Why are we so divided?

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

14 minutes ago, tbone4jc said:

The OP is self explanatory. Those who support the head coach and those who don't. Those who still support CGM get labeled as " not knowing football" or " don't care about winning" while the other side " continues to bash no matter what" or " continues to take over every topic bashing CGM". My per peeve is if you have an opinion, good or bad, state it and move on.

Some say it doesn't affect recruiting or players but I beg to differ. Even if there are a "small portion of the fanbase" on this forum it is still a representation of the entire fanbase and kids hear about it and talk about it and it does cause "issues". To hear a broadcaster on live tv mention the divisiveness and to see my Twitter line lite up afterwards is what prompted me to post.

This is the biggest myth in all of the college football internet. If so, then why is Gus and AU reeling in top 10 to 15 recruiting classes. These kids are going to go and not go to play football somewhere because of the experience they get in the real world. How the coaches recruit them. How the actual visits to the schools go. How the team preforms on the field. How early they can play. How they are used in the scheme of things on the team.

Not because of you and me on AUFamily.com. I can say this with 100% certain.

[McLoofus 35,182]

16 minutes ago, tbone4jc said:

Those who support the head coach and those who don't. Those who still support CGM get labeled as " not knowing football" or " don't care about winning" while the other side " continues to bash no matter what" or " continues to take over every topic bashing CGM".

Do the Germans have a word that means "more ironic than irony"? 

This thread is high comedy. Congrats. 

[DAG 33,954]

40 minutes ago, tbone4jc said:

Who hasn't won  a da%n thing? CGM? Surely you are kidding.

Well you just said Les miles won . Yeah he won a NC and got fired . Does Gus Malzahn have a NC? So what was your point in saying but Les Miles won? 

[ellitor 33,062]

11 minutes ago, tbone4jc said:

Or may be it's a discussion that should be brought up? Talked about? Seems like we have been having a very civilized discussion from both sides and now maybe we could see each other's point of view better?  🤔

No. We need to learn to accept people have different views & opinions about our programs & teams whether we like those thoughts or not without it having to be "discussed" in a why are we divided thread. As long as ideas, opinions, & philosophies are addressed in debates & not shooting insults to the posters & players & coaches then all things are fair game & seeing each other's POV should be easy to do already.

[abw0004 10,104]

2 minutes ago, ellitor said:

No. We need to learn to accept people have different views & opinions about our programs & teams whether we like those thoughts or not without it having to be "discussed" in a why are we divided thread. As long as ideas, opinions, & philosophies are addressed in debates & not shooting insults to the posters & players & coaches then all things are fair game & seeing each other's POV should be easy to do already.

I do agree with what you are saying.  The issue that needs to be brought to the forefront is posters are having trouble refraining from shooting insults which can in turn rile up others, including myself.  I think that was the main purpose of the OP was to bring this to the light to try and curb that from happening.  One thing that really attracted me to this forum in particular is the higher standard set for posters and something I have noticed newer posters have not grasped.  I think that was evident last week with Brannigan's Law.

[bigbird 60,367]

24 minutes ago, tbone4jc said:

The OP is self explanatory. Those who support the head coach and those who don't.

For me, it's not that black and white. I believe there is a 3rd category. Those of us that like Gus and want him to be successful but see major faults that, in year 7, have yet to be addressed.  It's not like we necessarily want a coaching change. We want Gus to win but don't see him being able to do so consistently.

By year 7, a program should have processes in place that allow a team to maintain some perpetual momentum moving forward.  We don't seem to have this systems in place that allow for this. By now we should understand what type of backs work best in the O, what type of OL are needed for success in the O, and the types of QBs needed to be most successful and recruit accordingly. From my perspective we tend to try and get the best available player irregardless of fit. Doing so makes each year is a mystery of what we will have and see. However, we call and run the same plays no matter personnel. That's foolish. If your recruiting and personnel are going to be flexible, then the plays and calls MUST be as flexible. Otherwise you get the discombobulated, out of sync mess on O we've had the last 5 years. It's a systematic issue that, IMO, isn't fixable with the current HC...no matter how much I support him and want him to have success here.

[ellitor 33,062]

2 minutes ago, abw0004 said:

The issue that needs to be brought to the forefront is posters are having trouble refraining from shooting insults which can in turn rile up others, including myself.

That could be part of an issue but another issue is sometimes people confuse shots to their opinions & views as shots to the themselves. On that posters have to get thicker skin or work on their reading comprehension TBBH.

