Null



VAtiger12

Verified Member
  • Content Count

    267
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

67 Sterling

About VAtiger12

  • Rank
    Asst Coach

Recent Profile Visitors

563 profile views
  1. The deer antler spray did a heck of a job as well.
  2. I would agree that OSU probably rocks us. But look at the playoffs for most of the years it's been in existence so far and you'll see a lot of really ugly first round matchups. So there are plenty of teams getting high (top 4) rankings and not really being a top 4 team. I'm not wanting to get too deep into the weeds on this, but this is where I'm coming back to the complaint about salary. People complain about the Top 10 salary and I just don't think that really has any bearing. If he was make $5m a year and we were getting these results would we all be content on the board that "hey we aren't beating LSU and UGA but we aren't paying like them either." .. doubtful. I believe he makes the 3rd most in the SEC West and I'd say during his tenure we have been about the 3rd best team in the West. Does that justify his salary?
  3. Having a team ranked in the top 10 and actually having a top 10 team are not the same. I'd argue that if you swapped Auburn and Clemson's schedules this year we'd have been 13-0 and in the playoffs. Before people jump on me, I'm not saying we are Clemson or that we would have beaten them or what have you. But the poll is based on the season and schedule you played. A couple of SEC teams could have walked through the ACC and even Big 12 unscathed this year. (I'd argue also the Pac 12 but that's probably up for discussion) So teams with great records are going to get a great end of season ranking. That doesn't in any way mean they are a top 10 team with respect to how good they are.
  4. I do feel like we as a group get a little too wrapped up in what he's being paid. We could pay him 10 or we could pay him 5 and the issues are the issues. I know people like to think that 'top 10 salary equals top 10 results' but if you look across so many other professions or even just in sports, a guy is paid what he was able to negotiate, not some kind of a direct ranking in relation to his peers.
  5. I think it's far from a given that a new coach would come in and keep Steele. Yes, he has kept our defense at a high level but there will be a good level of turnover on the defense this season anyway and hamstringing a new coach with a coordinator he didn't hire is a good way to get us into some kind of a mess with a coach. We all may like Steele a lot, but there's a few good defensive coaches in college football who could come in as well.
  6. I won't be that hard on Grimes but basically pass on Searles for me. Miami's lines have not been good and their OL recruiting hasn't been all that great either. At least Grimes gets his guys fired up and playing hard, even if the talent isn't always there.
  7. I'm not saying we shouldn't have still beaten Tennessee. You've got my vote all day on that one. It's still college football, how did Purdue beat Ohio State? It happens. The entire point I was trying to make was that our losses on the recruiting trail have led to our inconsistency more than a lot of other factors have. To talk about the MSU point, I feel like our offensive line is more or less at MSU's level and well.. it's shown all year.
  8. Because they aren't that far behind talent wise, unfortunately.
  9. I 100% agree. So we need to be working that much harder to out recruit these guys. But a lot of people it seems are counting out 'how Bama and UGA are doing' in relation to us when they seem to think we can just find more of the guys they are taking from us. There's a finite level of talent and because we are losing more of that talent than ever before, we are becoming inconsistent.
  10. Okay so I will amend to say that we have clearly adjusted over the last 2 seasons to throwing the ball more due to scheme changes. To address what you mentioned about talent, it kind of proves my point. We ended up in a dog fight with two teams that while we are more talented than them, not as much as we could be. Take any 2 players in the top 8 of Alabama's class in each of the last 3 years and take one from UGA in each of the last 3 years and you have 9 more top level players (scattered over freshman, sophomore and junior classes) on the roster than we currently have. Doesn't even matter the positions. Now I bet we don't lose either of those games. We would have ... a 9 win season. Suddenly we are a lot more 'consistent'. Amazing how that worked out.
  11. We've thrown the ball a lot more the past two years because it's been a part of a scheme change. I don't think that's up for debate? Or are people so blinded by Malzahn hate they aren't seeing that.
  12. I don't think there's as much development happening in college as some people want to think. I think it's mostly that good players come in, a lot of muscle gets added, they learn some techniques and they are out. I think there's only a select few who are really making big jumps. I see that all across college football, Auburn is about the same as most schools in that regard. Scheming, that's true and where Malzahn has to keep making strides but both Alabama and Georgia are paying to have a massive staff to help with that kind of thing. We are not, and probably won't do that in the foreseeable future. We need to understand that. It's really expensive to do that and you start to get into 'tail wagging the dog' territory where the tail is the football program and the dog is the school. We threw the ball this year a lot more than we did in 2013, so it's not that we aren't changing scheme. We just aren't as deep and consistent those guys are, mostly due to roster talent and depth. Practice I assume is more or less the same across college football with respect to the amount of time and intensity, etc.
  13. There are other issues, sure. I said that Malzahn wasn't perfect. But to say that's it's 'just' that Alabama and UGA are adjusting their schemes to fit their players is just blatantly not true. They are recruiting significantly better players in general.
  14. The only thing I think a lot of people don't take into account with Bama/Saban and now magnified by UGA/Kirby is that.. there is a finite level of talent. If UGA and Bama are taking not just top classes but truly off the charts levels of talent, there's just a lot less talent to be recruited by others. If you imagine even a few of Saban's big pulls a few years ago going to Auburn (Kuandjo, Yeldon, Foster- even if now it looks like it's probably fine to have missed on him) you talk about having a different level of talent that probably accounts for a couple games here or there over 3 years. Which, shocker- leads to 9-10 win seasons instead of 8 win ones. Sort of like where we were during the pre-Saban years. That isn't to say Gus is perfect. His mindset and his schemes need work. It also means that we need to be hiring not just good-great recruiters but top of college football recruiters to come here. We need to start winning those recruiting battles more. We have good classes and sometimes great classes but not those elite level classes. I don't think as much 'development' is happening in college ball as people think. Definitely some, but not the majority. So I don't think we need to just throw our hands up and say "Alabama and Saban are just too good, we are fine with where we are" but we need to realize that the level of recruiting prowess Bama and now UGA have is a big factor in our inconsistency. A lot of average coaches in college football win because they have more talent than their opposition. I think the top 5 teams in the SEC this year probably would have looked about the same as Clemson or Notre Dame did with their schedule this year, for instance.
  15. Yeah I haven't agreed with a lot of the stuff said here all day but I do with this. If Greene is "just staying out of it" because Malzahn wasn't his hire or this wasn't his bed than he was a poor choice for an AD. It's a leadership role. Be a leader.