Quietmaninthecorner

20 minutes ago, TeamZero77 said:

Or embarrassment to the school.

I would call it being professional.

Improvement in the fundaments of football

Improvement in techniques

Improvement of the players knowledge of responsibilities on each play

Improvement in "knowledge of the game"

Fight for 60 minutes

This is all I ever ask.

2 minutes ago, Randman5000 said:

Damn USC MLB had a hole to the RB. USC wins in 3OT. Even after missing the chip shot.

I'm going to be keeping an eye on UAz  in the future.   I like their style ball.  Their Offense was fun to watch and their D was punishing.   AND,  I am not emotionally tied to the school  .   

I never paid much attention to them before,  but my son moved about 2 miles from their campus a few months ago.  

Been impressed by Arizona   D plays rough.  O  has some playmakers.

Battie...  and it's not because i am some spring chicken.

17 minutes ago, WDE_OxPx_2010 said:

Um, Jarquez "allegedly" does the pounding.

BOOOOOOOO.

“Coach Freeze is always there in practice since fall camp,” running back Brian Battie said. “He’ll call his own plays every now and then. But Coach Mont, he’s still running the show.”

The man can run like a cat.  I suspect he is not an every down back is likely attributed to blocking.    He may know all his assignments, and block well,  but can he take on a DE or a DT that breaks through, protect the QB over and over and stay 100% healthy?

As a has been sprinter, I know.    The smallest injury can slow you down a lot.  A tweaked ankle to a  sprained wrist.  ANY little thing throws off your form from being natural.    Speed is Battie's biggest weapon.   It keeps him safe while running the ball.  Take a little speed from him,  and he may become a sitting  duck.  He needs to remain in top running condition or he becomes useless.  Why take the risk?

9 hours ago, ScotsAU said:

There’s already a thread on moral victories. And I’m never a fan of claiming them. The ugly win at cal was still a win. The loss to UGA was still a loss… to one of our biggest rivals, and honestly the one I can’t stand the most. It hurts, and I’m far from celebrating tonight.
But… UGA has a legit defense, and we were in it until the end. The coaches finally found something that works with our personnel. For the first time since Bo Nix went down in 2021, it felt like the offense had an identity. 
Thoughts?

I would classify it more as: "the light came on for a few of our players" .  not yet turning the corner,  but we are approaching the corner.

4 hours ago, shabby said:

It sure seemed substantially better and different. They seemed to say at the beginning of the game that Hugh freeze was calling the game but in the middle of the game they seem to indicate Philip Montgomery was. Judging by what I saw in the field it sure look like freeze called the game. What are you guys think?

Freeze said he was more involved in game planning,  and approved all the plays (I assume pregame).   Not sure how many he called tho.

We still have a LOOOOONG way to go with a lot of issues across the team,   but can reach a very high ceiling.  I saw improvement.  That's all I wanted to see.    An improvement in fundamentals and techniques.  Knowledge of your job on any given play.  Fewer Turn overs. etc.

Among them,  and largest step  forward being: selling the fake.   Specifically after the exchange the player without the ball carrying through as if it was real for more than just a second or to.   I do not recall any half assed fakes in this game. 

I saw our linemen and others helping push the RB for that extra yard or more, more  than other games so far. 

There seemed to be a better understanding of personal responsibility on a given play. Across the board.  Yes, even at WR, they were where they were supposed to be most of the time.

None of our issues have been fixed,  but I saw obvious improvement in a lot of areas that we have issues.

Improvement,  it is all I ever ask. 

25 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

Try kicking and controlling the angle though. Simple to say hard to do.

I understand that.  But then,  what is the point of "adding more room".   If the angle is too hard to control,  how is it legitimately more controllable  at longer distance? 

If you only can kick close to  one specific angle,  there is only a small sliver of the field that taking the penalty could possibly help.  

The loss of 5 yards hurts the gunner,  actually hurts hang time,  makes an errant play even more detrimental and all else equal if the kick is not perfect.  Taking the penalty gives the opponent a free 5 yards.  The higher angle also lowers the chance that the ball will bounce into the endzone if not fielded.

When taking the penalty,  there seems to be more negative outcomes/effects compared to the 1  slightly better outcome.

