Jax State QB

[McLoofus 35,182]

Hah! And good for you. I'm rolling with the punches with this evolving language but it really is abhorrent.

[AU64 10,122]

JMO but the difference between 4-4 or 6-6 ..or 8-4. Will be our coaching.

With a couple exceptions there is talent parity among the vast majority of SEC teams. Everybody has glaring weaknesses or unknowns. The question in my mind is whether our coaches can win against teams with comparable talent.

[McLoofus 35,182]

The question in my mind is whether our coaches can win against teams with comparable talent.

That really is what it boils down to, isn't it? And what we spend most of the time arguing about without any of us knowing the answer.

Gus has given us reasons to trust him and reasons to doubt him. We really still don't know what we have. Some people closer to the program than Average Joe Familymember have strong, more informed opinions, but it seems that even they allow for a variety of possible future outcomes.

I nervously look forward to learning more.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

The question in my mind is whether our coaches can win against teams with comparable talent.

That really is what it boils down to, isn't it? And what we spend most of the time arguing about without any of us knowing the answer.

Gus has given us reasons to trust him and reasons to doubt him. We really still don't know what we have. Some people closer to the program than Average Joe Familymember have strong, more informed opinions, but it seems that even they allow for a variety of possible future outcomes.

I nervously look forward to learning more.

64 nailed this one. The talent is there. We are about to see what kind of coach Gus is this year. I'm hoping Gus can turn this around. Has given us reasons to trust him. But like you said Gus has also given us reason to doubt him. I don't have the answer.

[thaitopher 807]

The question in my mind is whether our coaches can win against teams with comparable talent.

That really is what it boils down to, isn't it? And what we spend most of the time arguing about without any of us knowing the answer.

Gus has given us reasons to trust him and reasons to doubt him. We really still don't know what we have. Some people closer to the program than Average Joe Familymember have strong, more informed opinions, but it seems that even they allow for a variety of possible future outcomes.

I nervously look forward to learning more.

64 nailed this one. The talent is there. We are about to see what kind of coach Gus is this year. I'm hoping Gus can turn this around. Has given us reasons to trust him. But like you said Gus has also given us reason to doubt him. I don't have the answer.

So then based upon how we have recruited over the last several years, if we beat teams with comparable talent we should finish in the top 10 next year? Wouldn't that be fair?

[ellitor 33,109]

The question in my mind is whether our coaches can win against teams with comparable talent.

That really is what it boils down to, isn't it? And what we spend most of the time arguing about without any of us knowing the answer.

Gus has given us reasons to trust him and reasons to doubt him. We really still don't know what we have. Some people closer to the program than Average Joe Familymember have strong, more informed opinions, but it seems that even they allow for a variety of possible future outcomes.

I nervously look forward to learning more.

64 nailed this one. The talent is there. We are about to see what kind of coach Gus is this year. I'm hoping Gus can turn this around. Has given us reasons to trust him. But like you said Gus has also given us reason to doubt him. I don't have the answer.

So then based upon how we have recruited over the last several years, if we beat teams with comparable talent we should finish in the top 10 next year? Wouldn't thaNot be fair?

Not necessarily. Who you play factors into that. Bama, LSU, & UGA all have at least a bit better overall raw talent than us. We could win the other 9 & not be in the top 10. Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

I'm looking at you Nate Craig and Kyle Davis

I don't think we want to hang our hopes and dreams on true freshmen. Those guys should be really, really good, but it's probably not a good sign if they're WR1 and WR2 right out of the gate.

Other than the fact that our other options at receiver have not shown to be tough to beat out. If they play like they did last year, than a freshman with raw talent might actually be better.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

I'm not ready to completely buy into Clemson having lower rated, better developed players. If you take away Watson, is Clemson still a great team or are they back at being just a better than average ACC team?

[ellitor 33,109]

Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

I'm not ready to completely buy into Clemson having lower rated, better developed players. If you take away Watson, is Clemson still a great team or are they back at being just a better than average ACC team?

No question DW is a difference maker but he is not the only one that has been developed. Look at what they have done in the draft recently. They are definitely taking some at least a bit lower rated players & developing them.

Also they were 13th in team recruited talent last year but almost won the natty. They are definitely developing more than just DW. However with that said, 95% of the teams need big time QB play to win big. Bama is arguably the only team that can win big w/ a game managing QB right now because they have been so good at nearly every other area.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

I'm not ready to completely buy into Clemson having lower rated, better developed players. If you take away Watson, is Clemson still a great team or are they back at being just a better than average ACC team?

