNING small parts that could be a choking hazard
Well, LSU went 3-5 last year
There, that’s the cheap shot for a non-Ole Miss fan that likes them. A few quibbles:
(1) Arkansas wasn’t “awful” on offense. They weren’t great, but it wasn’t like they were epically bad, and they were actually pretty decent passing the ball.
(2) I’m glad for the Opelika area that someone sees Auburn’s offense progressing, because I don’t. I don’t even see any reason to believe it will happen, except the principle that it can’t get worse, which isn’t a real good reason to say it’ll get better. I think the offense will probably be just as bad.
In any case, neither Arkansas nor Auburn will see “massive” improvement in the offense. Some, possibly. But they’re not going to be gaining 100 ypg more or anything.
I think Snead and McCluster give them enough to build on. I don’t have them winning the SEC West — but I do have them doing better than LSU. And for now, at least, I’m pretty comfortable with that.
Team Speed Kills. All SEC, all the time.
And the thing is..
I don’t think that highly of McCluster. I don’t recall all that many electrifying plays he made, and he was not well-suited for the wildcat qb role because he could not pass, not even a little. Plus, he fumbled.
Richard Pittman
by Richard Pittman on Aug 4, 2009 4:39 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, you obviously didn't watch a lot of Ole Miss football last season.
Dex had 600+ yards in both receiving and rushing with just a shade under 1,300 all-purpose yards on the year. That is nearly 100 all-purpose yards a game. The only other player in the SEC who could boast that type of production in 2008 was Percy Harvin. That’s a big deal.
Yes, he couldn’t hit the blind side of a barn with his passes and yes, he had fumbleitis. But, by the end of the season, the coaches stopped asking him to throw and he got much better at holding on to the ball.
Red Cup Rebellion - Changing the Culture of Ole Miss Athletics
Take a picture, trick.
by The Ghost of Jay Cutler on Aug 6, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions
One reason to believe Auburn will be better on offense: Gus Malzahn. He built the Tulsa offense, which put up a few points here and there. Auburn has a decent stable of running backs, and they are one Kodi Burns benching away from having improved QB play. They aren’t gonna be Florida, but it’s not hard to see an improved offense on the Plains. Arkansas, of course, is pinning their hopes on an improved offense on that Ryan Mallet guy. It is extremely likely both will see their offense improve.
‘LSU, without giving away too much of our season preview, isn’t likely to go 3-5 again in conference play. The defense probably won’t suck out loud again, and it’s also extremely unlikely we’ll have a QB who throws six pick-sixes on the season. Actually, my early pick of the West is Bama, then LSU, then Ole Miss.
I don’t think Ole Miss is going to stink or anything, but I do think there will be either slight regression or a repeat of 5-3 in the SEC.
Yes, you've made your feelings on Ole Miss abundantly clear.
The past week on Team Speed Kills has left little question as to where you stand on the Almighty Rebel Juggernaut.
As to Auburn, it’s almost impossible for them not to improve on offense. Last year they underperformed relative to talent to an almost unheard of level. It’s hard for me to see that as anything other than an outlier and not likely to be repeated.
I will say this. Because of the nature of Malzahn’s offense, gross offensive stats always get exaggerated. I have no doubt that Auburn will run for a lot of yards and throw for a lot of yards, simply because the whole focus of Auburn’s offense is taking as many snaps as possible. It’s the difference between a basketball team that runs the court and a four corners offense. The team that runs the court will end up with higher point totals even if their shooting percentage is lower, just because they take so many more shots.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Aug 4, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions
pardon my ignorance...
I am not as up to speed on the current depth charts and dynamics of every other team in the SEC yet, however I have a question.
Why is Malzahn’s arrival characteristically different from Franklin’s last year? I know Malzahn has a nice track record of two years (or is it three?), but half of that was w/ an powerhouse backfield and the other part of it was w/ a head coach who is a pretty good offensive guy himself. Can’t remember his name, but I heard some story about the Tulsa head coach being given credit for Rice’s turn-around a few years back as well as tulsa’s recent offensive success, ie it wasn’t Malzahn’s contribution that made the difference. Shout me down if that is off base.
I personally think that auburn’s offense will be better this year simply but don’t know that I would be willing to bet any money on it. So much of the Malzahn talk just sounds too similar to last year’s hype about Franklin.
One difference that I'd point out is that Tubbs put the kibosh on Franklin's system PDQ.
The question is will Chizik do that to Malzahn? The easy answer is, well of course not, we saw what happened last year at AU. But think about it. Tubbs handcuffed Franklin because Tubbs is a defensive minded coach, who wants to grind the clock and play ball control, and squeak out of games 3-2 style.
Chizik is also a former D-coordinator and while I don’t know much about him, I do know that he will catch some heat when Auburns defense struggles because they are on the field the entire game because of Malzahn’s offense. With Auburn’s lack of depth, this is a recipe for disaster on the defensive side of the ball. It will be a very interesting year in Auburn to say the least.
I think this is right
Great article at Smart Football (by far the best football site on the web – sorry Richard!) on how Tony Franklin had no say in what went on at Auburn. http://smartfootball.blogspot.com/2008/10/auburns-offense-might-be-bad-but-dont.html
After the unmitigated disaster of last year I suspect Chizik will let Malzahn run his system and not interfere.
by 4.0 Point Stance on Aug 4, 2009 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Does playing at Ole Miss really...
give them that much of an advantage? I have no doubt that being the home team is just about always advantageous, but the size of that advantage varies from place to place. For example, Death Valley, the Swamp, Rocky Top, Between the Hedges, and Bryant-Denny all seem to be fairly intimidating stadiums for players and fans alike. In contrast, Vaught Hemingway just doesn’t seem to be that intimidating. Has anyone been to enough of these venues to provide a competent comment on the subject?
by Displaced Tiger on Aug 4, 2009 12:35 PM CDT reply actions
Well, we could run the numbers (column idea!) contrasting the road and home splits of teams during their conference games over, say, the past five or ten years.
But short of doing that, I have been to a lot of SEC stadiums as a fan, but obviously not as a player. I can’t tell you how a venue intimidates a player, if at all (I would guess it does, but they would likely deny it). Ranking them most to least intimidating as a road fan:
Florida
Auburn
Tennessee
Bama
Ole Miss
Miss State
Vanderbilt
Never been: Arkansas, Kentucky, Georgia (I’ve been to the campus just not a game), South Carolina. I’m biased towards LSU, but I’d have no problem with a list that put the Swamp ahead of Death Valley for intimidation.

by 