I know bucking "what everyone has always done"   is hard and I expected a lot of pushback.   Like I said above I am not trying to die on this hill,  but someone needs to do a modern study on this.   It just doesn't seem logical in my layman's mind.

7 hours ago, ScotsAU said:

We have a punter with a large leg. He was kicking them higher into the air, and they were still going far. Sometimes a punter having too big of a leg isn’t a good thing. Hopefully they are working on getting more height on punts moving forward. 

It is all about angle of launch. you can kick the ball at 85* angle as hard as you can,  and it will not go nearly as far as if you kick it at 42* angle as hard as you can.     Source: Physics. 

1 minute ago, Barnacle said:

I believe I heard freeze say earlier this week that both of those penalties were intentional for the purpose of giving our punter more room.

yes.  I believe he said  2 of the 3.

2 hours ago, aubaseball said:

 don’t know why teams do it anyway 

It has to be blind faith in tradition.   I imagine way back in the day the first coach to try taking the penalty was successful and won a big game.  Then, everyone jumped on the bandwagon.  It eventually became something everyone did under the assumption it is the bast strategy.  Maybe it is.   I do not know.  I just can not see the logic behind it.

41 minutes ago, drɘxɘl said:

Punting high and short is difficult to execute.  Even NFL punters take the extra 5 yards when they can.  5 extra yards to a gunner running full speed is meaningless, literally an extra step or two.  

I am not trying to die on this hill,   I just want to understand why traditionally taking the penalty is assumed the better option.

That extra step or two could be the difference in sidestepping a blocker and still getting to the ball.  also, the hang time will be slightly longer gaining another step.    Add to that,  the higher angle you kick the ball  the better chance the ball does not bounce forward into the endzone if not fielded.   

I am not a punter by any means,  But I can go out in the back yard and punt, maybe 40 yards,  but I can easily punt the ball with my max force and kick it higher so that it only goes 30 yards before hitting the ground. with slightly more hang time.  The guys in NCAA are specialists.

It just seems to me  there are more positive things that can happen with the shorter field punt. 

1 hour ago, DAG said:

That is assuming our Punter can even do that efficiently. Me thinks he can’t 

 It can not be much harder than shooting a bow and arrow accurately without sights.   After enough practice, you grow an instinctive feel how to shoot accurately at different distances.   

Are these guy specialists or  just a powerful leg.  I mean,  punting is in their job title .

But there must be some logical reason I am overlooking.  Every team takes the penalty,  and has for as long as I can remember.

I understand the time tested theory of giving a kicker more room to punt cause  his leg is sooooo strong,  but it also adds 5 yards to the distance the gunners have to run.

2 things...

1.   Wouldn't it be more efficient to - not take the penalty-  and have the punter kick the ball HIGHER,  with less distance?  The Gunners would have 5 yards less to get to where the ball is going to land,  AND have more time to get there. In general having more time to make juke moves that take them a step or two out of the way,  and still get tot he returner as he catches the ball. (May save 1/2 to 1 second for the coverage team.   That is a long way at full speed.)

If something goes wrong,  like last Sat,  it saves our defense 5 yards.

2.  If we are determined to take the penalty,  why do we not try to draw the D off sides EVERY TIME.  If they jump 1st down, or we gain ANOTHER 5 yards added to #1 above,  and can kick the ball even higher but less distance saving the gunners another 1/2 second.  If they don't - nothing lost.   Late in the season, it could even set up a last second fake punt in the right situation.  it is a win, win,  null situation. 

 (note on #1 above )  it would be the kicker version of a short guy shooting over a tall guy when 10 feet from the rim in basketball.  the ball goes a lot higher than it goes distance.  I would assume this would be a second nature  thing and punter would gain a feel for the angle per specific yards of distance at maximum kick height.   After all, it was originally called FOOTball for a reason.

15 hours ago, cole256 said:

Why don't we play Hank Brown? Not against uga of course but anybody knows how does he look? To me he has the most physical tools out of all the QB's

I am sooooo curious about Hank Brown. Didn't he set records in Tennessee with some impressive stats?  Supposedly he has all the tools and can "make all the throws" Per CHF.   