No question DW is a difference maker but he is not the only one that has been developed. Look at what they have done in the draft recently. They are definitely taking some at least a bit lower rated players & developing them.

Also they were 13th in team recruited talent last year but almost won the natty. They are definitely developing more than just DW. However with that said, 95% of the teams need big time QB play to win big. Bama is arguably the only team that can win big w/ a game managing QB right now because they have been so good at nearly every other area.

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

[McLoofus 35,182]

I'm looking at you Nate Craig and Kyle Davis

I don't think we want to hang our hopes and dreams on true freshmen. Those guys should be really, really good, but it's probably not a good sign if they're WR1 and WR2 right out of the gate.

Other than the fact that our other options at receiver have not shown to be tough to beat out. If they play like they did last year, than a freshman with raw talent might actually be better.

To your first sentence, I think we might be selling Marcus Davis, Tony Stevens and Jason Smith a little short. Particularly with the first two, you're talking about a lot of experience. Marcus Davis has made some really big plays and Tony came on a lot stronger down the stretch last season. And Jason is a legit deep threat if nothing else. Definitely just my opinion, highly subjective and possibly ill informed as always.

BUT... what I initially meant to say is that, no matter how good they are, it's never good when you're relying on true freshmen at any position. We had really good freshmen last season, but they were still freshmen and we were not a good football team. (We're all freaking out a little over Carlton Davis because he is very much an exception to the rule.)

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

I'm looking at you Nate Craig and Kyle Davis

I don't think we want to hang our hopes and dreams on true freshmen. Those guys should be really, really good, but it's probably not a good sign if they're WR1 and WR2 right out of the gate.

Other than the fact that our other options at receiver have not shown to be tough to beat out. If they play like they did last year, than a freshman with raw talent might actually be better.

To your first sentence, I think we might be selling Marcus Davis, Tony Stevens and Jason Smith a little short. Particularly with the first two, you're talking about a lot of experience. Marcus Davis has made some really big plays and Tony came on a lot stronger down the stretch last season. And Jason is a legit deep threat if nothing else. Definitely just my opinion, highly subjective and possibly ill informed as always.

BUT... what I initially meant to say is that, no matter how good they are, it's never good when you're relying on true freshmen at any position. We had really good freshmen last season, but they were still freshmen and we were not a good football team. (We're all freaking out a little over Carlton Davis because he is very much an exception to the rule.)

I would not expect too much from Stevens.

[keesler 5,926]

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

We will never know what could have been last year at AU. Clemson had Watson and some very good WRs (Renfroe was a beast).They also had a top ranked defense that helped them get to the playoff and on to the NC game with one of the best DC's in the country.

Auburn hasn't fielded a top shelf defense in over a decade. To say that AU would have won the championship game if they just had Watson last year is stretching it IMO. It's been glaringly obvious that we have had development issues for a while in multiple positions. Couple the poor development with head scratching play calling and we saw how the season panned out - AU put an inferior product on the field last year and I doubt one superstar QB would have taken them to the playoff all by himself.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

We will never know what could have been last year at AU. Clemson had Watson and some very good WRs..........They also had a top ranked defense that helped them get to the playoff and on to the NC game.

Auburn hasn't seen a top shelf defense in over a decade. To say that AU would have won the championship game if they just had Watson last year is stretching it IMO. It's been glaringly obvious that we have had development issues for a while in multiple positions. Couple the poor development with head scratching play calling and we saw how the season panned out.

This.

[McLoofus 35,182]

I would not expect too much from Stevens.

Bummer. Well, at least my expectations are set now.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

I would not expect too much from Stevens.

Bummer. Well, at least my expectations are set now.

Was told the starting wide receivers did not play in the A-Day game. I believe AU is going to be good at the WR spot next year.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

We will never know what could have been last year at AU. Clemson had Watson and some very good WRs (Renfroe was a beast).They also had a top ranked defense that helped them get to the playoff and on to the NC game with one of the best DC's in the country.

Auburn hasn't fielded a top shelf defense in over a decade. To say that AU would have won the championship game if they just had Watson last year is stretching it IMO. It's been glaringly obvious that we have had development issues for a while in multiple positions. Couple the poor development with head scratching play calling and we saw how the season panned out - AU put an inferior product on the field last year and I doubt one superstar QB would have taken them to the playoff all by himself.

