Texas A&M Game Report Card

[Auburn06 76]

We look like a high school team, figures since we have a high school coach. Hoover would beat us by 50

[autigeremt 6,599]

I'll be on the lake chasing lunker bass and pay outs. Thanks for the work, stat. 

[Fricking Ray 47]

56 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

The D is fine. The pass rush is non existent though. And we have too much talent for that.

How can the defense be fine if we have no pass rush? The defensive line has performed poorly against Clemson and Texas A&M. Neither offensive line is thought to be juggernauts. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck ......... but hey it looks really good on paper. As fans we have given the defensive line a pass the last few seasons due to Lawson's injuries. Talent gets off their blocks and makes a play. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

7 minutes ago, Fricking Ray said:

How can the defense be fine if we have no pass rush? The defensive line has performed poorly against Clemson and Texas A&M. Neither offensive line is thought to be juggernauts. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck ......... but hey it looks really good on paper. As fans we have given the defensive line a pass the last few seasons due to Lawson's injuries. Talent gets off their blocks and makes a play. 

I meant overall the D played okay yesterday despite the lack of pass rush 

[Fricking Ray 47]

1 hour ago, weagl1 said:

Offense is such a mess I don't see how they turn it around at this point.  When JF3 is in there it does open up some inside running lanes because the defense is so concerned with him getting outside on them.  But his passing accuracy is so terrible defenses are just going to load the box on him.  Our tackles are not capable of pass blocking an SEC caliber DE, especially one like Garrett.  This means Sean is not going to be effective even though he is accurate down the field because he is not going to have the time to get it down the field.  So we are dead in the water on offense again this year.  Even though the defense is better they are going to get beat up and worn down from staying on the field due to the lack of offense.  It's a mess and it's sad because there are some great looking athletes on this team and they deserve better.  

Agree with all except the last sentence. The "kids" use Auburn to get them to the NFL. Auburn uses the "kids" to get wins on the football field. It is supposed to be a symbiotic relationship. How is that working out for Auburn?

[NoALtiger 3,850]

1 hour ago, 80Tiger said:

They gained 250 yes in the first half last night so it wasn't skewed IMO. If Tamu had finished drives last night they would have scored 40. Game was not that close. D did not play good enough to win. Again my opinion.

Good point, I'm just going by the fact that we'd only given up 16 at the half. With any real offense, it would be a winnable ball game. 

[Fricking Ray 47]

3 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

I meant overall the D played okay yesterday despite the lack of pass rush 

The defense ran out of gas in the 3rd quarter because the offense couldn't sustain drives. As Stat pointed out the tackling was not as good as in the first two games.

[tbone4jc 2,241]

Can we hit the rewind button and go back to when we hired CGM and hire a REAL college football coach. 

I wonder if Arkansas St would take him back. 

This is a sad time to be a Auburn fan. Jesh!

[aujeff11 6,243]

2 minutes ago, Fricking Ray said:

The defense ran out of gas in the 3rd quarter because the offense couldn't sustain drives. As Stat pointed out the tackling was not as good as in the first two games.

Yes. We all already knew this. 

[tbone4jc 2,241]

Thanks stat. I believe you can take a break on grading out the offense. It's going to be a fail every week we play a SEC team. Now I see why Muschamp and Craig left this sinking ship.

I am so pissed off because our players committed to a fraudulent coach who cannot put together a bsic game plan. EVERY TEAM IN THE SEC HAS FIGURED HIM AND HIS GIMMICKY OFFENSE OUT!  We have tons of talented players on our team  unfortunately our offensive coaches CAN'T COACH OFFENSE!?!. 

 

Edit: I originally put this in a different topic but this is where I meant to post.

[Barnacle 9,064]

Hopefully Gus can keep the team from quitting. If that starts to happen it is going to be horrific. 

[Fricking Ray 47]

35 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Yes. We all already knew this. 

Good for you.

