Jump to content

Sabotage is afoot


Swamp Eagle
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Very true. My worry is that that’s the argument for an OC, not so much an HC. We’ve been down the  offensive genius HC path before.

No we haven't. CGM was only a genius in his own mind. When college football caught up with him and the rules, his offense got stagnant. That is not the case with CLK. It is not a fair comparison. 

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





3 minutes ago, lovemytigerz said:

But we DID know!  Even Pat Dye told them to hire Kirby.  

yes he did and we ignored him other than giving him an interview.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lovemytigerz said:

He was totally that coach.  GA just wasn't that team yet, hence the 10-3 mediocrity.  Just needed a little time ..

10 - 3 is mediocre? Lol. Man I am done with you.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DAG said:

No we haven't. CGM was only a genius in his own mind. When college football caught up with him and the rules, his offense got stagnant. That is not the case with CLK. It is not a fair comparison. 

 

giphy.gif

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DAG said:

No we haven't. CGM was only a genius in his own mind. When college football caught up with him and the rules, his offense got stagnant. That is not the case with CLK. It is not a fair comparison. 

to be fair he was considered a genius by many in the sports world at times and then he became average after saban cried about the hunh.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DAG said:

Just because Pat Dye wanted him did not guarantee he would be where he is at now. Just two years ago UGA fans were calling him Mark Richt 2.0. He took a program already established and finally got them over the hump. The fact that you said he had to "rebuild' them shows that you clearly don't know UGAs history. They were a 12,8,10,10 win team the four previous seasons that CKS got there. It worked itself out like AU should've worked itself out with Gus, alas it didn't.

The fans' impatience doesn't change what Pat Dye and many of us saw in Kirby Smart.  There is no doubt about a great football mind.  Where did I say Kirby had to totally rebuild them?  GA wasn't awful, and in need of a total rebuild, unlike Auburn at this point.  But 8 and 10 win seasons are not the standard for greatness in the SEC.  Kirby took mediocrity and turned it into a juggernaut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aubiefifty said:

to be fair he was considered a genius by many in the sports world at times and then he became average after saban cried about the hunh.

Yes and afterwards it clearly shown he isn't. So why are we comparing a current day CLK to Gus Malzhan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

with the mid season turmoil and losing a lot of players i think he has been outstanding. and he adjustments at halftime are refreshing to me. i think friend has as well. if we had a decent passing qb i think he looks really really well. i will say regardless of who we keep and who we pass on i will be forever be grateful for those that stayed to help us in our time of need.

Agree with all of that.  The team has looked much better, and Schmedding & Friend have done a good job, expecially under the circumstances.  The whole staff really has done a good job of not just holding the team together, but revamping the system, and inspiring the kids to play winning ball even with all that has happened, and in a season that is largely a bust.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DAG said:

Yes and afterwards it clearly shown he isn't. So why are we comparing a current day CLK to Gus Malzhan?

because the guy you addressed was right. and i realize cam helped a lot. but after our natty and 2013 he was called that quite a bit. and i am not comparing lane to anyone so i am not sure where you got that dag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, lovemytigerz said:

He, like Kirby, just needs time to build! 

What did he need to build? It was already built. He had to prove he could get them over the hump in the weak SEC East. Something Mark Richt just could not do. I agree CKS is a great coach and I would love to have him we don't.

Further, I am not going to let you take me down a rabbit hole. The whole debate came with you comparing Dan Lanning to Lane Kiffin and somehow attributing that to a Gus vs Kirby debate. At that time, Gus and Kirby were both green. However, Gus was considered a hot commodity across the nation after his one coaching year at ASU. He knew Auburn and was a major proponent in us earning a NC. So although I would've liked CKS, I also understood why AU went to Gus. I also understand why UGA would want Kirby (Mind you, UGA fans did not overwhelming want Kirby as he had no experience as a HC) as he has a history with them and learned under the greatest coach of all time. The comparison is not there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DAG said:

No we haven't. CGM was only a genius in his own mind. When college football caught up with him and the rules, his offense got stagnant. That is not the case with CLK. It is not a fair comparison. 

Lane has show he can adapt his offense to his players' strengths.  Gus never did that.

  • Like 4
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, lovemytigerz said:

It was way to early to know Kirby would build a juggernaut when Auburn passed on him in 2013 to hire flashy guru Gus and his sandlot high school offense.  But, some of us DID know ...

Regarding Lane, we already know Lane doesn't have a great football mind; he has analytics, and believes his "scenario probability tables" will always provide the winning decision matrix, all evidence to the contrary.  Heck, Lane's train was stopped cold by a herd of swarming Hawgs! 

One other stat:  Lane is only the 29th winningest coach in the country.  That's 6 places behind Gus Malzahn, and 10 places behind Bryan Harsin.  http://www.coacheshotseat.com/WinningestActiveCoachesIA.htm

I have personally witness Lane turning offenses around from really bad to really good.   (W/L record or not.)   I watched him at UT take a team that could not pass,  rush, catch, block,  and make huge  noticeable improvements immediately.  There is a reason UT and Ole miss are angry about him leaving.   Same at FAU,  same at ole miss.  even at USC  he kept the offense afloat under very harsh sanctions.  He revolutionized bama's offense at the time,  and I expect the same from him here at Auburn.

 

Don't start tearing down the whole program before he even starts because he is not your choice in coaches. You are better than that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lovemytigerz said:

Yes, 10-3 is mediocre in the SEC.  The goal is championships, not also ran.  This isn't the PAC 12.