5 minutes ago, abw0004 said:

I think that was evident last week with Brannigan's Law

He was banned so quickly because he's a known troll that has been banned on various AU boards including the old Auburn Eagle.

[ellitor 33,062]

2 minutes ago, bigbird said:

For me, it's not that black and white. I believe there is a 3rd category. Those of us that like Gus and want him to be successful but see major faults that, in year 7, have yet to be addressed.  It's not like we necessarily want a coaching change. We want Gus to win but don't see him being able to do so consistently.

By year 7, a program should have processes in place that allow a team to maintain some perpetual momentum moving forward.  We don't seem to have this systems in place that allow for this. By now we should understand what type of backs work best in the O, what type of OL are needed for success in the O, and the types of QBs needed to be most successful and recruit accordingly. From my perspective we tend to try and get the best available player irregardless of fit. Doing so makes each year is a mystery of what we will have and see. However, we call and run the same plays no matter personnel. That's foolish. If your recruiting and personnel are going to be flexible, then the plays and calls MUST be as flexible. Otherwise you get the discombobulated, out of sync mess on O we've had the last 5 years. It's a systematic issue that, IMO, isn't fixable with the current HC...no matter how much I support him and want him to have success here.

[WalkingCarpet 1,379]

2 minutes ago, bigbird said:

For me, it's not that black and white. I believe there is a 3rd category. Those of us that like Gus and want him to be successful but see major faults that, in year 7, have yet to be addressed.  It's not like we necessarily want a coaching change. We want Gus to win but don't see him being able to do so consistently.

Wait, there are people who don't feel this way?

[abw0004 10,104]

1 minute ago, ellitor said:

That could be part of an issue but another issue is sometimes people confuse shots to their opinions & views as shots to the themselves. On that posters have to get thicker skin or work on their reading comprehension TBBH.  I agree here.  That was something I struggled with for about the first 6 months of being on this forum.  It is a learning curve for some, and I was in that category.  For this reason is why I try to highlight when posters of two totally different viewpoints converse in a respectful way.  It just makes the thread that much better.  

He was banned so quickly because he's a known troll that has been banned on various AU boards including the old Auburn Eagle.  I did not know this.  Thanks for sharing that.  It made me wonder why others like L I G E R and thrustmaxwell lasted on here for so long.  

 

[ellitor 33,062]

@abw0004 If you want to address more than 1 idea from a post you are quoting it is much more user friendly for posters to be able to reply in turn to you if you highlight the specific part you want to address then click the orange "Quote Selection" box that pops up & replying to that selected quote outside of the quote instead of placing your reply inside of their quote.

10 minutes ago, abw0004 said:

It made me wonder why others like L I G E R and thrustmaxwell lasted on here for so long.  

Their return wasn't that long.

[abw0004 10,104]

1 minute ago, ellitor said:

@abw0004 If you want to address more than 1 idea from a post you are quoting it is much more user friendly for posters to be able to reply in turn to you if you highlight the specific part you want to address then click the orange "Quote Selection" box that pops up & replying to that selected quote outside of the quote instead of placing your reply inside of their quote.

I understand.  I actually did it to make it easier for the end-reader.  My theory was that when you have to do multi-quotes the post can get very long and confusing.  Sometimes people give up reading.  The other route is just quoting the entire section and answering below in one/multiple paragraphs which can also get confusing on which part they are responding to.  I have had that issue multiple times for posters who do not post in complete sentences or do not start a new paragraph for the next subject.

So if I just went into the quote and addressed each section in a different color you would know exactly which part of your quote I was responding to and it made the post smaller for others to read.

[McLoofus 35,182]

29 minutes ago, bigbird said:

For me, it's not that black and white. I believe there is a 3rd category. Those of us that like Gus and want him to be successful but see major faults that, in year 7, have yet to be addressed.  It's not like we necessarily want a coaching change. We want Gus to win but don't see him being able to do so consistently.

 

23 minutes ago, WalkingCarpet said:

Wait, there are people who don't feel this way?

[leglessdan 1,934]

Why are people so eager to regulate what another person says or thinks about a topic when it doesn't align with their belief? Seems to be an epidemic going on these days.

[abw0004 10,104]

6 minutes ago, leglessdan said:

Why are people so eager to regulate what another person says or thinks about a topic when it doesn't align with their belief? Seems to be an epidemic going on these days.