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 minute ago, Fricking Ray said:

Good for you.

Lol

 

2 minutes ago, Barnacle said:

Hopefully Gus can keep the team from quitting. If that starts to happen it is going to be horrific. 

Got a feeling we find out next week if the team quits or not.

[SickOfSucking 3]

8 hours ago, StatTiger said:

It was another disappointing offensive game plan by Gus Malzahn, with no attempt to attack the Aggies defense. It wasn't until the 64th offensive snap of the contest, Auburn registered a play over 20-yards. Thirteen of Sean White's pass attempts during the first half were within 10-yards of the line of scrimmage. Of Auburn's 40 snaps on first down, 60% resulted in 3-yards or less. Until Jonathan Franklin took over for Sean White, Auburn netted 62-yards on 28 first down snaps. What we witnessed tonight was the same game plan we saw against Texas A&M last year, minus the defensive production. There was a heavy reliance on screen passes and the hopes the running game could win the game. Nearly 56 percent of Auburn's rushing totals came after Auburn was down 22-10. Auburn did throw the ball nearly 33 percent of the time on first down but almost exclusively short. Auburn completed eight first down passes for only 41-yards or 3.2 yards per attempt.

The defense managed to keep Auburn in the ball game until the final quarter but struggled for the third week in a row, establishing a pass-rush without blitzing. The Tigers registered only four tackles for loss and failed to force a turnover. Auburn has won the "tackle for loss" battle only four times during their last 21 games. For the first time this season, tackling was poor, and Auburn has now allowed eight plays of 30-yards or more through 3 games, after allowing only 15 through 13 games last season. I do believe the defense has the potential to be better than 2015, but the defensive front appears to have been over stated regarding their potential. There were opportunities to make plays in the backfield, but Auburn's pass-rush lost containment too many times against the Aggies. The good news is that the players continued to battle down to the very end, which means they will strive to be successful.

It appears we could see another change at quarterback next week with Jonathan Franklin III, showing some life in the Auburn offense. If this happens, it is a sure sign Gus Malzahn is more likely to make personnel changes than scheme or play-calling changes. This is not a good sign for what should be expected at this level of play and with the talent level currently available to the offensive coaches. JFIII could be the right move to bring some form of rudimentary development and identity for a struggling Auburn offense. It could be enough to win six regular season games but certainly not sufficient for what is expected. How long the players continue to battle under the current circumstances remains to be seen. As long as they are committed to compete, there is talent to do some special things this year. For this to happen, it will be up to the coaches to place them in a situation to compete and win. The players deserve better than what we have witnessed through three games, especially on the offensive side of the football. After going 12-2 his first season, Gus Malzahn is now 16-13. The fan base is restless, to say the least, and the same mistakes are continuing to add up, which means changes will occur one way or another.

 

Game #3 Statistical Evaluation (Texas A&M Game)

Offensive Report Card
01) Avg 6-yards per play on 1^st down: [3.88] fail
02) Convert at least 40% of 3^rd downs:  [35.3%] fail
03) Avg at least 4.5 yards per rush:  [4.37] fail
04) Score on at least 1/3 of possessions:  [20.0%] fail
05) Keep 3 and out series under 33%:  [26.7%] pass
06) Average 8.0 yards per pass attempt: [4.66 yds] fail
07) Score at least 75% inside red zone:  [75.0%] pass
08) TD red zone above 60%:  [50.0%] fail
09) Avg at least 30-yards per possession:  [26.6 yds] fail
10) 40% of offensive snaps part of scoring drives:  [30.3%] fail
11) TD / Turnover ratio above 1.6:  [2.0] pass
12) TD ratio of at least 1 every 17 snaps:  [44.5] fail
13) At least 8 impact plays:  [7] fail
14) At least 2 big plays:  [1] fail
15) Pass rating of at least 126.3:  [116.3] fail

