Jump to content
Null

Sarkisian to interview


Recommended Posts





  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is so stupid. You do know people beat alcoholism every day right? Just like people quit smoking and quit other addictive habits. Your reasons for having doubts about him are the most disgraceful

Posted Images

4 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

i thought he destroyed the falcons? i never read that but i had friends basically claim that. that has been my worry concerning him.

All Dan Quinn. He's like the NFL version of gus. Given multiple chances when he should have been fired and firing/hiring coordinators to get same results. 

They brought him back this year again and he goes and hires all coordinators that he's worked with before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is perfect. We all stumble and fall. No matter if it's Freeze, Sarkisian or anyone else whos battling drugs or a drinking problem, they all deserve a second chance in life. Remember dear friends, we are NOT GOD. GOD forgives. Shouldn't we?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, auskip07 said:

sure doesnt seem like they are screwing up the process.  all good interviews

Agree if they are truly trying to find the best coach for us and not just going through the motions. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Old fan 47 said:

Drinking doesn’t mean you’re involved with hookers does it? I think he is a good fit for the misfit school. Bet he can cast some life into the program and possibly help finish recruiting strong. Gus’ recruiting was going nowhere anymore. He knows offense and with even a decent DC hire, we may not lose much ground, plus I am willing to bet he is not scared to match wits with Saban. Of course AU will wreck it all, so it’s a moot point. 

Sarkesian couldn't handle his high stress life as a head coach without heavy drinking and abusing anxiety medication, and he wasn't even coaching in a place as demanding as the SEC. His meltdown was not a minor event. What makes anyone think being a head coach in the SEC is a good idea for a man with serious addiction issues? It's a pressure cooker to the extreme every single day and it will be relentless. I do not think this would be a good situation for Sark or for Auburn. There's absolutely no reason for Auburn to take such a risk. And I think it shows a huge lack of insight on Sark's part to even consider it.

  • Like 2
  • Facepalm 2
  • Dislike 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tigerbelle said:

Sarkesian couldn't handle his high stress life as a head coach without heavy drinking and abusing anxiety medication, and he wasn't even coaching in a place as demanding as the SEC. His meltdown was not a minor event. What makes anyone think being a head coach in the SEC is a good idea for a man with serious addiction issues? It's a pressure cooker to the extreme every single day and it will be relentless. I do not think this would be a good situation for Sark or for Auburn. There's absolutely no reason for Auburn to take such a risk. And I think it shows a huge lack of insight on Sark's part to even consider it.

How are you aware of his current life? Do you know he could not handle the stress? Kind of a broad assumption about someone you don’t even know personally. Trust me, I have multiple friends that have been through the AA program and they will be the first to say that every day normal life is more stressful than their occupations. While I agree alcoholism can be a drastic issue to deal with, do you really believe no other college coach has alcohol problems? Sarks were made public due to stupid outbursts on his part. Have you heard anything negative pertaining to his issues in the last 2 to 3 years? And yes, I drink plenty, but that seemed like a shallow post. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kwagoner said:

Do you think one of those 'maybes' will be the guy?  I don't see how you conduct an interview, agree to offer the job to the interviewee, agree on proposed terms to offer, then come to an agreement with the interviewee all in the same day. 

Perhaps he is interviewing only because he was promised one and it makes headlines?  I know that at least three of those guys share an agent, so that would be one call to schedule three or more interviews. And we know that particular agent uses interviews and scare tactics to better current positions or open up other opportunities.

Assuming the source is correct on the timeline to announce the new HC, I cannot see Sark being the guy. How much faith do you put in this source? I know back during the Tuberville era, you were pretty well in the know.

The source is usually good or I wouldn't post it but I agree with the interview timing and have the same question. Thanks for the compliment but Tubs days were easy since were friends

Edited by Proud Tiger
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tigerbelle said:

Sarkesian couldn't handle his high stress life as a head coach without heavy drinking and abusing anxiety medication, and he wasn't even coaching in a place as demanding as the SEC. His meltdown was not a minor event. What makes anyone think being a head coach in the SEC is a good idea for a man with serious addiction issues? It's a pressure cooker to the extreme every single day and it will be relentless. I do not think this would be a good situation for Sark or for Auburn. There's absolutely no reason for Auburn to take such a risk. And I think it shows a huge lack of insight on Sark's part to even consider it.

If he can work for Saban without relapse, he can handle the stress of Auburn HC.

