Jump to content

#10 ranked 2020 class revisited


bigbird
 Share

Recommended Posts





22 out of 31 signees are still at P5 schools. That's about average for P5. Several of AU's key players this season are in this class.

I've seen worse, and worse is just getting started. Since the portal and bribes have created a situation of unlimited free agency 24/7/365 there are going to be a lot more transfers in the future, both incoming and outgoing.

  • Like 3
  • Facepalm 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you even listen?

 

Who cares about them at other schools?  

AT AUBURN, THEY WERE EITHER BADLY EVALUATED OR POORLY DEVELOPED.
 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Did you even listen?

 

Who cares about them at other schools?  

AT AUBURN, THEY WERE EITHER BADLY EVALUATED OR POORLY DEVELOPED.
 

And a coaching change etc.  This is going to be much more the norm than the exception going forward.  We will not develop our way to consistently beating the top of the SEC.  You can buy your way there.

Edited by AU9377
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

We will not develop our way to consistently beating the top of the SEC.  You can buy your way there.

This seems like the players are looking for instant gratification without the hard work it takes to develop.  Not everyone is a 5* that can step right in and contribute, but if you bounce around trying to find the best deal money wise and sacrifice your development it may not end well for the player.  JMO.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Screenshot_20220906-073856.png

Missed evaluation and underdevelopment. 

Tank was big win.

Zykeivous has been dissapointing.

Steiner mostly useless sadly. 

Capers, Evans, and Malcolm all mostly unused.

Tisdol, Frazier, Jernigan, Wright, and Burks all have provided depth but not much more.

Zierer, Coffey, and Council aren't great but damn they're saving us right now.

Kobe, Chris Thompson, Romello, Canion, and DFA are unfortunate losses.

Chayil should have never been at an SEC program, same for Grant Loy, and Caylin Newton.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically, 10 have contributed meaningful snaps since they have been here. Not many of the ones who left contributed to meaningful snaps. Most of Gus' classes were like this. The top end were either bust or left because they didn't play. Of course there were exceptions..but we basically been playing the last 4-5 years with the same level of talent out of hs as we have been recruiting under new staff when you break it down.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tigerpro2a said:

So basically, 10 have contributed meaningful snaps since they have been here. Not many of the ones who left contributed to meaningful snaps. Most of Gus' classes were like this. The top end were either bust or left because they didn't play. Of course there were exceptions..but we basically been playing the last 4-5 years with the same level of talent out of hs as we have been recruiting under new staff when you break it down.

But hey! We sure got dem top ten classes! Guh-hyuck!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

And a coaching change etc.  This is going to be much more the norm than the exception going forward.  We will not develop our way to consistently beating the top of the SEC.  You can buy your way there.

Only if you have the moo-lah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hank2020 said:

Only if you have the moo-lah.

And are willing to spend it like the bamas, georgias and ta&m;s of the world.  Auburn alums have the moo-lah but not ponying up to the degree the other schools are at this point in time.  It's coming, but will take a while unfortunately.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still too early to evaluate that class. Frankly, that's jumping the gun.

I look at that list and see obvious successes:  Tank, Zierer, and Council. No questions asked on those three.

I see multiple guys that look like obvious successes:  Jet, Riley, and Tate. Those guys look like multi-year starters in the making. They're starting as Juniors/RS Sophomores despite the fact that one of them (Jet) is the youngest guy in the class after reclassifying.

You have some multi-year contributors (like Burks) who won't be starters, and we have a group of guys who still have a high ceiling like Wright, Frazier, and Capers. Very much TBD on those three.

At Auburn, we didn't utilize a few guys like I hoped we would (Tennison, Pegues... who looked great in his first start at Ole Miss, Height, and Canion). Those guys looked like they were on their way to being really good players for Auburn before they left. Lots of misevaluations. I'll agree with that, but it's not true that guys didn't develop. Zierer is better. Riley is a different dude entirely. Tate Johnson has grown up. Hell, even JJ Pegues developed in his time at Auburn (even it was just picking the right position).

Also, I'd say it's a bit unfair to include guys like Nick Curtis and Caylin Newton. Unless I'm mistaken, those guys were walk-ons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

This seems like the players are looking for instant gratification without the hard work it takes to develop.  Not everyone is a 5* that can step right in and contribute, but if you bounce around trying to find the best deal money wise and sacrifice your development it may not end well for the player.  JMO.

I agree.  I just think it is a symptom of the system we have created.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd also flag this bit of info:

Oregon was #9 on that list. Two of their top four guys in that class were Jayson Jones and Robby Ashford... they're currently playing at Auburn.

It just feels like jumping the gun to talk about whether a class developed or contributed when you're halfway through their time. Almost every Tuberville class would've looked like crap by that metric.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The win/loss record AU has had over the past years speaks to all of this. It’s about winning and losing guys. AU has got whipped by most everyone. AU is still years away from being competitive on a national level. it’s reality. Everyone knows why. Don’t get it twisted. All of these power index lists and development of recruit lists and who has better lemonade doesn’t mean squat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JDUBB4AU said:

The win/loss record AU has had over the past years speaks to all of this. It’s about winning and losing guys. AU has got whipped by most everyone. AU is still years away from being competitive on a national level. it’s reality. Everyone knows why. Don’t get it twisted. All of these power index lists and development of recruit lists and who has better lemonade doesn’t mean squat. 

But we also have a Chick-fil-A.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/cassanova-mckinzy-chick-fil-a-auburn-clemson_n_1250237/amp

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bigbird said:

Did you even listen?

 

Who cares about them at other schools?  

AT AUBURN, THEY WERE EITHER BADLY EVALUATED OR POORLY DEVELOPED.
 

Or turned into important contributors.

What they do at other schools is important because if they succeed there your claim of bad evaluation or poor development falls apart. A lot of what this class does or doesn't do at AU or other schools has yet to be determined. You should try this trick again two years from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mikey said:

What they do at other schools is important because if they succeed there your claim of bad evaluation or poor development falls apart.

Maybe you should rethink your premise.

Your quoted post actually bolsters my claims.

If Auburn brought in talent and the players were unable to reach it at Auburn, transfer, and then shine, then logic dictates that they were developed there and not at Auburn.

 

Again, did you listen to the segment?

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, mcgufcm said:

I'd also flag this bit of info:

Oregon was #9 on that list. Two of their top four guys in that class were Jayson Jones and Robby Ashford... they're currently playing at Auburn.

It just feels like jumping the gun to talk about whether a class developed or contributed when you're halfway through their time. Almost every Tuberville class would've looked like crap by that metric.

And tuberville was an 8-4 coach when you average it all out.   Not much better than Gus in my opinion.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll respectfully disagree. If you can’t see the difference in player development or sustained success, no one will ever convince you otherwise. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bigbird said:

If Auburn brought in talent and the players were unable to reach it at Auburn, transfer, and then shine, then logic dictates that they were developed there and not at Auburn.

If they were showing promise at AU, transfer and also do well at their new school, what that tells us is that they should have been encouraged to stay at AU.  Pegues and Tennison come immediately to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

If they were showing promise at AU, transfer and also do well at their new school, what that tells us is that they should have been encouraged to stay at AU.  Pegues and Tennison come immediately to mind.

Even Dawgs lost some good players ( but you are definitely aware of that already). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

Even Dawgs lost some good players ( but you are definitely aware of that already). 

So, did they lose them because of missed evaluation and underdevelopment? Because that's what the OP states happened at AU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Members Online

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...