OL coach

[bg5 536]

If Grimes was a better recruiter then maybe we could get some of the OL that Gus says we can recruit. We seem to be able to get high quality players at every other position and as far as I can tell Gus is the HC over those positions as well. 

[shabby 1,957]

On 12/20/2019 at 10:59 AM, I_M4_AU said:

If the rumors are true and Gus actually limits Grimes as to who he can recruit and who he can’t; how does one excel at recruiting?  How does a position coach get in the position we are in without getting in the HC’s ear every year?  How does a position coach allow the HC to sign more WRs then we need when his position is crumbling?

Will a new OL coach really help?

When have rumours around here ever been true?

[McLoofus 35,182]

23 minutes ago, shabby said:

When have rumours around here ever been true?

How often are you sure they're not?

[shabby 1,957]

13 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

How often are you sure they're not?

100% of the time when they're posted without a reputable source which is 100% of the time around here

[McLoofus 35,182]

5 minutes ago, shabby said:

100% of the time when they're posted without a reputable source which is 100% of the time around here

I can see where that approach might make life more simple, if less accurate. 

[auburn4ever 1,266]

I heard that Miami fired Dan Enos. If Gus lets Grimes go, would Enos be a good OL coach? I realize he was the OC at Miami, but just wondering if he'd be a good hire for Auburn.

[Auburn Kev 1,653]

52 minutes ago, auburn4ever said:

I heard that Miami fired Dan Enos. If Gus lets Grimes go, would Enos be a good OL coach? I realize he was the OC at Miami, but just wondering if he'd be a good hire for Auburn.

Enos has not coached the offensive line before. So no, he would not be a good hire.

[bigbird 60,512]

3 hours ago, shabby said:

100% of the time when they're posted without a reputable source which is 100% of the time around here

What would you consider reputable?

[shabby 1,957]

35 minutes ago, bigbird said:

What would you consider reputable?

Someone who has a history of reliability with claims. What would you consider a reputable source?

[bigbird 60,512]

16 hours ago, shabby said:

100% of the time when they're posted without a reputable source which is 100% of the time around here

 

12 hours ago, shabby said:

Someone who has a history of reliability with claims. 

If this is the case, you're either looking in the wrong place, listening to the wrong people, or purposefully dismissing information.

 

12 hours ago, shabby said:

What would you consider a reputable source?

My definition is probably a little different. Players, coaches, analyst, AD staffers, parents, as well as others with similar contacts and interactions. Also, @ellitor. He does more research and knows his stuff with regards to recruiting.

[I_M4_AU 7,801]

19 hours ago, shabby said:

When have rumours around here ever been true?

Sorry I missed out on the conversation, but what Loof and bigbird said.  If you are paying attention, you know who the reliable sources are.  They are not always correct, but you can rest assured that there is ample amount of smoke for them to report something.  JMO of course.

[toddc 13,194]

18 hours ago, shabby said:

100% of the time when they're posted without a reputable source which is 100% of the time around here

If you’re on this forum for any length of time you can easily tell who’s reliable as a source and who’s rumor-mongering, and it’s not that complicated.

[cole256 17,051]

22 hours ago, shabby said:

100% of the time when they're posted without a reputable source which is 100% of the time around here

Well you're wrong on that because I remember plenty of times where things were posted on here and then they turn out to be true. Also there are things that a person may KNOW, so it may be a rumor to you but to them it's a fact. 

If there was a person who on multiple occasions posted rumors and on top of that they were false like you stated this would be discussed on the open forum and I imagine they would be limited in their ability to continue to post. 

[cole256 17,051]

5 hours ago, bigbird said:

 

If this is the case, you're either looking in the wrong place, listening to the wrong people, or purposefully dismissing information.

 

My definition is probably a little different. Players, coaches, analyst, AD staffers, parents, as well as others with similar contacts and interactions. Also, @ellitor. He does more research and knows his stuff with regards to recruiting.

Yep. When it comes to recruiting that can change from year to year. I myself usually know a little with stuff in the north west part of the state. Sometimes I can give good stuff like calling Armani Goodwin 2 years before he is even on a radar to another year I literally don't know anything going on with our recruiting at all.....year to year things change.

[shabby 1,957]

8 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Well you're wrong on that because I remember plenty of times where things were posted on here and then they turn out to be true. Also there are things that a person may KNOW, so it may be a rumor to you but to them it's a fact. 

