Updated 12/15- Recruiting update and Numbers breakdown

[alexava 6,973]

Actually, ellitor, I disagree with your assessment of Cecil Newton's response to the question of whether he took money or not. If he emphatically says, "No" I guarantee you that leads to another question, then another, then another and in the end he looks like he's dancing around the truth. His reference to NCAA findings, who incidentally, investigated the matter for over a year put an abrupt end to the questions right there! In fact, I'll go on record and say... I thought his handling of that question was nothing short of brilliant and it was probably given to him by someone a whole lot smarter than Cecil..aka known as legal counsel.

Well I am glad you see it that way Blue but I and probably a lot of other people think it looked like he had something to hide. Especially because he laughed a little deviously when he gave his answer like he knew he got away with something. I am a master manipulator and unfoertunately used to lie quite a bit so i know how to manipulate words to my advantage. When i used to lie I would have answered the way Cecil did if i got away with something I was not supposed to do. Whether they were asked or not, answering the way Cecil did creates more questions and doubt than simply and calmly saying no.

this sounds very interesting?????

[ellitor 33,087]

Guys stop overanalysing please. I did not say that PM committed to LSU because of the investigation. It is just a coincedence that he was a strong AU lean then picked LSU is all I was saying...Also in terms of Miller committing to LSU, you cant compare LSU's situation to Auburn's. LSU got a slap on the wrist compared to what would have happened to AU had the NCAA decision went against AU.

Not sure how "he just liked LSU better" is overanalyzing.  And, I think you can compare the LSU situation to AU, cheating is cheating.  One of the teams was caught cheating and the other wasn't...and lied to a recruit about it. 

My point is the sanctions Auburn would have gotten would have been much worse. Being on probation don't mean a hill of beans.

[ellitor 33,087]

Actually, ellitor, I disagree with your assessment of Cecil Newton's response to the question of whether he took money or not. If he emphatically says, "No" I guarantee you that leads to another question, then another, then another and in the end he looks like he's dancing around the truth. His reference to NCAA findings, who incidentally, investigated the matter for over a year put an abrupt end to the questions right there! In fact, I'll go on record and say... I thought his handling of that question was nothing short of brilliant and it was probably given to him by someone a whole lot smarter than Cecil..aka known as legal counsel.

Well I am glad you see it that way Blue but I and probably a lot of other people think it looked like he had something to hide. Especially because he laughed a little deviously when he gave his answer like he knew he got away with something. I am a master manipulator and unfoertunately used to lie quite a bit so i know how to manipulate words to my advantage. When i used to lie I would have answered the way Cecil did if i got away with something I was not supposed to do. Whether they were asked or not, answering the way Cecil did creates more questions and doubt than simply and calmly saying no.

this sounds very interesting?????

Yeah it's not something I am proud of but it's in the past.

[alexava 6,973]

cia?

[fourthvision 0]

Watched Javie Mitchell tonight, I believe he fits AU's linebacker profile well....Leeds won 44-0

Also, Cassanove McKinzie is freakin huge

[Guest jthaub]

Updated after Lacy Westbrook committed to UCLA. Also a few other changes

[texastiger09 0]

Watched Javie Mitchell tonight, I believe he fits AU's linebacker profile well....Leeds won 44-0

Also, Cassanove McKinzie is freakin huge

So is Cassanova around the size of Josh Bynes?

[CameronCrazy 1,059]

jthaub - I see some guys on your list of OL backups that I have never heard before, so it would appear to me that this would be scraping the bottom of the barrel.  Do you think that there is a chance that we would go back after a Caleb Peterson or Micheal Flint if we miss on some of our top OL targets instead of these other guys?

Thanks for all of your hard work!     

[Guest jthaub]

jthaub - I see some guys on your list of OL backups that I have never heard before, so it would appear to me that this would be scraping the bottom of the barrel.  Do you think that there is a chance that we would go back after a Caleb Peterson or Micheal Flint if we miss on some of our top OL targets instead of these other guys?

Thanks for all of your hard work!       

Well honestly, yes, some of these are guys we had alot of contact with early on, but then started pursuing bigger targets. However this is not bottom of the barrel, alot of these guys are good prospects.

Young, Garnett, and Goodman are all Top caliber guys. Landing 1-2 of them would be HUGE!