I'm not sure it is that, more so the context in how it is said.  For example, I think you had a great discussion Tuesday with me and I think Keesler.  Your opinions were very different from mine but since it was said respectfully I think you can agree it was a great outcome.  Obviously not all our your views align with my beliefs, but in how you respond and converse is done in a very mature fashion.  Posters who are calling names, making fun of how a poster signs off with their name at the bottom, etc is I think the context of how that needs to change.  Does that make sense?

[BigWhiskey91 632]

54 minutes ago, bigbird said:

For me, it's not that black and white. I believe there is a 3rd category. Those of us that like Gus and want him to be successful but see major faults that, in year 7, have yet to be addressed.  It's not like we necessarily want a coaching change. We want Gus to win but don't see him being able to do so consistently.

By year 7, a program should have processes in place that allow a team to maintain some perpetual momentum moving forward.  We don't seem to have this systems in place that allow for this. By now we should understand what type of backs work best in the O, what type of OL are needed for success in the O, and the types of QBs needed to be most successful and recruit accordingly. From my perspective we tend to try and get the best available player irregardless of fit. Doing so makes each year is a mystery of what we will have and see. However, we call and run the same plays no matter personnel. That's foolish. If your recruiting and personnel are going to be flexible, then the plays and calls MUST be as flexible. Otherwise you get the discombobulated, out of sync mess on O we've had the last 5 years. It's a systematic issue that, IMO, isn't fixable with the current HC...no matter how much I support him and want him to have success here.

Yeah this is the major concern. I think this is why many of us were happy to hear Gatewood was trending as the starter at the end of spring. Just felt like the design of the passing game doesn’t maximize Nix’s skill set, but thought if Nix was really outshining Gatewood, there must be something there. It sucks having to wait so long to establish an identity on offense. Hopefully we see some progress this week and next, but regardless, we will have another major reset next year on offense and the then we have the defense losing a ton of folks too. 

At times it feels like our staff is so hyper focused on putting out the worst fire that they do not see the other fires growing in size until they have to shift focus. Every year it’s another personnel group that has massive rebuilding to do. 

[Tiger 8,817]

One thing to also consider for our problems on O:

QB Coach -- Dilly

RB Coach -- Caddy

WR Coach -- Burns

OL Coach - Grimes

 

Not a single one of these guys would be hired by another SEC program at their current position. And Dilly/Caddy/Burns do a great job recruiting for sure. But they are all grossly under-qualified at this stage in their careers to be holding their positions at an SEC power like Auburn. They just are. If they were fired I don't even think they would get an interviewed by any SEC teams to fill a vacancy. Caddy has name recognition but we plucked him from HS/AAF. 

You can't have subpar hires and expect this thing to operate at an elite level. Gus is dumb as hell for thinking that would work.

It's no surprise our defense has been vastly outshining our O over the past few years.

[McLoofus 35,182]

2 minutes ago, BigWhiskey91 said:

At times it feels like our offensive staff is so hyper focused on putting out the worst fire that they do not see the other fires growing in size until they have to shift focus. Every year it’s another personnel group that has massive rebuilding to do. 

Small edit mine.

We'll occasionally see a major exodus on defense- linebackers last year, DL this year- but the difference is Steele is developing the guys behind them in practice and through game reps and, and we don't fall off a cliff when a few guys move on. (We are thin at safety but I don't think it's from negligent recruiting or development. Certainly, the 1s are producing.) 

I won't get into the issues with offensive roster management here. But they are bad and they exist at almost every position group. 

 

[McLoofus 35,182]

2 minutes ago, Tiger said:

QB Coach -- Dilly

RB Coach -- Caddy

WR Coach -- Burns

OL Coach - Grimes

None of these guys will challenge Gus or threaten to find a better way of doing things than whatever he wrote in his book 16 years ago. Except maybe Caddy, who is almost certainly being ignored and who will hopefully find a better gig and be the next TWill or TRob. Even so, like you said, he's a first year guy who probably didn't have a lot of other P5 offers yet. So even he probably isn't rocking the boat. 

Dilly might be the next Dabo but he's not here to bite the hand that feeds. 

But yeah. What we have now is the culmination of a steady process of removing any outside ideas or new ways of thinking from the staff. As you, I and other objective observers have been saying for years.

Oh, you forgot Porter, who is a stud with tons of experience. Which is why he coaches the position we don't use. 

[AUFriction 1,179]

16 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

Since his 4th year in 2011, Dabo has been winning 10+ games each season. Dabo has had sustained success. It hasn't been a roller coaster of ups a downs like Gus has had at Auburn.