 When he committed  He just needed to:

1.   Gain some weight.   I think I read a recent chart and he he gained like 13 pounds.

2.   Learn the playbook/ read defenses.    I have no idea how that is coming along.

I am kind of a worry wart about playing a true freshmen at QB.   It CAN  be done successfully, but there is a large risk of creating a basket case if things go sideways.   I still want to see him for my own curiosity.

Does anyone have a mini report that has actually seen him in  game like situations @  practice? 

15 minutes ago, keesler said:

Coaching, lack of proper recruiting foundation players, zero attention to talent acquisition on the offensive line, inability by the “gurU” offensive HC to evolve his schemes or show any creativity on offense, twirly QBs on offense, stagnant and stubborn play calling, pigeon holing WRs, failure to develop NFL ready offensive players for years, boneheaded roster management, refusal to let the OC do his job.  And THATS all just on Gus.

Harsin need not be mentioned. 
 

IMHO, the actual fans venting on a message board are low on the totem poll compared to the million$ this dysfunctional administration and revolving door of coaches that have extorted a king’s ransom from a passionate and faithful fan base in the last decade.

You lay too much blame on the shoulders of message board fans.  While at the same time the Coaches, board Mods, and OTV constantly pass the hat to the FANS for more $$ to fund our NIL to pay players to come here.

I can agree with a lot of that.  but,  I think you do not give enough credence to fans attitudes towards players and the team.    1/2 our recruits or more talk about choosing Auburn because of the family atmosphere.  But that fades away quickly with mistakes and miscues.     

4 minutes ago, keesler said:

So the fans on Internet forums are the decade long strangle hold AU has had at the QB position?  Fans on the internet demanding position changes.  I had no idea a few thousand old geriatric farts blowing hot air on Auburn boards had so much sway.  
 

If you think it holds NO sway,  what do you think is the common denominator of our QB  issues over the last 12 years?

Talent?   They seem to do fine elsewhere.

Coaching?   we picked 4 coaches in a row that cant teach QBs (probably 8 OC's and QB gurus)

You may not want to admit it,  but fan's attitudes do effect players.  As I said before.   It is not the only thing,  but it does have an effect.

10 minutes ago, GAAubie said:

Yes! We have the worst fans in sports.  

It has nothing to do with quality of fans.   We are a passionate group.   Being very passionate  is not always a positive thing. 

27 minutes ago, cbo said:

You think our QB problems are because of the fans?

Do you think AU fans are more critical than Bama, UGA, Ohio State, etc?

JMO

Not solely because of the fans,  but it has a large effect on transferring before they hit their stride.

We are not more critical than other fans,  but we are hyper-critical of EVERY QB.   It doesn't matter if they deserve it or not. It doesn't matter if they have potential or not.      Go back and look at the very early season game threads from the past 10 years.  Notice how fast the opinions on our QB's change after 1 or 2 mistakes.  See people trash a QB's talent only to have him transfer and excel.

When we do have a great QB  he still gets trashed.   Newton caught the least amount of heat early and was the only QB we have had without much internal controversy.   Partly because it was "us against the world"  because of external controversy.  Mostly because he was an exceptional and rare talent. 

2 hours ago, AuCivilEng1 said:

 

This whole thing is just ridiculous, imo. What are the odds of getting this many QBs in a 10 year span that fall apart when the stadium lights come on? Honestly.

I would suggest the reason is that, historically,  our fans trash our QBs before they even have a chance to settle in and learn.  We are hyper-critical.  We expect a QB to be great from play one of game one.  If not we demand the QB gets benched for another QB.   or just trashed  on the internet. immediately.  I was embarrassed by the way some Auburn fans treated Nix  before he decided to transfer.   

Very few QBs  have come through Auburn since Tuberville have been accepted long enough to gain a large % of fan support.   The rest  eventually transfer,  get time and fan support and do very well at other schools.

At this point there is no easy fix.   CHF knew what we had at QB  and brought in the best QB transfer he could get. 

I still think our QB situation is serviceable and not 100% the problem.  unfortunately the QB issues are compounded with all the other issues we have. (techniques/ knowing the playbook/ fundamentals, etc)   most of our issues are small.  ALL of which can be overcome.  there is just a shitload of them spread out across the whole team.