If there was a person who on multiple occasions posted rumors and on top of that they were false like you stated this would be discussed on the open forum and I imagine they would be limited in their ability to continue to post. 

People on here post rumors with agendas. Think Kevin Steele ain't gonna stay if Gus is retained rumour. I said I consider when it comes from a reputable source. I said that rumours on here not from reputable sources 100 percent of the time. I knowledge that was hyperbole on my part. But I do think we need to be more wary of those who start rumors simply because they have an anti gus or anti Auburn agenda. 

[dyehardfanAU 2,117]

5 minutes ago, shabby said:

People on here post rumors with agendas. Think Kevin Steele ain't gonna stay if Gus is retained rumour. I said I consider when it comes from a reputable source. I said that rumours on here not from reputable sources 100 percent of the time. I knowledge that was hyperbole on my part. But I do think we need to be more wary of those who start rumors simply because they have an anti gus or anti Auburn agenda. 

You're a delicate little flower, aren't you?

[cole256 17,051]

23 minutes ago, shabby said:

People on here post rumors with agendas. Think Kevin Steele ain't gonna stay if Gus is retained rumour. I said I consider when it comes from a reputable source. I said that rumours on here not from reputable sources 100 percent of the time. I knowledge that was hyperbole on my part. But I do think we need to be more wary of those who start rumors simply because they have an anti gus or anti Auburn agenda. 

I understand your overall thought and don't necessarily disagree, the important take from that is understanding just because a person disagree or has a problem with something doesn't make them anti Gus or anti Auburn. IMO lately the biggest problem we've had on here is that. Questioning people's fanhood or trying to silence a person overall because they say something that another person doesn't want to hear. 

[shabby 1,957]

23 minutes ago, dyehardfanAU said:

You're a delicate little flower, aren't you?

Not so much. I'm just not an idiot that believes something just cause I want it to believe.  Your welcome to be that idiot though. You seem to have the prerequisite experience

[dyehardfanAU 2,117]

1 hour ago, shabby said:

Not so much. I'm just not an idiot that believes something just cause I want it to believe.  Your welcome to be that idiot though. You seem to have the prerequisite experience

🙄

[ellitor 33,091]

12 hours ago, bigbird said:

Also, @ellitor. He does more research and knows his stuff with regards to recruiting.

And most of the time I state the source in an original post or give a general bibliography of where it came from. Now when I have to repeat the info I'm not going to go through all that trouble again.

[ellitor 33,091]

6 hours ago, shabby said:

Think Kevin Steele ain't gonna stay if Gus is retained rumour.

That makes no sense. Likely nobody in this fanbase wants Steele gone. There was no aganda from anyone who posted that here. It was just simply relaying the scuttlebutt from the pay sites. If there was an agenda it came from there.

[bigbird 60,512]

6 minutes ago, ellitor said:

And most of the time I state the source in an original post or give a general bibliography of where it came from. Now when I have to repeat the info I'm not going to go through all that trouble again.

I just don't state anything anymore.

[bigbird 60,512]

1 minute ago, ellitor said:

It was just simply relaying the scuttlebutt from the pay sites. 

FTR, I've never been on a pay site...well, their boards/forums

[shabby 1,957]

42 minutes ago, ellitor said:

That makes no sense. Likely nobody in this fanbase wants Steele gone. There was no aganda from anyone who posted that here. It was just simply relaying the scuttlebutt from the pay sites. If there was an agenda it came from there.

The rumour in my mind was not about wanting Steele gone. Just the opposite. It was about creating a narrative about why Gus needed to be fired. You guys can believe whatever rumours you like. Have at it. I'm just saying I dont much entertain them.unless they are from reliable sources. 

[AuMarine 1,372]

2 hours ago, shabby said:

The rumour in my mind was not about wanting Steele gone. Just the opposite. It was about creating a narrative about why Gus needed to be fired. You guys can believe whatever rumours you like. Have at it. I'm just saying I dont much entertain them.unless they are from reliable sources. 

And there is some very good info floating around on this board.. sometimes those people who have the good info say nothing at all when those “rumors” are being tossed around. We also have those posters who know everything about everything and they don’t mind telling you that and in the end, they really are just full of it. But overall, this is a great forum, you just have to sift through the trash every once in a while.