Gus is in his 7th year. Gus and Mark Stoops at Kentucky are tied as the 2nd longest tenured coaches in the SEC behind Saban who's been at Bama since 2007. Gus has been given time and a nice big contract and buyout for producing pockets of success. Alabama being the in-state rival has no bearing on Auburn losing to Miss State and Tennessee in 2018. Both Miss St and Tennessee had 1st year HC's while Gus was in his 6th year. It's not the players, it's the offense that needs changes. The sign of growing into the job as HC means making necessary changes to improve an aspect of your program that needs improvement. 

Dabo changed both his offense and defense. In 2011 despite winning 10 games, Dabo fired Kevin Steele after they gave up 70 points in their bowl game. He hired Brent Venables from Oklahoma and Clemson's defense has remained consistently good since. Also in 2011, Dabo hired Chad Morris to improve Clemson's offense and their offense has remained consistently good since.

Ed Orgeron changed LSU's offense by bringing in Joe Brady to work on LSU's passing offense. Saban changed Bama's offense in 2014 by bringing in Kiffin to evolve Bama's passing offense. Spurrier changed his offense at South Carolina because his Fun-N-Gun offense from his Florida years wasn't producing. Even experienced coaches have to make changes in order to maintain success.

This comment helps me reiterate a point I made several pages back. If you look across the entire country, there are only a handful of programs that have had sustained success on the level of Dabo at Clemson. They include Clemson, Bama, Georgia (maybe), Ohio State, and Oklahoma. That's it. Every other program is about where we have been the last few years or worse. If you look at each of these consistent teams in more detail:

- Clemson: Easy to win all of their games because they don't really play many (or any) good teams during the season. Their best opponents have been USCe and Florida State (who has been terrible the last few years). I'm not saying they aren't good. I am curious how Auburn would do if we had their schedule. They don't get beat up during the season like SEC West teams do. So, when they get to post season play, most of their players are healthy. Makes it a lot easier to win post season games. It also makes it easy for them to win their 1-2 tough-ish games during the season. 

-Bama: Still don't like Saban. Still am baffled how someone who treats his players like he does is able to be successful. But the fact is that he has put them in uncharted waters. They are recruiting on a level never seen before, and Saban has such a reputation that he can pick almost any coach he wants. Even if the coach doesn't want to work with Saban, they'll take the prestige that comes with having coached with him. It is a real mistake to compare us to Bama right now. We aren't "little brother" as they like to call us. They are the oversized bully that failed three grades in a row, so now they are bigger and stronger than us. Their insane level of success should not detract from ours. The fact remains that we have been the somewhere between the 2nd and 4th most successful SEC program in the years since Saban has been at Bama, despite shady tactics from them (and Georgia) in recruiting. But the good news is that Saban is approaching 70. How much longer will he realistically be able to keep coaching? Many of the most successful coaches have stopped being as successful around the time they've hit that age.

-Georgia: I'm still not completely sold here. Part of me thinks that Smart is riding on Saban's reputation. Still, I'm not sure I'd even put them that high up. They've had 2 good years, and we beat them in the regular season in one of them. Before that, they had Mark Richt, who was compiling records like Malzahn's while playing in a really weak SEC East.

Ohio State: Won't say much here. Refer to my comments on Clemson. The Big 10 has some good teams, but they really don't play a consistently difficult schedule, allowing them to exit the regular season healthy and to play their toughest in season games healthy.

Oklahoma: Kind of the same thing as Ohio State and Clemson here. They've been consistently successful over about the last 5 years. Let's look at their conference since then... Texas hasn't been good since 2010 (and I'm not sold on their rankings this year). TAMU used to be a good team in that conference, but there now in the SEC. Oklahoma State has been very up-and-down (and lately it has been more down). TCU fizzled out after having some consistently good years. The rest of the programs are mediocre at best. Oh yeah, and they get to play Kansas every year and call it a conference game. Oklahoma didn't get this consistently good until the rest of the Big 12 took a step backward. 

So, save Bama, what's the common factor with sustained success? Cupcake conference schedules. Bama is the only team on this list that plays a decent schedule, and even their schedule quality is in question since their out of conference games tend to be really easy (Duke...lol). I'm not an SEC elitist that thinks these teams aren't good. But clearly playing such easy schedules makes it easy to stay healthy during the season. When they do a play their 1 or 2 difficult games of the year, their guys are well-rested and healthy. That's why these teams are the ones that keep ending up in the playoffs. Again, the lone exception here is Bama, who is having just an insane level of success. 

