Sunday Morning Quarterback: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Headlines: BC Beats BU 4-3 in 58th Beanpot Championship

Mandate For Change: Ole Miss

The Catalyst: Every year, Phil Steele flips out in his "Baylored" section over the axe that fell on David Cutcliffe in 2004 after his first losing season, only a year removed the Rebels’ best season in more than 30 years. Three years and one canned Cajun later, Phil, David and David’s new employer in Carolina look like the smart ones:

Ole Miss will never again be the national power it was in the fifties and sixties, and in place of that, it’s hard to imagine it being more successful over any period of time than in Cut’s six-year run –– no other coach since the sainted Johnny Vaught averaged seven wins here, or took UM to five straight winning seasons. Was that streak overly dependent on the genetically inevitable glow of Eli Manning? To some extent. But even as the legend of Eli is certain to obliterate the bounds of the reality (he was a very good college quarterback, but rarely great, especially prior to his senior year) as the years go on and the fluky Super Bowl wins amass, his last hurrah was Ole Miss’ seventh winning season in a row and its ninth in eleven years. Billy Brewer, Tommy Tuberville (impressively, in the wake of the recruiting shenanigans that cost Brewer his job, cut available scholarships almost in half in ‘94 and ‘95 and banned TV and bowl games both years) and then Cutcliffe consistently fielded competitive teams –– not contenders, but respectable outfits that could be counted on to hover around .500 in the conference and pay off in a bowl game. I don’t know if the goal in firing Cutcliffe was to take "the next step" or what, but after the disastrous experiment in diminishing returns under Orgeron, .500 in-conference and a steady diet of shady bowl games would get Houston Nutt coach of the year (it worked for Sly Croom! Eventually!)

The New Guy: At least Nutt, unlike Orgeron, is a known commodity in these parts, and –– coming from a program that looks exactly like Ole Miss in terms of resources and recruiting –– probably a more accomplished addition than he generally gets credit for:


"Big Three"=LSU, Auburn, Alabama
- - -

Nutt never took Arkansas over the top, but he almost broke even against the alleged division overlords and had the Hogs in a non-shady New Year’s Day game as often as not. Ole Miss hasn’t been close on either front, and went 3-7 against Nutt’s teams. If you consider Arkansas and Ole Miss basically the same school (again, Rivals’ database shows they’ve recruited almost identically since at least 2002), Nutt is an immediate improvement over Orgeron (that much is obvious) and at least the equal of Tuberville and Cutcliffe based on his record.

At least until they feel the itch for the "next step," anyway. But there is no precedent for a 1-7 disaster on HN’s watch, and ending their relationship with those sorts of seasons is the Rebels’ first priority.


If the first guy’s not open, Jevan, it’s okay. You’ve got six other receivers to check to. We don’t have to gain all 110 yards at once.
- - -

Immediate Impact or Slow Burn?: The one improvement Der Orgeron did make to the program was the overall talent level, thanks to top 30 recruiting classes from 2005-07 and a top 20 class in ‘06. And he won’t even get to reap the benefit of his best sell, Jevan Snead, the hot shot out of Texas –– Rivals’ third-ranked quarterback in the class of 2006 –– who bailed on the ‘Horns when it was clear he’d spend his career behind Colt McCoy. Nutt never had a quarterback with pocket presence at Arkansas: Clint Stoerner was a competent manager, Matt Jones was an athlete but an erratic passer and Mitch Mustain just tried to get the ball to the running backs and get out of the way. So the Nutt offense we’re used to has always been heavily reliant on big backs plunging between the tackles.

That’s not the talent he has here, though, not at the moment. Massive tailback Cordera Eason had a lot of hype coming out of high school a couple years ago, but the leading returning rusher is a wide receiver who had six carries, Dexter McCluster. Snead can allegedly move a little, but the initial book on him is that he’s a strong-armed, pocket guy, moreso than anyone Nutt had at Arkansas or than any of the ineffective flops that manned the position for Orgeron. Last year’s top five receivers return, too, and the new coaching staff favors opening things up a bit: the new offensive coordinator is former Rebel quarterback Kent Austin, who comes from two decades as a player and coach in the always high flying CFL. Presumably he remembers how to draw plays with only eleven men instead of twelve.

First-year starter in a new system, with familiar but rather generic receivers and no proven running threat? Taken with "most generous defense in the conference," which this one was last year almost across the board, five SEC losses seems assured, not including toss-ups with Arkansas and Mississippi State; then there’s Memphis and Wake Forest out of the league. Under the circumstances, any bowl game this year would be an enormous success. In three or four years, they can start worrying about which one.