I'm still of the opinion that the play calling was an effect of the issues at QB and injuries. I still stand by my belief that we were on the cusp of actually being really good, last year, and having one superstar player could have easily been the thing to take us from the mess we were to a real contender.

As for Clemson's top ranked D, I direct you to their schedule and this fact...

bama droped 473 yards and 45 points on Clemson. They were only able to get 465 yards and 29 points against us. They obviously weren't that much better than we were by the end of the year.

[ellitor 33,109]

Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

I'm not ready to completely buy into Clemson having lower rated, better developed players. If you take away Watson, is Clemson still a great team or are they back at being just a better than average ACC team?

No question DW is a difference maker but he is not the only one that has been developed. Look at what they have done in the draft recently. They are definitely taking some at least a bit lower rated players & developing them.

Also they were 13th in team recruited talent last year but almost won the natty. They are definitely developing more than just DW. However with that said, 95% of the teams need big time QB play to win big. Bama is arguably the only team that can win big w/ a game managing QB right now because they have been so good at nearly every other area.

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

Not hard at all when you look at the fact that besides 2010 & 2013 this team has underachieved overall 4 of the past 6 years in relation to the talent brought in. AU, Bama, & FSU are the only teams to have top 11 recruiting classes each year going back to 2010.

Also DW is a special special player. He would have taken about 15-20 teams to the natty at least if he were on their teams.

[WarDamnEagleWDE 12,737]

Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

I'm not ready to completely buy into Clemson having lower rated, better developed players. If you take away Watson, is Clemson still a great team or are they back at being just a better than average ACC team?

No question DW is a difference maker but he is not the only one that has been developed. Look at what they have done in the draft recently. They are definitely taking some at least a bit lower rated players & developing them.

Also they were 13th in team recruited talent last year but almost won the natty. They are definitely developing more than just DW. However with that said, 95% of the teams need big time QB play to win big. Bama is arguably the only team that can win big w/ a game managing QB right now because they have been so good at nearly every other area.

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

Not hard at all when you look at the fact that besides 2010 & 2013 this team has underachieved overall 4 of the past 6 years in relation to the talent brought in. AU, Bama, & FSU are the only teams to have top 11 recruiting classes each year going back to 2010.

Also DW is a special special player. He would have taken about 15-20 teams to the natty at least if he were on their teams.

DW would have been taken #1 overall in the NFL draft this year.

[ellitor 33,109]

Then you add in Clemson who had a bit lower raw talent but developed it better than we have overall & you could have a 4th loss.

I'm not ready to completely buy into Clemson having lower rated, better developed players. If you take away Watson, is Clemson still a great team or are they back at being just a better than average ACC team?

No question DW is a difference maker but he is not the only one that has been developed. Look at what they have done in the draft recently. They are definitely taking some at least a bit lower rated players & developing them.

Also they were 13th in team recruited talent last year but almost won the natty. They are definitely developing more than just DW. However with that said, 95% of the teams need big time QB play to win big. Bama is arguably the only team that can win big w/ a game managing QB right now because they have been so good at nearly every other area.

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

Not hard at all when you look at the fact that besides 2010 & 2013 this team has underachieved overall 4 of the past 6 years in relation to the talent brought in. AU, Bama, & FSU are the only teams to have top 11 recruiting classes each year going back to 2010.

Also DW is a special special player. He would have taken about 15-20 teams to the natty at least if he were on their teams.

DW would have been taken #1 overall in the NFL draft this year.

I'm not an NFL GM but I would have easily taken him over the guys who went 1 & 2 this year.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

I just have to imagine if Auburn had Watson last year, we could have won the championship and bama wouldn't have even been in it. It's hard to say we don't have solid, developed talent when you look at the fact that we were in every game even though we had a lame duck QB most of the time and limited options at receiver. I think Auburn, with Watson is better than Clemson with Watson. Of course, we'll never know.

Not hard at all when you look at the fact that besides 2010 & 2013 this team has underachieved overall 4 of the past 6 years in relation to the talent brought in. AU, Bama, & FSU are the only teams to have top 11 recruiting classes each year going back to 2010.