So where am I going with this? Gus IS underperforming. An 8 win season should happen only once every 4 or 5 years. But our realistic expectations should be 9-10 wins in most seasons. Maybe once every few years we make it to the playoffs. Maybe once every few years we have a 7 or 8 win season. But our average should be about 9.5 wins a season. This means we're dropping about one game that we shouldn't drop each year. That's certainly something that has to stop. But that isn't enough to justify the complete anti-Gus hatred that is coming out of some of our fans this year, especially not when we are 2-0 and have played the toughest 2 opponent stretch in the top 10 as of now.

[leglessdan 1,934]

24 minutes ago, abw0004 said:

I'm not sure it is that, more so the context in how it is said.  For example, I think you had a great discussion Tuesday with me and I think Keesler.  Your opinions were very different from mine but since it was said respectfully I think you can agree it was a great outcome.  Obviously not all our your views align with my beliefs, but in how you respond and converse is done in a very mature fashion.  Posters who are calling names, making fun of how a poster signs off with their name at the bottom, etc is I think the context of how that needs to change.  Does that make sense?

It does,  but eh...idk. Everyone seems so touchy these days. I guess I can see where someone may take offense to some things said to them personally,  but opinions or thoughts not so much. I guess I live in a different world than most. I'm a firefighter,  and we bust each balls a the time. You have to have really thick skin to be a part of that Brotherhood. In the end, we all love each other and have the same end goal. We have to, we live a third of our lives together. In recent years, even that's changing for the worse. Ok...off my soapbox...lol. WDE

[Tiger 8,817]

2 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

None of these guys will challenge Gus or threaten to find a better way of doing things than whatever he wrote in his book 16 years ago. Except maybe Caddy, who is almost certainly being ignored and who will hopefully find a better gig and be the next TWill or TRob. Even so, like you said, he's a first year guy who probably didn't have a lot of other P5 offers yet. So even he probably isn't rocking the boat. 

Dilly might be the next Dabo but he's not here to bite the hand that feeds. 

But yeah. What we have now is the culmination of a steady process of removing any outside ideas or new ways of thinking from the staff. As you, I and other objective observers have been saying for years.

Oh, you forgot Porter, who is a stud with tons of experience. Which is why he coaches the position we don't use. 

Ah you're right I forgot Porter who is far and away our best and most accomplished coach on O. But like you said we don't even use his position. I think Gus did that intentionally based on how he has hired for comfort rather than improvement. Porter has been a RB coach for his career and we stick him at TE? Gimme a break. And didn't even move him to RB when we fired Horton. Gus really would rather do what he wants rather than be pushed to win. What a freaking joke.

[Barnacle 9,064]

@McLoofus @Tiger

Good points about assistant hires. I do actually kind of like that Gus is willing to take guys onto his staff with less experience. It's an incredible opportunity for some of our young coaches to be in these positions at Auburn, and I can't help but feel good for those guys and for Gus being willing to give them chances. 

That said, how much of his hiring patterns stem from the possibility that he may not be able to hire more established coaches on the offensive side of the ball? Are seasoned assistants willing to work with him? 

[abw0004 10,104]

4 minutes ago, leglessdan said:

It does,  but eh...idk. Everyone seems so touchy these days. I guess I can see where someone may take offense to some things said to them personally,  but opinions or thoughts not so much. I guess I live in a different world than most. I'm a firefighter,  and we bust each balls a the time. You have to have really thick skin to be a part of that Brotherhood. In the end, we all love each other and have the same end goal. We have to, we live a third of our lives together. In recent years, even that's changing for the worse. Ok...off my soapbox...lol. WDE

Did not know you were a firefighter.  Thanks for sharing that.

[Tiger 8,817]

This Dabo argument about strength of schedule and not being beat up for post-season isn't as strong of a point to me. They beat us head to head the last 3 times we played. And it was all either week 1 or week 2 and the 2 Gus-led teams were totally winnable by us if just one basic correction were made (Umm maybe don't play 6 QBs, and hey how about give Stidham a checkdown or 2 when the entire LB unit of Clemson is blitzing us up the middle?). OK, I'll certainly concede their overall regular season record may be inflated a bit because the ACC isn't great, but also remember by the time the post-season rolls around there is a month between the last game and the playoff game. A lot of the wear and tear has healed by then and everyone is essentially on a level playing field in regards to that.