0 recs  |  Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

How different is the history of the combatants and coaches involved if Ole Miss hadn’t missed two FGs and beaten LSU in 2003? Would Cutcliffe still be there with at least a divisional title and maybe an SEC championship (I can’t imagine he would have been canned in 2004)? Does the program build on that to become a 2nd tier power in the league (however one wants to define it)? How different does Saban look without that national title in hand? Does he ever go to the pros?

In retrospect, that one game that could have gone either way had some serious ramifications.

One positive would have been not having to hear LSU fans jabber about USC’s “one-peat” in 2005.

by DoubleB on Jun 18, 2008 11:59 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

It also would have affected the National Title game in another way. Ole Miss would’ve played their first SECCG against a surging Georgia team who would’ve likely jumped into the title game with a win.

Huge ramifications around the SEC, indeed.

by Hobnail_Boot on Jun 21, 2008 1:55 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cutcliffe

As usual, you so-called analysts fail to point out that Cutcliffe was a lazy recruiter, lost games to Memphis and Vanderbilt, and had a losing SEC record. Big wins were usually followed by crushing letdowns.
He was not fired for one losing season. He was fired for insubordination. The AD asked him to present a plan for improvement, and he refused. Yes, he was better than Orgeron, but who wouldn’t be better than Orgeron?

by Rebel111 on Jun 19, 2008 8:09 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

He got Ole Miss some of the best results of the past 30 years. Instead of firing him, couldn’t they have told him to hire an ace recruiter or two on the staff rather than give him the boot?

by Year2 on Jun 19, 2008 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That’s what Ole Miss did. It’s why they fired him. They said “you need to make these changes and present a plan for how to improve.” They knew the results were good in the W-L column in 2003 but also knew that some things had not changed (bottom 1/3 of the conference defensively, etc) and that Eli Manning was leaving. So Ole MIss asked for a plan to show how things would be done to continue to improve and win post-Eli. The response given was “nothing needs to change”. So the administration made the change for him.

by SPErebel on Jun 19, 2008 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks for the clarification. I don’t know much of the detail surrounding Cutcliffe’s tenure there and its subsequent end. From the outside, anyway, it still seems a bit hasty to ax the guy so soon but y’all know the politics of it better than I do.

by Year2 on Jun 19, 2008 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

That’s the thing most people still ignore in this situation. Cutcliffe was not fired for going 4-7 his last year. He was fired because he refused to make any changes. That’s why the process took more than 2 weeks of meetings. The AD met with him multiple times to discuss the issues he felt needed to be fixed, and Cutcliffe stood pat. Cutcliffe knew what he was doing, and he knew what the end result would be, so I think in effect he chose to be fired.

Of course, had they given him 1 more year, we’d have been without a coach the next fall, as Cutcliffe’s heart attack would’ve kept him from coaching in 2005. Of course, in hindsight, no coach might have been better than what we got.

Hindsight says he should’ve been given one more year, which would’ve allowed us to make a better replacement hire. However, I don’t think one more year would’ve changed our direction. Talent was shrinking, especially at the skill positions, and our defense was still struggling.

by rdevil84 on Jun 19, 2008 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It doesn’t make much sense considering the results of the Orgeron era, but all things considered, firing Cutcliffe was at least defensible and wasn’t that far out of line with what the rest of the SEC was doing. Consider:

-Mike Shula was fired for going 6-6, after going 10-2 the previous year.
-Tommy Tuberville was nearly run out of town after four straight winning seasons (and probably would have been if Auburn hadn’t been caught red-handed talking to Petrino.)
-Houston Nutt essentially got run out of town after winning 18 games in his last two years at Arkansas.

Yes, those are three better programs than Ole Miss, though I’d argue that all three of them (especially Arkansas) have expectations for the football program that are just as unrealistic. And only in one of those cases did the school in question clearly upgrade their coaching situation. For all the hype, I don’t think Petrino is that much better of a coach than Nutt.

by Tom (RFTN) on Jun 21, 2008 4:58 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lazy recruiter??

I have never understood this. Maybe compared to Orgeron, but if that’s the case everyone in the country but about five guys are “lazy” recruiters. His last 3 classes at Ole Miss ranked 33, 38, and 30 according to Rivals. His 2002 class only had 18 scholarships and it was a top 15 class on an average star basis. It’s not like he was recruiting at the Vanderbilt level.

by DoubleB on Jun 19, 2008 10:36 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

College Football Coverage
Start posting on Sunday Morning Quarterback »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Official Partner of CBS Sports