See, that's were we disagree. I realize that there are a lot of fans who believe if we don't at least play for the SEC Championship, we underachieved, but I look at the juggernaut that is the SEC, especially with the Mississippi schools landing star players and making waves, and don't think that is at all realistic without cheating, covering up for player miss-deads, etc. (see bama, Ole Miss, Tennessee, and whoever else gets busted in the near future). I believe we underachieved 2 of the last 6 years and in both cases it was due to personnel issues and not development. In 2012, it was mostly the bad choice of OC, with a heavy dose of failure to recruit on the O-Line, something Malzhan addressed immediately upon his return. Last year it was one player meltdown piled upon by several key injuries. If you want to consider 2014 a disappointment, then I will give you development, there. Johnson was soft on his defenders. 2011 was a team recovering from losing a pile of star players to the draft and no reasonable person expected them to be great.

Also DW is a special special player. He would have taken about 15-20 teams to the natty at least if he were on their teams.

My point exactly. I think people give Clemson too much credit because he is a force that makes the whole team appear better than they are.

[ellitor 33,109]

See, that's were we disagree. I realize that there are a lot of fans who believe if we don't at least play for the SEC Championship, we underachieved, but I look at the juggernaut that is the SEC, especially with the Mississippi schools landing star players and making waves, and don't think that is at all realistic without cheating, covering up for player miss-deads, etc. (see bama, Ole Miss, Tennessee, and whoever else gets busted in the near future). I believe we underachieved 2 of the last 6 years and in both cases it was due to personnel issues and not development. In 2012, it was mostly the bad choice of OC, with a heavy dose of failure to recruit on the O-Line, something Malzhan addressed immediately upon his return. Last year it was one player meltdown piled upon by several key injuries. If you want to consider 2014 a disappointment, then I will give you development, there. Johnson was soft on his defenders. 2011 was a team recovering from losing a pile of star players to the draft and no reasonable person expected them to be great.

1. Don't assume I'm 1 of those fans cuz I'm not. You know I'm educated & well thought out most of the time. 2. Yes the SEC is a juggernaut but that's no excuse. While the Miss schools have gotten some special players they have not recruited to AU's level overall. If we had been developing our talent as we should have we would outclass both fairly easily.

On the underachievement I'll give you 2011 given we had 22-25 from the 2010 team leave or graduate. 2012 & 2015 are obvious but you neglected 2014. We had the most rookies in the NFL the next season so 2014 should have been better than 8-5 & definitely underachieved.

Also DW is a special special player. He would have taken about 15-20 teams to the natty at least if he were on their teams.

My point exactly. I think people give Clemson too much credit because he is a force that makes the whole team appear better than they are.

Not exactly your point. Yes he makes them better but not better than they appear to be. DW was not no where near the only player winning his lion's share of his battles in the natty versus Bama. Many other players, who had been developed better than they were rated, did too. If DW was the only 1 winning battles in that game Bama would have bloodied Clemson.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

See, that's were we disagree. I realize that there are a lot of fans who believe if we don't at least play for the SEC Championship, we underachieved, but I look at the juggernaut that is the SEC, especially with the Mississippi schools landing star players and making waves, and don't think that is at all realistic without cheating, covering up for player miss-deads, etc. (see bama, Ole Miss, Tennessee, and whoever else gets busted in the near future). I believe we underachieved 2 of the last 6 years and in both cases it was due to personnel issues and not development. In 2012, it was mostly the bad choice of OC, with a heavy dose of failure to recruit on the O-Line, something Malzhan addressed immediately upon his return. Last year it was one player meltdown piled upon by several key injuries. If you want to consider 2014 a disappointment, then I will give you development, there. Johnson was soft on his defenders. 2011 was a team recovering from losing a pile of star players to the draft and no reasonable person expected them to be great.

1. Don't assume I'm 1 of those fans cuz I'm not. You know I'm educated & well thought out most of the time. 2. Yes the SEC is a juggernaut but that's no excuse. While the Miss schools have gotten some special players they have not recruited to AU's level overall. If we had been developing our talent as we should have we would outclass both fairly easily.

On the underachievement I'll give you 2011 given we had 22-25 from the 2010 team leave or graduate. 2012 & 2015 are obvious but you neglected 2014. We had the most rookies in the NFL the next season so 2014 should have been better than 8-5 & definitely underachieved.

I wasn't lumping you in that group, just pointing out that there is an overall lofty expectation which I believe is unreasonable considering the level of competition we have. If we were in the ACC, for instance, I'd expect a conference championship more often than not.