Shuler - committed to Stanford - has offer from Clemson as well... We haven't offered

Greene - committed to Alabama - offers from UNS and S Carolina... We have offered but could pursue more heavily

Gamble - commited to Geaorgia Tech - offers from Georgia and Stanford... We haven't offered

Kozan - offers from Arkansas, LSU, Ohio St., Michigan, Ok St, and Oregon... We haven't offered

Jelks - offers from Alabama, Tennessee, and Stanford... We haven't offered

Leff - committed to Southern Miss early on... We haven't offered

Mckoy - offers from USF, Florida.... We haven't offered (profile says so, but we haven't)

Davis - offers from WVU, Texas Tech, USF, Ok St, and Az St... We haven't offered

JUCO guys who will be re-evaluated over the next 2 weeks

[Rednilla 5,390]

Well, I'll confess, Im not much into the psychology of lying and have no response to how a liar handles damage control once he's trying to hide something but his answer ENDED any possibility of additional questions which, at that moment, was more important than what his answer may appear to some people. Some have tried to argue that answer hurt Auburn in recruiting. My response to that is...how bad did it hurt? Auburn is rankd by every service as top 10 or better and thats about as good as they've ever been ranked at this juncture in the recruiting year. So, at the end of the day, whether his answer was liked or not or whether it made him appear to have something to hide, that's really a secondary consideration at that moment. The critical accomplishment was ending that line of questioning and that succinct response put a much needed and rather expeditious end to it.

Um, Hello! Is anybody in there? Come on. Think McFly. Think...It did raise further questions. Namely why did he just not just squash it by saying no instead of appearing that he had something to hide? His response opened up questions to be asked. They were just not asked for whatever reason. I am not going to say that it hurt recruiting but if his response made the NCAA take a few more months to clear Auburn (which we will never know.) Then it is possible it hurt us some. For example, Patrick Miller was an Auburn lean then BOOM! He commits to LSU...His response did not put an end to it. The interviewer just chose to, for whatever a, not to probe further and ask obvious questions. But it's over now and I am glad the NCAA cleared Auburn even if his response may have caused them longer to dot their i's and cross their t's.

El, I'm sorry, but no. It doesn't matter what his response was, nothing he said would have stopped the questions. Remember his frustration at the "witch hunt" after his son? He figured out early on that the truth would get him nowhere because every single word is over-analyzed by people who are paid to manipulate words just like you described yourself as being a master of doing. I agree that his response was a cleverly advised comeback from his legal council: he just let people believe whatever they want to believe (ahem), because they're going to anyway.

[ellitor 33,087]

Well, I'll confess, Im not much into the psychology of lying and have no response to how a liar handles damage control once he's trying to hide something but his answer ENDED any possibility of additional questions which, at that moment, was more important than what his answer may appear to some people. Some have tried to argue that answer hurt Auburn in recruiting. My response to that is...how bad did it hurt? Auburn is rankd by every service as top 10 or better and thats about as good as they've ever been ranked at this juncture in the recruiting year. So, at the end of the day, whether his answer was liked or not or whether it made him appear to have something to hide, that's really a secondary consideration at that moment. The critical accomplishment was ending that line of questioning and that succinct response put a much needed and rather expeditious end to it.

Um, Hello! Is anybody in there? Come on. Think McFly. Think...It did raise further questions. Namely why did he just not just squash it by saying no instead of appearing that he had something to hide? His response opened up questions to be asked. They were just not asked for whatever reason. I am not going to say that it hurt recruiting but if his response made the NCAA take a few more months to clear Auburn (which we will never know.) Then it is possible it hurt us some. For example, Patrick Miller was an Auburn lean then BOOM! He commits to LSU...His response did not put an end to it. The interviewer just chose to, for whatever a, not to probe further and ask obvious questions. But it's over now and I am glad the NCAA cleared Auburn even if his response may have caused them longer to dot their i's and cross their t's.

El, I'm sorry, but no. It doesn't matter what his response was, nothing he said would have stopped the questions. Remember his frustration at the "witch hunt" after his son? He figured out early on that the truth would get him nowhere because every single word is over-analyzed by people who are paid to manipulate words just like you described yourself as being a master of doing. I agree that his response was a cleverly advised comeback from his legal council: he just let people believe whatever they want to believe (ahem), because they're going to anyway.

