What was the snake oil?

[trout54 55]

What was it the former staff was selling to these top end defensive recruits that made them come to a place (full of defensive history) that hasn't produced a quality defense in the past several years? Even the NC team's defense was not what I grew up watching. Were they lies? Were they promises that couldn't be kept? What was it that the underachieving staff was able to provide for these recruits that the new PROVEN staff isn't being given consideration for? As long as CGM is doing things the right way, I will be pleased, but i wih these recruits would see it too.

I feel as though maybe they fell in love with our beloved Auburn, and now they finally have the opportunity to be part of something truly special. I just hope none of the current commits (and a couple of the de-commits) fail to see the positives in front of them and the program and stay/get back on board.

Your thoughts?

[cptau 169]

The recuiting coaches and that BCS championship brought most of them in I think. Same as the difference between a recuriting sergeant and a drill sergeant.

One is your "friend" and tells you about all the neat things you'll learn, places you'll go and things you'll do.

Drill sergeants aren't your buddy and they will run your rear end off to make sure you perform and become what you can be.

[dp4au 2]

Cptau, Good analogy. Our problem, it appears, is that there were some command issues that kept the drill sgt,'s from doing the job. A situation that I hope the new staff will correct.

[rockfordpi 91]

What was it the former staff was selling to these top end defensive recruits that made them come to a place (full of defensive history) that hasn't produced a quality defense in the past several years? Even the NC team's defense was not what I grew up watching. Were they lies? Were they promises that couldn't be kept? What was it that the underachieving staff was able to provide for these recruits that the new PROVEN staff isn't being given consideration for? As long as CGM is doing things the right way, I will be pleased, but i wih these recruits would see it too.

I feel as though maybe they fell in love with our beloved Auburn, and now they finally have the opportunity to be part of something truly special. I just hope none of the current commits (and a couple of the de-commits) fail to see the positives in front of them and the program and stay/get back on board.

Your thoughts?

I don't think there was any "snake oil". Many of those on the previous staff were known as excellent recruiters before they arrived at AU. That is the primary reason they were hired and was what most AU fans wanted. I clearly recall many AU fans being proud and boasting of those coaches (while putting down Tubbs and his staff) and how they could go head to head with NS.

Recruiting is all about relationships and relating to the recruits. Those guys know how to relate and build those relationships. I still recall during the NC season on a kickoff where an LSU player made a huge hit on our return guy down the sidelines and CTT congratulating and high fiving the LSU tackler. When I got home, I looked it up and the LSU guy was a player CTT had tried to recruit to AU. Many times after the games ended I watched CTT interact with players from the OTHER team who came up to greet and/or hug him. My guess is that these were guys he had recruited.

In my opinion, the guys on the previous staff were all good coaches. We just signed some highly rated players that never panned out. The same things happens with NS and UAT, the difference is, he has the FULL 85 to work with and when a handful of his never work out, they do not miss them. They cut them loose and replace them with someone better. Since we never had the full 85 on scholarship, we never were in the position where we could do that.

I am sure they made some mistakes, but I will always believe a lot of it was simply bad luck and bad timing. CGC only had 55 on scholarship his first year and then he lost 30 from the NC team in year two. By definition, that makes you very young and does not allow a lot for margin of error in years 3 and 4.

[AUIH1 1,515]

Recruiting is a "snake oil" business and the best at it are the best snake oil salesmen. The best convince these kids that the school they are recruiting them too will give them what they want in terms of playing time, position, making it to the NFL etc. They also convince the kid's parents, cousins, uncles, handlers of the same thing. For a team to be successful, you need snake oil, but you also need to build a true foundation of sound fundamentals and discipline from good coaching.

The problem for AU, we had good salesmen that were not good coaches or disciplinarians and once the on-the-field (and off the field) discipline from the Tuberville regime finally eroded after the 2010 season, we were stuck will all snake oil and no substance. We have to have both to compete.

wde

[AU64 10,122]

We've moved on to a new staff. Why do some "AU Supporters" insist on beating up on the staff that won a NC? I'm inclined to say "troll". Anyone got a good reason to dispute that?

[AUIH1 1,515]

We've moved on to a new staff. Why do some "AU Supporters" insist on beating up on the staff that won a NC? I'm inclined to say "troll". Anyone got a good reason to dispute that?

Not all are trolls. I am not a troll. I call it like I see it and usually wait until reality/facts hit me in the face before I stop being a cheerleader. Even after the BCS Championship, I posted that the jury was still out on Chizik based on his record at ISU. I also posted that the preliminary results looked promising. But then the Trailer Park 4 debacle happened followed by the quit against LSU, uga and spuat in 2011. The Chik Fil A Bowl gave me hope, but then info received about off of the field "activities" of our players followed by quitting virtually the entire 2012 season (starting in the 2nd half of the MSU game) led me to the opinion that the coaching staff was terrible both on and off of the field and needed to be replaced. I can go on if you would like. Any good reason to dispute that?

wde

[AU64 10,122]

You got your wish...YOU WERE RIGHT....get over it. We have an NC that I submit AU would never have won under any other coach. Granted it was a confluence of events and maybe a fluke but I can live with that, especially when I consider all the other coaching candidates that people were tossing out at the time....who have not proven anything elsewhere.

To a man, they are nice guys, have good families and were good reps for AU. They never embarrassed the school and now they are moving along.

Having a bad football team or a losing season is not a moral failure. People get fired from their jobs all the times and they move on and usually find success elsewhere. So why is it necessary for you or anyone else to beat up on them at this point?