That said, I still don't want him.  I don't think he's a good HC, he's just propped up by the talent at Alabama that he had little to do with recruiting there.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

No no no on Sark. Falcons' offense nose dived, in a gigantic way (33.8 ppg under Shanahan to 22.1 and 25.9 under Sarkisian). At USC, Sark arrived after the sanctions ended. Kiffin outperformed him despite scholly reductions. Embarrassingly so in my opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Old fan 47 said:

True. Then again, Saban was horrible with the Dolphins wasn’t he? 

Sark wasn’t the issue in the ATL. It was more Defense and HC that was of issue. Sark had Atlanta 4th in passing and 10th in scoring in the NFL. 
 

To be honest, I’m not sure why they got rid of him. I thought he did a pretty good job while in charge of the O for the games I watched... but hey, that’s just me. Although I live in the ATL I’m not much of a NFL guy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, slyinsocal said:

No no no on Sark. Falcons' offense nose dived, in a gigantic way (33.8 ppg under Shanahan to 22.1 and 25.9 under Sarkisian). At USC, Sark arrived after the sanctions ended. Kiffin outperformed him despite scholly reductions. Embarrassingly so in my opinion.

I understand your thought... but a lot of that is from the Defense being so poor and causing the play calling to play catch-up and having injured RBs. 

You’re also comparing to one of the top offensive years in NFL history in the Shanahan year to Sarks.  

Falcons were 4th in passing and 10th in scoring offense if I recall. Both really good numbers. 
 

As for the Kiffin comparison, Kiffin’s a better OFfensive mind  than Sark... I have no doubt about that. 

Edited by Bathel
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bathel said:

Sark wasn’t the issue in the ATL. It was more Defense and HC that was of issue. Sark had Atlanta 4th in passing and 10th in scoring in the NFL. 
 

To be honest, I’m not sure why they got rid of him. I thought he did a pretty good job while in charge of the O for the games I watched... but hey, that’s just me. Although I live in the ATL I’m not much of a NFL guy. 

The Falcons don’t give us much to celebrate here. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JTFazz said:

About alcoholism? No. About Freeze, yes. It was intended as humor. But the AMA did recognize alcoholism as a disease over 60 years ago.

The only reason they recognize it now is because that’s the only way they can get insurance money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Old fan 47 said:

How are you aware of his current life? Do you know he could not handle the stress? Kind of a broad assumption about someone you don’t even know personally. Trust me, I have multiple friends that have been through the AA program and they will be the first to say that every day normal life is more stressful than their occupations. While I agree alcoholism can be a drastic issue to deal with, do you really believe no other college coach has alcohol problems? Sarks were made public due to stupid outbursts on his part. Have you heard anything negative pertaining to his issues in the last 2 to 3 years? And yes, I drink plenty, but that seemed like a shallow post. 

I have worked for an addiction specialist and I studied addiction in college. I know many addicts, and am close to a few.  I'm not talking about a subject I know nothing about.  I don't come here posting crap, and I never have. Shallow post? You are very ignorant and insulting. How many of your friends are head coaches in the SEC with unrealistic expectations and in the public eye 24/7? None of them. It is not a job for ANYONE who is unstable. You obviously don't understand addiction. Made stupid mistakes in public? His addiction was  completely out of control....this was not a "mistake". It was full blown addiction and he was FORCED to get help. Sark suffers from anxiety issues and was abusing prescription meds as well as abusing alcohol. How do you think that will work with coaching at Auburn?  He has a long history of drug abuse and I know that he didn't just become sober forever 2-3 years ago. Addicts have relapses more often than not during their lives when they face stressors that caused them to use drugs in the first place. Those stressors are called triggers. That's the stress your friends are talking about. Every addict has their own triggers. It takes a lot to stay sober and a head coach won't have that time to take care of himself. I stand by what I posted. Sark is in a fragile state and he should not be considered for this position. It is a terrible idea for all involved. I want Auburn's team to have a coach they can trust and depend on. 

What other coaches do or don't do does not concern me, or Auburn, unless they are considering one of them for the head coaching position also. Auburn already had two other coaches in other sports who had issues that were overlooked/ignored and they almost caused the programs they ran to go completely off the rails and/or face ugly lawsuits. Why would Auburn want to risk that again in a much more popular and highly visible sport?  

  • Like 2
  • Dislike 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...