WDEKC

Only loss was to the top seed in their group. Not a bad showing at all.

This recent iteration formed as an official Auburn club in winter 2009/spring 2010 and started playing games in the 2010/11 season.

Oh yeah club hockey has been around a long time and Auburn has had a few teams at different times dating back to the 80s at least. College club hockey in general though isn't the easiest to follow or have very accurate rankings due to the leagues and divisions. This was a division 2 club tournament, but not ACHA division 2, which traditionally has been where the better club teams participate. For reference, some of the recent schools to make the jump from club to NCAA D1 (like Lindenwood and Penn St) dominated ACHA D1 for multiple years.

Apparently, the team is in some sort of club hockey national tournament this weekend. It's a new one and college club hockey is hard to follow with all the different leagues and divisions popping up, but good luck and War Eagle. It's good to see this become a success after getting it started in 2010 as a senior, but never getting a chance to play before graduating.

I would accept reloading.

Historically you could definitely say UCLA is a blue blood, but of those 11 national champs 10 of them were won over a 12 year period that ended over 40 years ago. Since Wooden retired, I'd put them in the good-great program area and just a tier under elite, but not on the level of the other 4.

Right, there are only 4 true blue bloods in basketball. Those 4 programs are both the only ones in D1 with more than 2,000 overall wins and win percentages over .700. For reference, I have only been able to find top 50 wins all time and win percentages and Virginia is on neither list.

ftfy

Are they that respectable of a run defense or have they just not played many good rushing teams? bama, Arkansas and Miss State all had over 200 yards rushing and averaged about 5 yards per rush.

I'd be interested to see the difference in negative or short 1st down gains between the 1st and 2nd half. I thought the OL got better as the game went on.

Yeah that telecast was full of the entire ESPN staff of analysts gushing over JG and questioning the coach for rotating QBs.

Bartram Trail vs Cartersville is available for replay on watchESPN. Lawrence is the REAL DEAL IMO. Doesn't matter what level he's playing.

Why not both? If we also get Fields, we'd have both a stud polished QB and one that needs more development, but might have an even higher ceiling.

Completely difference offense when he went to GT though. Even Demaryius Thomas started his career at GT before Paul Johnson brought his triple option.

It was on cable.... Maybe not your package.

I feel like I haven't seen as many bubble screens since Lashlee has taken over the past calling. I haven't kept count, but I'd almost say there have been more reverses than bubble screens.

This is exactly what I was going to say.

Good stuff

Yeah, hard to say. Everything sounds good coming out of camp, but that's always the case with new coaches.

Right, I'm just saying we really don't matchup well on paper with them as a secondary. Almost everything you can analyze points to them having an advantage there other than C. Davis. Who knows, maybe they step up and have a big game to help the front 7 out and the stars align to set up a dream season. Great thing about college football is that so many things can change from year to year and game to game.

I think all the talk about how our secondary matches up with their WRs and TE is somewhat moot. They are better and have the best QB in the country spreading the football around. Our opportunity to disrupt their offense lies solely in the hands of the DL.

Well, the actual depth chart is much closer to what I would have expected. I probably shouldn't have taken the one rivals put together seriously at all. It was more a question about Auburn's ability to get WRs up to speed as quickly as many other schools are able to.

I think sometimes experience can be over-appreciated as well. Just because somebody has more experience does not mean they should automatically be ahead in a depth chart. This is a good point and probably what is most likely the case Also good to hear. I haven't kept up much with this position battle so I was a bit surprised to see them at the bottom of this list. As I mentioned before, I'm not sure how accurate this is from rivals. I don't really think of JGT or BMatt as great football minds and really just report based on what info they are given.

Stevens has 19 receptions in 3 years. Maybe the light finally came on, but I wouldn't consider him a proven player.

I understand they are just freshman, but other programs across the country seem to get some pretty good production out of freshmen WR. A certain program across the state has had 3 different WRs have BIG freshman years in the last 8 years. And maybe one of ours does this year, but I would expect at least one of them to be considered in the 2 deep on a depth chart at this point. It's not like we are bringing back Duke and Sammie this year.