Score: 3 of 15 (20.0%) FAIL

  
Defensive Report Card:
01) Avg under 6-yards per play on 1^st down: [6.58] fail
02) Convert below 35% of 3^rd downs:  [13.3%] pass
03) Avg at least 4.0 yards per rush or less:  [6.24] fail
04) Score  1/3 of possessions or below:  [46.7%] fail
05) Keep 3 and out series above 33%:  [40.0%] pass
06) Average below 7.5 yards per pass attempt: [6.17 yds] pass
07) Score below 75% inside red zone:  [100.0%] fail
08) TD red zone below 60%:  [20.0%] pass
09) Avg under 30-yards per possession:  [31.9 yds] fail
10) Less than 40% of offensive snaps part of scoring drives:  [63.6%] fail
11) TD / Turnover ratio below 1.6:  [2:0] fail
12) TD ratio of at least 1 every 30 snaps:  [38.5] pass
13) Less than 8 impact plays:  [10] fail
14) No more than 2 big plays allowed: [3] fail
15) Pass rating below 125.0:  [110.1] pass

Score: 6 of 15 (40.0%) FAIL

 

Special Teams Report Card:
1) Punt Average (Above 41.3):  [37.2] fail
2) Punt Return Defense (Below 7.8 YPR): [0.0] pass
3) Punt Return Offense (Above 9.8 YPR): [6.0] fail
4) Kick-Return Defense (Below 21.2 YPR): [0.0] pass
5) Kick-Return Offense (Above 22.3 YPR): [24.0] pass
6) PAT’s (100%): [2 of 2] pass
7) FG Pct (75% or above): [100.0%] pass

Score: 5 of 7 (50.0%) PASS

 

* 50% is a passing score.

 

War Eagle!

 

[SickOfSucking 3]

Should we start thinking that the football problems at Auburn cannot be fixed as long as an Alabama fan is Chairman of the BOT?  That's right: The governor, almost always a UA-graduate lawyer (right now a UA-graduate doctor), runs Auburn, and selects the candidates for seats on the Board of Trustees. Who approves the Athletics Director....who hires the Head Coach.  

 

Go back to the 1950's, Auburn hired Shug, an assistant at Georgia with no HC experience.  Then Barfield, who had one year as Auburn's freshman team HC.  Then Dye, who had one year at East Carolina, and one year at Wyoming.  Then Bowden, from Samford.  Then TT, he of no proven ability (went undefeated in 2004, but averaged losing 5 a year the other 9 years).  Then 5-19 Chizic.  Then Gus, who had 1 year at Arkansas State.  Auburn has NEVER done what other successful programs do: Go hire a proven winner.  Sure, we're a $100million program, one of the Top 15 in the country for revenue and profit, but we've never had a Chairman, a BOT, and ab AD, all working together to demand accountability and performance from the HC, and willing to go out and get someone who has proven they can do it.

 

And it won't happen as long as a UA graduate is running things.  See UAB!

 

 

[WeagleAU 594]

9 minutes ago, SickOfSucking said:

And it won't happen as long as a UA graduate is running things.  See UAB!

Politics definitely plays a huge part in the game of college football.  Now to what degree some may argue.  But there is more than meets the eye going on in the background of major university football programs.  College football is a business and brings in more money than any other college sport, especially in the SEC.  So there will be some to question how and why the BOT is set up the way it is.  It makes no sense for a UA grad and fan to run an AU program, as it does an AU grad and fan to run a UA program.  Of course there will be bias.

Same thing goes for the officiating in the SEC.  I've always said that they need to work on "fairness" as much as possible when it comes to officiating the game.  We are human beings and we all have bias.  For someone to tell me that the head of SEC officiating, who is a UA grad and "fan",  is completely fair and in no way would ever show any bias for or against "certain" teams, is completely living in fantasy land.  

All I'm saying is the way things are set up now, I don't think the "conspiracy" theorists are too far off.  There is definitely some questionable calls being made in leadership positions.  And yes the move to terminate the UAB football program was a political move.