I didn't neglect 2014... I laid it at the feet of Johnson who was admittedly too soft on his defenders. The 2014 O was still one of the best in the country, even after losing 3 of it's top players from 2013. I still argue that we should have been a 9-4 team in 2014, had we not lost to the zebras when playing A&M (one of the very few games I really believe bad officiating decided). Also, the lack of moral hit from that game may have propelled us to 10-3 or better.

[AU80cruiser 1,102]

I'm looking at you Nate Craig and Kyle Davis

I don't think we want to hang our hopes and dreams on true freshmen. Those guys should be really, really good, but it's probably not a good sign if they're WR1 and WR2 right out of the gate.

Other than the fact that our other options at receiver have not shown to be tough to beat out. If they play like they did last year, than a freshman with raw talent might actually be better.

To your first sentence, I think we might be selling Marcus Davis, Tony Stevens and Jason Smith a little short. Particularly with the first two, you're talking about a lot of experience. Marcus Davis has made some really big plays and Tony came on a lot stronger down the stretch last season. And Jason is a legit deep threat if nothing else. Definitely just my opinion, highly subjective and possibly ill informed as always.

BUT... what I initially meant to say is that, no matter how good they are, it's never good when you're relying on true freshmen at any position. We had really good freshmen last season, but they were still freshmen and we were not a good football team. (We're all freaking out a little over Carlton Davis because he is very much an exception to the rule.)

Loved your response to my post earlier Loof. Still chuckling about Gus's response. (did I do it right? Gus's?)

LionHeart hit more on what I'm thinking. Marcus Davis has proven himself and Ryan Davis stands out in the receiver drills I've seen so far. I saw Kodi use ryan as a teaching tool for other receivers to do exactly as he was doing. However, Nate and Kyle have something those two don't have and that's height. Nate Craig especially does a great job of high pointing the ball and while I don't expect much YAK for craig, I do expect him to make the catch. I haven't watched much film on Kyle Davis but I know he was a highly sought after prospect with spring practice under hos belt.

Our running game should be good as long as we use our H-Backs and Jovon like we did in Aday. I'm hopeful that will ease nate and Kyle into their positions.

I'm still holding out some hope for Tony Stevens despite WDE's response to atleast make a few plays for us this year.

[ellitor 33,109]

See, that's were we disagree. I realize that there are a lot of fans who believe if we don't at least play for the SEC Championship, we underachieved, but I look at the juggernaut that is the SEC, especially with the Mississippi schools landing star players and making waves, and don't think that is at all realistic without cheating, covering up for player miss-deads, etc. (see bama, Ole Miss, Tennessee, and whoever else gets busted in the near future). I believe we underachieved 2 of the last 6 years and in both cases it was due to personnel issues and not development. In 2012, it was mostly the bad choice of OC, with a heavy dose of failure to recruit on the O-Line, something Malzhan addressed immediately upon his return. Last year it was one player meltdown piled upon by several key injuries. If you want to consider 2014 a disappointment, then I will give you development, there. Johnson was soft on his defenders. 2011 was a team recovering from losing a pile of star players to the draft and no reasonable person expected them to be great.

1. Don't assume I'm 1 of those fans cuz I'm not. You know I'm educated & well thought out most of the time. 2. Yes the SEC is a juggernaut but that's no excuse. While the Miss schools have gotten some special players they have not recruited to AU's level overall. If we had been developing our talent as we should have we would outclass both fairly easily.

On the underachievement I'll give you 2011 given we had 22-25 from the 2010 team leave or graduate. 2012 & 2015 are obvious but you neglected 2014. We had the most rookies in the NFL the next season so 2014 should have been better than 8-5 & definitely underachieved.

I wasn't lumping you in that group, just pointing out that there is an overall lofty expectation which I believe is unreasonable considering the level of competition we have. If we were in the ACC, for instance, I'd expect a conference championship more often than not.

I didn't neglect 2014... I laid it at the feet of Johnson who was admittedly too soft on his defenders. The 2014 O was still one of the best in the country, even after losing 3 of it's top players from 2013. I still argue that we should have been a 9-4 team in 2014, had we not lost to the zebras when playing A&M (one of the very few games I really believe bad officiating decided). Also, the lack of moral hit from that game may have propelled us to 10-3 or better.

Just agree to disagree. Nothing is changing either 1 of our minds. It's pointless to continue this convo, especially considering how much it high jacked this thread.