But you want a PAC 12 Coach? LOL . And I like Dan, but he is going to win 10 games this year just like the last coach did. Mediocre results. 

Edited by DAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lovemytigerz said:

Agree with all of that.  The team has looked much better, and Schmedding & Friend have done a good job, expecially under the circumstances.  The whole staff really has done a good job of not just holding the team together, but revamping the system, and inspiring the kids to play winning ball even with all that has happened, and in a season that is largely a bust.

i was not sure we would win another game after we fired harsin but then i was not sure we would with harsin still coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

because the guy you addressed was right. and i realize cam helped a lot. but after our natty and 2013 he was called that quite a bit. and i am not comparing lane to anyone so i am not sure where you got that dag.

He is not right. He is attributing the stats that I presented of Lane Kiffin currently to the idea that we had a so-called genius. GUS WAS NEVER A GENIUS. He had a small pocket of success that catapulted him up. CLK has a long history of stellar offensive playcalling in several different capacities. Gus had a scheme that was before it's time and when people caught up with it, he could not adapt.  I didn't say YOU did anything. The conversation that you entered was discussing CLK hiring and offensive prowess and somehow relating it to Gus's stint over here. That is a comparison

Edited by DAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Quietmaninthecorner said:

I have personally witness Lane turning offenses around from really bad to really good.   (W/L record or not.)   I watched him at UT take a team that could not pass,  rush, catch, block,  and make huge  noticeable improvements immediately.  There is a reason UT and Ole miss are angry about him leaving.   Same at FAU,  same at ole miss.  even at USC  he kept the offense afloat under very harsh sanctions.  He revolutionized bama's offense at the time,  and I expect the same from him here at Auburn.

 

Don't start tearing down the whole program before he even starts because he is not your choice in coaches. You are better than that.

I'm not asserting that he wouldn't win at all.  Quite the opposite.  He would win a lot of games at Auburn, but he's not an elite coach who will build Auburn into a powerhouse. 

The standard is not to take a team that is at rock bottom and just bounce off the bottom.  The standard is juggernaut .. not just being better than rock bottom or even winning a lot of games, but fielding a team that is a legit championship contender every season!  Kiffin hasn't done that anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DAG said:

Yes and afterwards it clearly shown he isn't. So why are we comparing a current day CLK to Gus Malzhan?

i am not comparing them at all and i told you this once. i was just saying gus was considered a genius for a while by the media and the usual suspects. nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DAG said:

Yes and afterwards it clearly shown he isn't. So why are we comparing a current day CLK to Gus Malzhan?

Because the arguments being made for Kiffin now are strikingly similar to those that were made for Gus.  Yet, Kiffin's record is actually inferior to Gus's!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aubiefifty said:

i am not comparing them at all and i told you this once. i was just saying gus was considered a genius for a while by the media and the usual suspects. nothing more.

Jeez. I did NOT say you. WE (ME AND THE POSTER CONVERSATION WHICH YOU ARE RESPONDING TO)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lovemytigerz said:

Because the arguments being made for Kiffin now are strikingly similar to those that were made for Gus.  Yet, Kiffin's record is actually inferior to Gus's!

But you want a pac 12 coach who may or may not win 10 games this year, right? How is that a proven Juggernaut based on your standards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DAG said:

He is not right. He is attributing the stats that I presented of Lane Kiffin currently to the idea that we had a so called genius. GUS WAS NEVER A GENIUS. He had a scheme that was before it's time and when people caught up with it, he could not adapt.  I didn't say YOU did anything. The conversation that you entered was discussing CLK hiring and offensive prowess and somehow relating it to Gus's stint over here. That is a comparison

gus was a genius in 2013. he looked like one with cam. all i am saying is the guy was technically correct. he was considered a genius until the wheels fell off. and no it is not a comparison and i just wanted the kid you were talking to was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DAG said:

What did he need to build? It was already built. He had to prove he could get them over the hump in the weak SEC East. Something Mark Richt just could not do. I agree CKS is a great coach and I would love to have him we don't.

Further, I am not going to let you take me down a rabbit hole. The whole debate came with you comparing Dan Lanning to Lane Kiffin and somehow attributing that to a Gus vs Kirby debate. At that time, Gus and Kirby were both green. However, Gus was considered a hot commodity across the nation after his one coaching year at ASU. He knew Auburn and was a major proponent in us earning a NC. So although I would've liked CKS, I also understood why AU went to Gus. I also understand why UGA would want Kirby (Mind you, UGA fans did not overwhelming want Kirby as he had no experience as a HC) as he has a history with them and learned under the greatest coach of all time. The comparison is not there.

He needed to take GA from a mediocre also ran to a juggernaut.  

Kirby is a great coach.  We could have had him, but much like the arguments for Kiffin now, everyone wanted Gus b/c they believed he was some kind of offensive genius b/c of what Cam Newton did in 2010.

I'm not saying that Kiffin is a terrible coach .. I'm saying he's not an elite coach.  He'll win a lot of games, and rack up a lot of yards.  He won't build a powerhouse at Auburn.  I want the powerhouse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aubiefifty said:

gus was a genius in 2013. he looked like one with cam. all i am saying is the guy was technically correct. he was considered a genius until the wheels fell off. and no it is not a comparison and i just wanted the kid you were talking to was right.

And I am telling you, CLK did not need a cam to look like a genius prior to his hiring. So you cannot compare the two which is the point of the discussion you entered. You are stuck on the word Genius, and I am trying to show why that is not a fair comparison, which was insinuated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • WarTiger changed the title to Sabotage is afoot
  • WarTiger locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...