My point is he should not have done that to open the door wide open for recruits to believe the crap other coaches were saying about us even more. But Mr. Newton has shown a pattern of not doing what's best for Auburn when he agreed to not show up at the BCS game but did anyway, so sadly I am not surprised by Mr. Newton's actions.

[auinmadison 0]

Well, I'll confess, Im not much into the psychology of lying and have no response to how a liar handles damage control once he's trying to hide something but his answer ENDED any possibility of additional questions which, at that moment, was more important than what his answer may appear to some people. Some have tried to argue that answer hurt Auburn in recruiting. My response to that is...how bad did it hurt? Auburn is rankd by every service as top 10 or better and thats about as good as they've ever been ranked at this juncture in the recruiting year. So, at the end of the day, whether his answer was liked or not or whether it made him appear to have something to hide, that's really a secondary consideration at that moment. The critical accomplishment was ending that line of questioning and that succinct response put a much needed and rather expeditious end to it.

Um, Hello! Is anybody in there? Come on. Think McFly. Think...It did raise further questions. Namely why did he just not just squash it by saying no instead of appearing that he had something to hide? His response opened up questions to be asked. They were just not asked for whatever reason. I am not going to say that it hurt recruiting but if his response made the NCAA take a few more months to clear Auburn (which we will never know.) Then it is possible it hurt us some. For example, Patrick Miller was an Auburn lean then BOOM! He commits to LSU...His response did not put an end to it. The interviewer just chose to, for whatever a, not to probe further and ask obvious questions. But it's over now and I am glad the NCAA cleared Auburn even if his response may have caused them longer to dot their i's and cross their t's.

El, I'm sorry, but no. It doesn't matter what his response was, nothing he said would have stopped the questions. Remember his frustration at the "witch hunt" after his son? He figured out early on that the truth would get him nowhere because every single word is over-analyzed by people who are paid to manipulate words just like you described yourself as being a master of doing. I agree that his response was a cleverly advised comeback from his legal council: he just let people believe whatever they want to believe (ahem), because they're going to anyway.

My point is he should not have done that to open the door wide open for recruits to believe the crap other coaches were saying about us even more. But Mr. Newton has shown a pattern of not doing what's best for Auburn when he agreed to not show up at the BCS game but did anyway, so sadly I am not surprised by Mr. Newton's actions.

Couldn't disagree more with you.  Nothing, would have stopped me from seeing my son play in the National Championship Game.  Telling everyone he wouldn't be there, kept the focus on the game and not on camera shots of him and bringing up the incident even more.  It is unfortunate that he couldn't enjoy the game with his wife and family, but that was his own fault.

[telling tiger 156]

As someone pointed out, since when did the truth matter? To the media anyway. Unless you were in the room, no one knows what Cecil and anyone from AU did or did not agree to. What you may have heard from the media might have had no basis in reality. The way he did it kept the focus off him and on the game. If you want a look at a real master of manipulation, take a look at damn near any member of the sports so-called media from last year.

[BirdofPrey76 0]

There's precious little integrity in today's media. Sensationalism sells. Getting it first is more important than getting it right. Who cares if it destroys someone's good name just as long as I get my byline. Notoriety is what's strived for.

[Rednilla 5,390]

Well, I'll confess, Im not much into the psychology of lying and have no response to how a liar handles damage control once he's trying to hide something but his answer ENDED any possibility of additional questions which, at that moment, was more important than what his answer may appear to some people. Some have tried to argue that answer hurt Auburn in recruiting. My response to that is...how bad did it hurt? Auburn is rankd by every service as top 10 or better and thats about as good as they've ever been ranked at this juncture in the recruiting year. So, at the end of the day, whether his answer was liked or not or whether it made him appear to have something to hide, that's really a secondary consideration at that moment. The critical accomplishment was ending that line of questioning and that succinct response put a much needed and rather expeditious end to it.

Um, Hello! Is anybody in there? Come on. Think McFly. Think...It did raise further questions. Namely why did he just not just squash it by saying no instead of appearing that he had something to hide? His response opened up questions to be asked. They were just not asked for whatever reason. I am not going to say that it hurt recruiting but if his response made the NCAA take a few more months to clear Auburn (which we will never know.) Then it is possible it hurt us some. For example, Patrick Miller was an Auburn lean then BOOM! He commits to LSU...His response did not put an end to it. The interviewer just chose to, for whatever a, not to probe further and ask obvious questions. But it's over now and I am glad the NCAA cleared Auburn even if his response may have caused them longer to dot their i's and cross their t's.

