A Mike Farrell Sports Columnist Said Gators would be better off if Dan Mullen was still here

Gibberish

 

I think he's saying that you can't really judge a class for a couple years. I tend to agree and find it interesting that the recruiting services don't dig too deep on this.

Although one upside to NIL is that I've never seen signing day seem so irrelevant.

 

Most are in agreement about that. The difference with Mullen's classes is that they were clearly deficient come fall due to all the attrition and risky takes that never made it to campus. Then you have your normal attrition from what is left. The dudes classes were awful. At a minimum, Napier has brought in early contributors. Can he keep them on campus? That's not clear yet since has had his share of defections already. I'd like to see what his non transition classes end up doing long term myself.

 

And since Napier doesn’t sign the checks, there’s a certain amount of players that he doesn’t really have control over where they go.

 

To be fair, Mullen had to deal with that too. It just wasn't called NIL then.

 

It’s funny everyone keeps telling us that we would be better if he was here but no one is trying to hire him. Probably because any program worth a damn is afraid that he will turn them into Mississippi State.

 

If it was just OC, I'd be all over it. He coached and ran a good offensive scheme and seems able to adapt to what he has around him. If it was his offense and he was calling the plays, we would be better than the same under BN. No offense to BN, but Mullen is a good OC. That said, there are a lot of other factors in play here beyond play calling and ability to coach players up.

 

Mullen quit. How is someone unwilling to run a program better than someone willing? Asinine take.

 

Huh?

 

I think he interviewed, but the buyout is like receiving welfare. You have to look like you’re applying for jobs to keep getting paid.

 

Exactly. It’s so stupid to keep bringing this up. BN is here because Mullen was disinterested and quit on the program. I’m feel pretty certain that if Napier fails it won’t be from lack of effort.

 

You really find that statement perplexing???

We would have won more games solely based on his calling the offense. He's one of the best in the business IMO.

But that doesn't mean we would be better off as a program moving forward. His failings would still be present and would limit what we can do as a program moving forward. High floor low ceiling.

 

In another 3 or 4 years, when we'd be better off if Napier were still here, Farrell will be whistling a different tune.

 

I agree 1000%, Mullen lost interest and quit.

I saw it at the beginning of his last year when Marty & McGee show had all the SEC coaches come on (individual sessions with each). Most of them spoke about their program and what they were doing to enhance the program and team.. When Mullen came on, he did none of that, only spoke about his 'wakeboarding" (towed behind a boat) and doing a 360. He also spoke about his 'thumb wrestling'. When i saw that, I knew he was done. He obviously couldn't give a flying f*k about the future of our program. Then the rumors about NFL etc etc came about.

He quit on the team and was waiting to get fired to get his big payday.
Why this conversation about Mullen had been even started is asinine.

 

Yeah, I do find it perplexing. Napier’s inability to win games is why we’re probably never going to find that mythical ceiling you’re hoping for. Your argument is that we would be better off in the long run sticking with Napier, even though the norm under Mullen would be 8-10 win seasons. But if Napier lays a third egg in 2024, we aren’t going to see whatever you might think his long game is. And we shouldn’t have to wait six seasons to see what Mullen produced in his first.

 

Again, huh ? Somehow I thought wins were important.

 

Mythical players who never show up is not a class. An offense predicated on superior athletes doesn’t pare well with laziness and a lack of recruiting.

Bad hires got us where we are. Next year will answer more questions.

 

At the end of the day, Mullen’s ceiling is and was ten times higher than Napier’s.

 

I think we needed to move on from Mullen.

We needed to move on from Mullen. I was a big fan of his but even I got to the point where it was clear he had to go.

I believe that Napier has moved the infrastructure of the program forward substantially. I do not think that Mullen was capable of doing that because I don't think he gave a crap at the end.

Part of the process of moving away from Mullen was getting to a point where the program would be in the position to become more successful in the long term. I believe that if nothing else Napier has set the foundation for that.

Yes, I believe Mullen would have won a game or 2 that Napier lost. But I don't think he or the program would have been substantively better. Let's not forget, Mullen had a losing season to end his tenure. Would you have wanted to keep him if he went 6-7 the last 2 years again? That's the couple extra wins. I think not.

Nowhere did I say the norm would be 8-10 wins with him here. He would have suffered the same issues Napier has in regard to scheduling. Putting words in my mouth.

 

Don’t disagree with most of what you wrote. But it does not address the fact that there is no “long term” with Napier if he does not start winning games now, beginning with Miami next year. He gets fired. And the chaos continues. No fourth season without significant improvement in the third.