 

[IronMan70 3,277]

Stat, I always look forward to your breakdowns of the good as well as the bad. Thanks for the work.

[Strychnine 1,802]

1 hour ago, SickOfSucking said:

Then Dye, who had one year at East Carolina, and one year at Wyoming.  Then Bowden, from Samford.  Then TT, he of no proven ability (went undefeated in 2004, but averaged losing 5 a year the other 9 years).  Then 5-19 Chizic.  Then Gus, who had 1 year at Arkansas State.

 

In the modern era, which in this case I would say is from Dye onward, only one of those hires was considered a headscratcher at the time:  Chizik.  I do not recall anyone thinking we were crazy for hiring Bowden, Tuberville, or Malzahn.  For that matter, most people considered Malzahn to be the brains behind 2010 and welcomed him gladly.  He was dominant in high school, had a good year in Arkansas, did well at Tulsa, was part of our first national championship since before Vietnam, and did well in his first year as a head coach at Arkansas State.

A lot of major programs hire coordinators with no head coaching experience to run big-time programs.  A lot of major programs also hire head coaches with limited head coaching experience.  It is neither guaranteed to succeed or fail, or considered to be an uncommon practice.  Stat might actually have the failure rate.

I very seriously doubt that UA alumni are influencing Jay Jacobs to hire coaches poorly.  Some of the theories I hear about UA are the kind of thing that would make Illuminati conspiracy theorists say "Man, that is a bit far-fetched."  If anything, post-Tuberville Auburn has a problem with itself:  too much weight is given to people that have been here before (IE Auburn men), and possibly too much meddling.  I doubt an exhaustive head coach search went out and objectively concluded that Gene Chizik and Gus Malzahn were the best coaches for the job, especially if either of them were competiting with Gary Patterson.

[AUBwins 10,075]

I was one that thought the best strategy going forward would be to gameplan around SW. Basically the Ark st game plan.  I thought Gus finally came to his senses and put players in the right situation to make them successful. IF the game plan was to not attempt more than a few passes past 20 yards,  why did we not just play JF3 from the start.  I am just so disappointed because I can see how this talent can be successful and have a great season. 

[steeleagle 2,945]

2 hours ago, AUBwins said:

I was one that thought the best strategy going forward would be to gameplan around SW. Basically the Ark st game plan.  I thought Gus finally came to his senses and put players in the right situation to make them successful. IF the game plan was to not attempt more than a few passes past 20 yards,  why did we not just play JF3 from the start.  I am just so disappointed because I can see how this talent can be successful and have a great season. 

I think being successful with a game plan against Ark St means nothing when you play power 5 teams like Clemson and TaM. 

There is no way the game plan was to throw short passes but it does work as running plays if you are getting 5-7 yds on the passes like we were on our only TD drive in first half.  But TaM adjusted and we didn't successfully adjust. White did not get the time to stretch the field but I also think the coaches give up too easy when it doesn't work at first then it seems he goes again for trickery and plays that are low percentage ( trying that wing t crap again with Cox). 

 

[AUBwins 10,075]

I agree the competition changes the way you call things. I think Gus has outsmarted himself more than the opposition in recent years.  It's like he tries too hard.  I agree with another thread that trust is the biggest thing with Gus, both good and bad.  I don't think he trusts his short yardage offense at all.  He gimmicks and changes personnel and doesn't even call the play until the defense is aligned.  He used to have a knack for when to exploit a defense.  That changed somewhere down the line.  Not sure where.  He is basically doing the same thing we accuse JJ of doing, losing confidence in what does.  That is likely why the offense is mental. Overall,  it seemed like the plan that was practiced was more suited to JF3 than SW.