El, I'm sorry, but no. It doesn't matter what his response was, nothing he said would have stopped the questions. Remember his frustration at the "witch hunt" after his son? He figured out early on that the truth would get him nowhere because every single word is over-analyzed by people who are paid to manipulate words just like you described yourself as being a master of doing. I agree that his response was a cleverly advised comeback from his legal council: he just let people believe whatever they want to believe (ahem), because they're going to anyway.

My point is he should not have done that to open the door wide open for recruits to believe the crap other coaches were saying about us even more. But Mr. Newton has shown a pattern of not doing what's best for Auburn when he agreed to not show up at the BCS game but did anyway, so sadly I am not surprised by Mr. Newton's actions.

Wait, so he's been tormented for a year about this issue, and he's supposed to make the statement that best helps Auburn's recruiting? People need to get off of Cecil Newton. I've heard countless Auburn men and women say some pretty horrible things about him, but it's a pretty selfish desire to want him to live his entire life to enrich the recruiting at a school his son attended for a single year. I'm with Madison: there's no chance I would have missed that game, and showing up the way he did kept the attention off of him and on the game. Personally, I consider him Family, and while maybe I am looking through orange and blue shades, I completely buy the story of his innocence.

I think he has acted exactly as he would if he were sucked into the situation by a shady character, explained the truth expecting that would be the end of it, and then saw first hand the way conspiracies get treated and became exasperated. He decried the media as being on a witch hunt against his son. Does anyone know what a witch hunt was? It was when the citizens of a town looked for any reason burn a woman at the stake for being a witch. Even some of the most nonsensical things, such as floating in water, were used as "proof" that they were devil spawned and had to die. And that's exactly what happened to Cam and his father.

Don't let the media pull the wool over your eyes. Cecil did exactly what a father is supposed to do: he sacrificed his own image to guard that of his son. Maybe he did wrong, maybe not, but in either case he rectified the situation and turned his back on it by leaving Mississippi State behind. Why put uncalled for blame on his shoulders?

[fourthvision 0]

Watched Javie Mitchell tonight, I believe he fits AU's linebacker profile well....Leeds won 44-0

Also, Cassanove McKinzie is freakin huge

So is Cassanova around the size of Josh Bynes?

Maybe bigger, w/some yoxercise he's gonna be very good

[ellitor 33,087]

Well, I'll confess, Im not much into the psychology of lying and have no response to how a liar handles damage control once he's trying to hide something but his answer ENDED any possibility of additional questions which, at that moment, was more important than what his answer may appear to some people. Some have tried to argue that answer hurt Auburn in recruiting. My response to that is...how bad did it hurt? Auburn is rankd by every service as top 10 or better and thats about as good as they've ever been ranked at this juncture in the recruiting year. So, at the end of the day, whether his answer was liked or not or whether it made him appear to have something to hide, that's really a secondary consideration at that moment. The critical accomplishment was ending that line of questioning and that succinct response put a much needed and rather expeditious end to it.

Um, Hello! Is anybody in there? Come on. Think McFly. Think...It did raise further questions. Namely why did he just not just squash it by saying no instead of appearing that he had something to hide? His response opened up questions to be asked. They were just not asked for whatever reason. I am not going to say that it hurt recruiting but if his response made the NCAA take a few more months to clear Auburn (which we will never know.) Then it is possible it hurt us some. For example, Patrick Miller was an Auburn lean then BOOM! He commits to LSU...His response did not put an end to it. The interviewer just chose to, for whatever a, not to probe further and ask obvious questions. But it's over now and I am glad the NCAA cleared Auburn even if his response may have caused them longer to dot their i's and cross their t's.

El, I'm sorry, but no. It doesn't matter what his response was, nothing he said would have stopped the questions. Remember his frustration at the "witch hunt" after his son? He figured out early on that the truth would get him nowhere because every single word is over-analyzed by people who are paid to manipulate words just like you described yourself as being a master of doing. I agree that his response was a cleverly advised comeback from his legal council: he just let people believe whatever they want to believe (ahem), because they're going to anyway.