[trout54 55]

We've moved on to a new staff. Why do some "AU Supporters" insist on beating up on the staff that won a NC? I'm inclined to say "troll". Anyone got a good reason to dispute that?

Not all are trolls. I am not a troll. I call it like I see it and usually wait until reality/facts hit me in the face before I stop being a cheerleader. Even after the BCS Championship, I posted that the jury was still out on Chizik based on his record at ISU. I also posted that the preliminary results looked promising. But then the Trailer Park 4 debacle happened followed by the quit against LSU, uga and spuat in 2011. The Chik Fil A Bowl gave me hope, but then info received about off of the field "activities" of our players followed by quitting virtually the entire 2012 season (starting in the 2nd half of the MSU game) led me to the opinion that the coaching staff was terrible both on and off of the field and needed to be replaced. I can go on if you would like. Any good reason to dispute that?

wde

I feel I need to defend myself when called out as a troll. Don't let my "low post count" fool you. I would much prefer reading what is being reported, and move on, as I have a life away from my computer. FWIW, I went to Auburn. Spent 17 years in the loveliest village. Spent a dozen years working with the athletic department. Both of my children were born in Lee County. My son and my money now go to auburn. He will be participating in the walk-on tryouts next monday. My roots run deep with Auburn. I take great offense to being called out as a troll.

Just because I wondered how our previous coaching staff were able to attract such "highly touted" talent to our school, having shown NO EVIDENCE that they could make the players better than they were coming into the program from high school? I am proud of what the previous staff was able to accomplish. Something that no other coaching staff in Auburn has been able to do in over 50 years. However, I believe the real coaching reason for the 2010 success is now the head coach.

That said, if you think I am a troll for asking for people's opinion of the situation, people may consider you a tard for turning a completely blind eye to what is abundantly apparent to anyone who has looked at recruiting and the product that has been put on the field in Auburn for 3 of the last 4 years. That's all.

[CNovaSoar 0]

Why keep talking about the ex when your new girlfriend is so hot and loves that you have hobbies. Amirite

[Zimas4Ziemba 0]

Pretty simple:

Before 2011 recruiting year, we have no talent so come play for us....immediate playing time. Recruiting rankings pre-Chizik back this sell.

2011 recruiting year, we just won the NC....play for a champion. It can be done here...just wait until we get our players in here and we'll do it annually.

2012 recruiting year, we have a young team with a ton of talent. We still made it to a bowl even with one of the youngest teams in the SEC. The future is very bright. Just need players like you and to get bigger, stronger, faster.

2013 recruiting year most of our commitments were made before the season started and I think we sold BVG's NFL experience and then turned around and told these kids we need talent on defense that can play immediately after BVG's evaluation of the team.

[AU64 10,122]

JMO but "snake oil" is when a coach tells a kid that the school really wants him...and that the coach's school is a pipeline to the NFL....and the coach gets the kid all revved up about playing in the big time and learning the NFL way. And then on signing day, the kid is told there was some kind of mistake and they don't have enough scholarships for him....and one of the coach's assistants tells the kid he will have to find someplace else to play...maybe Arkansas or somewhere like that....or perhaps the kid can pay his own way the first year and then the HC would take a look at putting him on scholarship afterward....or if the kid actually signs to play....and then a year or so later he is told that he might be happier at UNA or somewhere.

As for Auburn's recruiting message: I think AU coaches tell a kid about being able to go to a quality school and play in the best conference in college football. As noted above, they were also told they would have a chance to play immediately...which for better or worse turned out to tbe true. Most of AU's recruits were playing as freshmen and many seeing quite a bit of playing time....often before they were ready for the level of competition they faced. I find it hard to believe that any were mis-led about their opportunities at Auburn.

So who is peddling the "snake oil"?.

[trout54 55]

Pretty simple:

Before 2011 recruiting year, we have no talent so come play for us....immediate playing time. Recruiting rankings pre-Chizik back this sell.

2011 recruiting year, we just won the NC....play for a champion. It can be done here...just wait until we get our players in here and we'll do it annually.

2012 recruiting year, we have a young team with a ton of talent. We still made it to a bowl even with one of the youngest teams in the SEC. The future is very bright. Just need players like you and to get bigger, stronger, faster.

2013 recruiting year most of our commitments were made before the season started and I think we sold BVG's NFL experience and then turned around and told these kids we need talent on defense that can play immediately after BVG's evaluation of the team.

I like this explanation. thank you.

[trout54 55]

JMO but "snake oil" is when a coach tells a kid that the school really wants him...and that the coach's school is a pipeline to the NFL....and the coach gets the kid all revved up about playing in the big time and learning the NFL way. And then on signing day, the kid is told there was some kind of mistake and they don't have enough scholarships for him....and one of the coach's assistants tells the kid he will have to find someplace else to play...maybe Arkansas or somewhere like that....or perhaps the kid can pay his own way the first year and then the HC would take a look at putting him on scholarship afterward....or if the kid actually signs to play....and then a year or so later he is told that he might be happier at UNA or somewhere.

As for Auburn's recruiting message: I think AU coaches tell a kid about being able to go to a quality school and play in the best conference in college football. As noted above, they were also told they would have a chance to play immediately...which for better or worse turned out to tbe true. Most of AU's recruits were playing as freshmen and many seeing quite a bit of playing time....often before they were ready for the level of competition they faced. I find it hard to believe that any were mis-led about their opportunities at Auburn.

So who is peddling the "snake oil"?.

pretty well explained and compared. acceptable. wasn't that easier that calling someone a troll?