[Randman5000 4,226]

6 hours ago, SickOfSucking said:

Should we start thinking that the football problems at Auburn cannot be fixed as long as an Alabama fan is Chairman of the BOT?  That's right: The governor, almost always a UA-graduate lawyer (right now a UA-graduate doctor), runs Auburn, and selects the candidates for seats on the Board of Trustees. Who approves the Athletics Director....who hires the Head Coach.  

 

Go back to the 1950's, Auburn hired Shug, an assistant at Georgia with no HC experience.  Then Barfield, who had one year as Auburn's freshman team HC.  Then Dye, who had one year at East Carolina, and one year at Wyoming.  Then Bowden, from Samford.  Then TT, he of no proven ability (went undefeated in 2004, but averaged losing 5 a year the other 9 years).  Then 5-19 Chizic.  Then Gus, who had 1 year at Arkansas State.  Auburn has NEVER done what other successful programs do: Go hire a proven winner.  Sure, we're a $100million program, one of the Top 15 in the country for revenue and profit, but we've never had a Chairman, a BOT, and ab AD, all working together to demand accountability and performance from the HC, and willing to go out and get someone who has proven they can do it.

 

And it won't happen as long as a UA graduate is running things.  See UAB!

 

 

Good post. That definitely was the most disappointing part of the last two hires because it was proven that we can win here. That we compete for championships and we want to win badly...to hire those folks was just a huge let down. I think Bruce Pearl was more of the hire we expected in terms of top tier quality, but we probably were able to get him because of his troubles.

If this keeps going South...I hope this is a good lesson. At the price of too much for the fans.

[AuburnNTexas 7,140]

The D-Line is winning many individual battles but then they over commit and don't get the sack or Tackle for loss. Multiple times we should have had the sack with just the D-line but because of lack of containment and because of Knights ability to make people miss the D-line didn't quite get the job done.  A few of the big plays happened after Knight was able to turn a sack into a big gain. Just need to contain better. 

O is a different matter.  Trick plays won't work if you can't block up front. Obviously no scouting of A&M defense before the game to think a pulling guard could get to one of the fasted DE's in the SEC was dumb and to do it twice and expect to get a different result was dumb at best.  As far deeper passes that requires time. The interior of our line does a pretty good job but our tackles are over matched when pass blocking. JF3 is not the solution as his limited passing abilities will allow teams to plan to stop his runs. 

There is to much reliance on trickery and not enough reliance on football fundamentals on offense. Gus O works when he has a great O-line which we had for both CAM and Nick. We have lost 3 tackles to NFL Robinson, Coleman and Young and the replacements work hard but they are not the same and that is why the O is not working.

On the pulling guard play since we don't have a TE on that side have tackle do quick hit on DE  before blocking down on the double team that would allow Braden to get there. A minor adjustment I have seen other teams do. We keep repeating same thing without even making minor adjustments.

 

 

Edited September 19, 2016 by AuburnNTexas

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

19 hours ago, WeagleAU said:

Politics definitely plays a huge part in the game of college football.  Now to what degree some may argue.  But there is more than meets the eye going on in the background of major university football programs.  College football is a business and brings in more money than any other college sport, especially in the SEC.  So there will be some to question how and why the BOT is set up the way it is.  It makes no sense for a UA grad and fan to run an AU program, as it does an AU grad and fan to run a UA program.  Of course there will be bias.

Same thing goes for the officiating in the SEC.  I've always said that they need to work on "fairness" as much as possible when it comes to officiating the game.  We are human beings and we all have bias.  For someone to tell me that the head of SEC officiating, who is a UA grad and "fan",  is completely fair and in no way would ever show any bias for or against "certain" teams, is completely living in fantasy land.  

All I'm saying is the way things are set up now, I don't think the "conspiracy" theorists are too far off.  There is definitely some questionable calls being made in leadership positions.  And yes the move to terminate the UAB football program was a political move.

 

Yeah, but

what have they done to us lately?

[doc4aday 1,887]

At this point, I have no idea of what is the best solution for the 2016 season.