My point is he should not have done that to open the door wide open for recruits to believe the crap other coaches were saying about us even more. But Mr. Newton has shown a pattern of not doing what's best for Auburn when he agreed to not show up at the BCS game but did anyway, so sadly I am not surprised by Mr. Newton's actions.

Wait, so he's been tormented for a year about this issue, and he's supposed to make the statement that best helps Auburn's recruiting? People need to get off of Cecil Newton. I've heard countless Auburn men and women say some pretty horrible things about him, but it's a pretty selfish desire to want him to live his entire life to enrich the recruiting at a school his son attended for a single year. I'm with Madison: there's no chance I would have missed that game, and showing up the way he did kept the attention off of him and on the game. Personally, I consider him Family, and while maybe I am looking through orange and blue shades, I completely buy the story of his innocence.

I think he has acted exactly as he would if he were sucked into the situation by a shady character, explained the truth expecting that would be the end of it, and then saw first hand the way conspiracies get treated and became exasperated. He decried the media as being on a witch hunt against his son. Does anyone know what a witch hunt was? It was when the citizens of a town looked for any reason burn a woman at the stake for being a witch. Even some of the most nonsensical things, such as floating in water, were used as "proof" that they were devil spawned and had to die. And that's exactly what happened to Cam and his father.

Don't let the media pull the wool over your eyes. Cecil did exactly what a father is supposed to do: he sacrificed his own image to guard that of his son. Maybe he did wrong, maybe not, but in either case he rectified the situation and turned his back on it by leaving Mississippi State behind. Why put uncalled for blame on his shoulders?

Well I don't know why you surfed through the thread to bring this subjecy back up. It had not been talked about in a week. There are plenty of other less volatile posts that could have been commented on since then. Let's just agree to disagree. I am fine with being the only one or one of the few to look at it without O and B glasses on.

[Rednilla 5,390]

Well I don't know why you surfed through the thread to bring this subjecy back up. It had not been talked about in a week. There are plenty of other less volatile posts that could have been commented on since then. Let's just agree to disagree. I am fine with being the only one or one of the few to look at it without O and B glasses on.

I've been without ready access to a computer for a while, and my girlfriend's just got in from the shop, so I'm just getting caught up.

[ellitor 33,087]

Cool. Have a great weekend!

[wardon1345162806 0]

TOS now reporting that UAT commit Geno Smith is visiting for IB?? Think AU is already full @ CB?? Maybe he just wants to see a good game?

[ArmchairAthlete7 21]

TOS now reporting that UAT commit Geno Smith is visiting for IB?? Think AU is already full @ CB?? Maybe he just wants to see a good game?

[ellitor 33,087]

TOS now reporting that UAT commit Geno Smith is visiting for IB?? Think AU is already full @ CB?? Maybe he just wants to see a good game?

I would think he is coming for the game. Is he making an official visit? That would mean Auburn is paying for the trip.

[kkolumbo 8]

TOS now reporting that UAT commit Geno Smith is visiting for IB?? Think AU is already full @ CB?? Maybe he just wants to see a good game?

I would think he is coming for the game. Is he making an official visit? That would mean Auburn is paying for the trip.

are we still recruiting him? If we have Bush locked up and/or Darby is possible, I'd prefer we don't waste our time.

[ellitor 33,087]

Well I don't know why you surfed through the thread to bring this subjecy back up. It had not been talked about in a week. There are plenty of other less volatile posts that could have been commented on since then. Let's just agree to disagree. I am fine with being the only one or one of the few to look at it without O and B glasses on.

I've been without ready access to a computer for a while, and my girlfriend's just got in from the shop, so I'm just getting caught up.

I am wrong and I apologize. I forgot about the letter Auburn sent to Cecil that essentially completely disassociated him from the program. Although I wish Cecil had said things that were politically correct and put Auburn in the best light, he had no responsibility to do that after receiving that letter. What he said may have or may not have slowed the NCAA clearing Auburn and cost us a recruit or 2. Only the NCAA and recruits know those answers. But I am not going to cry over spilt milk anymore. We are going to have a great recruiting class either way.

[JFDTiger80 790]

I saw an ESPN recruiting analyst today tweeted that UGA was getting ready to be deep in RBs. : That is all he said. Do u think he was thinking that Keith Marshall was going to commit soon to them