Can't look at first year records because Croom inherited a train wreck, while Arnett inherited a veteran laden team that won 9 games last season coming into an overall down year for the SEC. If Arnett is retained we might not win 2 games next season. He can not be retained.
I'm calling it. Croom > Arnett....
- Thread starter thekimmer
- Start date
Croom only had one season as good as this one. We're going to win 5 games this year, with an outside shot at 6. Croom won 3, 3, 3, 8, and 4. This is bad. Really bad. But Croom was even worse.
Absence makes the heart grow fond
We all know we were trying to appease the NCAA with Croom. This staff is terrible but he was slightly more terribler. At least Arnett had the luxury of taking over a decent team. Granted they had a few holes to fill but completely whiffed on that. Obviously. Somebody should go on Twitter and suggest Arnott try wearing the tan banner hat.
It’s the facial hair. Croom had it. Moorhead had it at times. Arnett has it. Instant fireable offense.
Croom inherited a program that won 2 games the previous season and 8 total in the last three. Arnett inherited a program that won 9 games last season and 20 the last three. I think he is worse than croom at this point in his tenure and don't want to see four more to find out if the trend continues.
Croom was worse and it’s not even close.
No fond memories for Croom. He was awful. I just think judging by what each man had to work with his first season Croom did a better job than Arnett is doing this season. MIght change if ZA gets more chances. I hope we don't get to find out.
Seeing those win totals from the Croom years makes me appreciate the last 14 seasons prior to this one even more. Adding in the 3 season prior, we were 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 8 and 4 for eight freaking seasons in a row. My stomach just turned.
Arnett next year would match those numbers, if he is given a next year.
Neither one work within their strengths and that's what makes them similar, thus the comparisons.
Croom was much worse. I remember going to watch State play at LSU. We lost 52-0 and we could barely complete passes and get first downs. Croom also never wanted to fire his assistants and said he would accept being fired if he was forced to replace them. This was the bottom.
If Croom inherited a 9-4 veteran team with an easy schedule like this one, he’d win just as many games, probably more.
So you're one those "blind" guys Croom was talking about ***
Let's hope we don't find out about what he can do in year 2
I still contend that the biggest leadership mistake that he made was changing too much from a program that was doing well by MSU standards. If he had simply promoted Spurrier to OC, and did his best to run the program in year 1, the way he saw Leach model it, he could both incrementally learn how to steer the ship and make small changes along the way that suited his style and program success. Two totally different situations that Croom v Arnett walked into.
When Croom came in, the program needed major change, he just wasn't capable of successfully leading through that change. When Arnett came in, it was allegedly for continuity and because it seemed like the best response to a crappy situation. He needed only maintain/learn this year, but he chose to change everything on offense and create a rebuild year out of thin air.
When Croom came in, the program needed major change, he just wasn't capable of successfully leading through that change. When Arnett came in, it was allegedly for continuity and because it seemed like the best response to a crappy situation. He needed only maintain/learn this year, but he chose to change everything on offense and create a rebuild year out of thin air.
They both had terrible uniforms, that were forced on us. Lot of similarities between the two, for sure. Mike Wright looks a lot like Omarr back there.
Only real difference is Croom took over a bad situation, whereas Arnett took over a good one.
Only real difference is Croom took over a bad situation, whereas Arnett took over a good one.
Don't challenge the spirits, man, we still have to play USM.
he should have been fired after the lost to Maine. No questions asked.
There isn't any "contend"-ing this - it's what happened. If anything, it's almost apparent that we should have just hired Spurrier Jr. straight up. You can't tell me that Keenum didn't know what Arnett planned to do, when he hired him. And that's the bigger problem.
Croom's hiring was about race from the start and firing him early would have blown up in our face . It was like hiring your wife's drug addict baby brother...we were 17ed any way we turned.
You can't just look at win totals, because that doesn't show the full story regarding what they inherited. Plus, for those first 3 seasons, he was playing with an 11-game schedule without FCS.
Spurrier Jr wouldn't have been much different. Another career assistant not ready for a prime time SEC job. He'd have been as overmatched as Arnett is.
At least we got the historical credit for that. In the case of Arnett, similarly, we did this for feel-good reasons (respect for Leach, continuity) and they moron completely changed everything instead.
Maybe, maybe not. He's a good bit older than Arnett and has been around some successful program. Hard to imagine he'd be worse. But at least it wouldn't be quite as self-imposed as this has been.
I really don't know what's worse, watching us this year, watching Moorhead pass in the rain with Fitz vs. Kentucky, or watching Croom continually drop Omarr back time after time.
Croom was a long time assistant with a solid track record in football who had been in the mix for other jobs. Nobody knew if he would be a good head coach until he was, and he wasn't. We absolutely took all the positive press that could be had from making an historic hire, but I don't think that we were just looking to hire a black dude...
The one thing that really scares me is we kept Croom for five seasons - what's to say we won't keep this crap for five seasons?
This thread is freaking depressing
It's hard to face the truth sometimes but sticking our heads in the sand doesn't change the facts
There were other black coaches that deserved the job more than him. There were multiple black assistants that had been in college football for sometime that deserved the job more than him. Templeton hired him because Alabama interviewed him. Those guys didn’t really pan out either, but they would’ve made a hell of a lot more sense than hiring a lifelong position coach from the NFL.
Croom's first year was significantly worse than Arnett's first year. But I think Croom had a better staff, at least on defense, and he was afforded more years to figure some things out. If he was fired after year one (like he should have been), you're probably singing a different tune.
I don't think in terms of "deserved". He certainly did not pan out and others did. Sometimes I wonder if MSU coaching decisions are studied at AD clinics for what not to do...
100000%.
When Bama passed on him, I knew we were hiring that dude. He was never even assistant. He didn't deserve to be a coach at all. We wanted the political and SEC points. LT had given up on football.
I really think we are going to see a mass exodus in the portal at the end of the season. That combined with the fact that’s our recruiting is now nonexistent, I don’t think the administration will have any choice. Also, templeton is not our AD anymore, thank god
Deserved is admittedly a bad choice of wording. “More qualified” works better
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.