Verified Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

955 Sterling

About triangletiger

  • Rank
  • Birthday 02/14/1972

Contact Methods

  • AIM

Profile Information

  • Location
    Charlotte, NC
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,648 profile views
  1. triangletiger

    Evaluate the Progress of the Offensive Line

    Is the lack of push by our o-line on running plays by design or is it due to a lack of strength? Someone suggested awhile back that it may be by design for RPOs so that we don't get penalized for ineligible receiver downfield.
  2. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    Why would Gus tell his agent to call off the dogs? What motivation would he have to do that? I don’t think his intention is screw over Auburn; I think he truly believes that he is a top-tier coach who ought to be paid as such (whatever that amount may be). Still, I don’t think that the amount of money in and of itself is what’s driving him. His flaw is more of in the area of pride than greed.
  3. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    Agree on that point.
  4. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    Well, that’s your perception as an Auburn fan. Gus is from Arkansas and might see it differently.
  5. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    He probably would have, but he has a good agent who does his job well. He probably would have been okay with going to Arkansas too, if it came down to that.
  6. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    I’m no Gus apologist, and I’m certainly not blaming Sexton for doing what Gus pays him to do. If anyone is to blame in this, it’s the Auburn folks who signed off on this deal considering Gus’ inconsistent tenure st Auburn. I still don’t think that making money is Gus’ primary motivation. I think the contract was more important to him in his position as head coach because his perceived lack of job security was being used against him in recruiting than the dollar amounts involved.
  7. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    He does, but it will not last long if he’s not successful. I just don’t think he’s focused on the money.
  8. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    Of course the money matters, but I don’t believe that’s his primary motivation. I do think that he does have a big ego but having a lot of money is not what strokes his ego. He wants to be viewed as the smartest football coach who came up with this brilliant offensive system. I think he’s going to live or die by that system. If money were his primary motivator, he’d make the changes necessary to perpetuate keeping the money coming. Instead, he’s like Captain Ahab in Moby Dick and is going to go down chasing his ‘great white whale’.
  9. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    I don’t think Gus is in it for the money, but his agent certainly is in the business of getting the best deal for his clients.
  10. triangletiger

    Leath on Malzahn

    Neither Allen Greene nor any AD is going to go out on the limb of making a coaching change that involves a $32 million buyout without having the backing of the president. And the president is not going to go out on that limb of making that change without having the money lined up to support it. No matter what happens with this, it reflects poorly on Leath.
  11. triangletiger

    If you could have one Non-Auburn player...

    I'm thinking someone like Jadeveon Clowney would have been nice on our 2013 team and probably would have been a difference maker in the 2013 BCS Championship Game.
  12. triangletiger

    A Little Buyout Backlash
  13. triangletiger

    What is ESPN apologizing for?

    It would help if officials worked for the NCAA rather than the conferences
  14. triangletiger

    What a horrible place to be

    It doesn’t change anything for me as far as trusting Gus to get us where we want to be, but I’m really trying to savor this win. That was an incredible comeback! And I had the pleasure of attending it in person with my dad and two of my sons. The most exciting Auburn game I ever attended was 2004 LSU, but this one will rank up there pretty high for me just because of the circumstances surrounding it. Living in Charlotte, I can usually only make it to 1 game a year. I’m sure glad it was this one in 2018.
  15. triangletiger

    Article "shut down the prayer"

    Just read this in a devotional and found it to be relevant to the direction this thread has taken: Case for the Creator Along with many naturalists, Richard Dawkins believed that the origin of life is merely an impression of design and there is no need at all for a divine watchmaker. In his book, “The Blind Watchmaker” he writes, “the only watchmaker in nature is the blind forces of physics …...Natural selection, the blind, unconscious, automatic process which Darwin discovered, and which we now know is the explanation for the existence and apparently purposeful form of all life…” Therefore, one can argue that if everything can be accounted for by the naturalistic processes, then there is no need for a Creator. However, naturalists such as Dawkins who insist that the naturalistic evolution operates merely on the principles of time and chance forget that it also depends on the laws of a universe that is not the product of time and chance. Physicist Stephen Barr in his book, “Modern Physics and Ancient Faith” writes, “What Dawkins does not seem to appreciate is that his blind watchmaker is something even more remarkable than Paley’s watches. Paley finds a “watch” and asks how such a thing could have come to be there by chance. Dawkins finds an immense automated factory that blindly constructs watches and feels that he has completely answered Paley’s point. But that is absurd. How can a factory that makes watches be less in need of explanation than the watches themselves?” In other words, the naturalistic point of view, far from disproving the need for a Creator, arguably does nothing more than push the argument from the primary to secondary causes. Furthermore, the naturalists very often would claim that the reason they exclude the primary cause is because it cannot be quantified, measured, or experimented on. So a question arises. Can science detect the divine watch-maker concerning questions of origin? The naturalist believes that just because he can understand the mechanical processes of life, he is justified in concluding that there is no God because science cannot detect God in it. This reasoning commits a logical error that confuses mechanical processes with primary causes. Let us say that a kid would like to know who designed a train engine. One way of doing it is by examining the whole train and the processes of how it works and then proclaim that there is no Mr. Train inside the engine to make it move. Besides, if the kid grows up to study train engineering, he would discover that he did not need to introduce Mr. Train as an explanation for its working. His understanding of the impersonal processes would be enough to do that. However, if he concludes that his understanding of how it works has now made it impossible to believe in the existence of a Mr. Train who made the engine in the first place, then this would be false. Had there never been a Mr. Train to design the mechanical processes, none would exist for him to understand. In the same way the creator cannot be expelled from the theory just because evolution may be a mechanism for the origin of life. It is important to note that God is not a mechanical process but an agent who is the reason behind the processes. Now, both the agent and the mechanism are involved in the comprehensive explanation of the existence and working of the universe as a whole. In fact, Life itself warrants the existence of a personal Creator. Therefore, it makes sense when the Bible says, “In the beginning God created…”