Looking on to 2017 (Merged)

[lionheartkc 6,150]

4 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I agree with you.  Players (recruiting) ain't what's holding AU back right now.

Well, it's not, but it is... Overall recruiting is stellar.  That being said, it's taken Gus a while to learn to recruit for the future, so we've been thin at several positions along the way and it's cost us. 2013-2015 - linebacker, 2015 wide receiver/QB, 2016 QB.  2017 is going to be the first time since Gus has taken over that we will have high quality depth at EVERY position.

[AUsince72 11,084]

38 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

Well, it's not, but it is... Overall recruiting is stellar.  That being said, it's taken Gus a while to learn to recruit for the future, so we've been thin at several positions along the way and it's cost us. 2013-2015 - linebacker, 2015 wide receiver/QB, 2016 QB.  2017 is going to be the first time since Gus has taken over that we will have high quality depth at EVERY position.

I agree with you regarding the positions that were lacking.  Where I may deviate is as to WHY those positions were insufficient.  HINT: I don't think it's talent.

Now the LB's mentioned struggled and well....overall, they sucked... and that was poor recruitment.  But I contend that there's plenty talent at both WR and even QB if AU had truly good position coaching in those areas.  

I suspect there are many coaches who could have made JF3, at least a serviceable, "plan B" guy and I'm no recruitnick but was Hurts supposed to be THAT much better than Barrett? IE: Starting QB for team playing in Natty Title Game vs Never even sniff the depth chart?

As for the WR's, I do believe they MAY have rec'd better coaching this year than previously but I'm just not sure Gus has a passing game system conducive to getting the most out of them.  There were a TON of big names come in this year and outside of a circus catch here or there (and a senior FINALLY show up to play...well, for 1/2 the season anyway) nobody could ever get open and you rarely even heard their names.  Were they really not that talented after all?

I'm blaming coaching for this disaster.  

Now if Gus would only LISTEN TO ME!!!!!

[lionheartkc 6,150]

10 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I agree with you regarding the positions that were lacking.  Where I may deviate is as to WHY those positions were insufficient.  HINT: I don't think it's talent.

Now the LB's mentioned struggled and well....overall, they sucked... and that was poor recruitment.  But I contend that there's plenty talent at both WR and even QB if AU had truly good position coaching in those areas.  

I suspect there are many coaches who could have made JF3, at least a serviceable, "plan B" guy and I'm no recruitnick but was Hurts supposed to be THAT much better than Barrett? IE: Starting QB for team playing in Natty Title Game vs Never even sniff the depth chart?

As for the WR's, I do believe they MAY have rec'd better coaching this year than previously but I'm just not sure Gus has a passing game system conducive to getting the most out of them.  There were a TON of big names come in this year and outside of a circus catch here or there (and a senior FINALLY show up to play...well, for 1/2 the season anyway) nobody could ever get open and you rarely even heard their names.  Were they really not that talented after all?

I'm blaming coaching for this disaster.  

Now if Gus would only LISTEN TO ME!!!!!

I don't think any coach could have gotten John into playing shape for this season. He even worked with outside coaches and he's still extremely inconsistent. 

I've heard from some insiders that Woody's issues are more personal than skill. He needs to grow up. Hurts also got A LOT more work, before the season, than Woody did.  Woody was late coming in, and had a depth chart in front of him. And, yes, Hurts also out-ranked him in the recruiting rankings. For the record... if it weren't for an all-world D, Hurts wouldn't be playing for a national championship, either.  He's very turnover prone.

I think your perception of our receiver play this year is skewed. You don't have a QB with the #1 completion ratio and #1 yards per completion without seriously good wide receiver play. Last year, they dropped as much as they caught, this year is was down to 1-2 drops per game, and almost all of those were the veterans, not the new crop of top recruits. Part of that was because the veterans are mainly made up of converted athletes. That is why, in 2016, we went lights out on our receiver recruiting. I have a feeling you will see even more improvement as they all have a year under their belts, now.

 

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

Well, it's not, but it is... Overall recruiting is stellar.  That being said, it's taken Gus a while to learn to recruit for the future, so we've been thin at several positions along the way and it's cost us. 2013-2015 - linebacker, 2015 wide receiver/QB, 2016 QB.  2017 is going to be the first time since Gus has taken over that we will have high quality depth at EVERY position.

Hindsight's generally better'n foresight by a damn site!

With you.

[PatBoCamRob 30]

3 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

Wow... this is fascinating to me.  You do realize before 2009 we spent the majority of the time in the top 20-30 in recruiting and not the top 10 that we have been living in since the Chizik/Malzahn era, right? We are living in the Golden Age of Auburn Recruiting to date.  We are also directly competing with several of the hardest schools to recruit against, and are in direct rivalry with a team that buys whoever they want and strategically undermines us as often as they can.

Yes, the whole Franklin project was head scratching (I'm still not sure it wasn't dictated from on high), and Gus has learned some hard lessons about recruiting for depth and not counting on star players to finish their 4 years, but to claim that recruiting, in general, is our problem is questionable at best.

I would take Rivals.com, and all that, with a grain of salt and look at the details. 

#1: I don't think the recruiting services dedicate the resources and time to actually learning about players. They just rely on self reporting by HS players parents of who is offering them. It's just a feedback loop from which we have a loose understanding of the players' abilities. If an SEC school is recruiting that player they get some stars automatically. If not, they may not even be on the radar screen. (See Nick Brahms)

#2:  It appears the scouting services are just tallying up the stars a school gets for their composite rankings. Tennessee was high in the rankings a few years ago, because they had 33 incoming players, mostly 3*. How'd that work out for them?

#3:  What good is it to get six 5*s if they are all DEs?  Can those players do their jobs well if we don't bring in LBs?  (See AUs 5-2-star D)

#4:  I don't think rivals takes HS injuries into account as much as they should. I think our competitors are sifting those candidates out better than we are. 

#5:  I think if Rivals et al would take biometrics into account and give it higher weighting into composites we would get a better picture. Playing a position well in high school is different from being built for a position.  I think that goes back to "time and resources."  And I think our competitors are doing a better job of sifting through those than we are. ... or would you say we have the cream of the crop and we just aren't developing them?

[kd4au 1,145]

4 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

Wow... this is fascinating to me.  You do realize before 2009 we spent the majority of the time in the top 20-30 in recruiting and not the top 10 that we have been living in since the Chizik/Malzahn era, right? We are living in the Golden Age of Auburn Recruiting to date.  We are also directly competing with several of the hardest schools to recruit against, and are in direct rivalry with a team that buys whoever they want and strategically undermines us as often as they can.

Yes, the whole Franklin project was head scratching (I'm still not sure it wasn't dictated from on high), and Gus has learned some hard lessons about recruiting for depth and not counting on star players to finish their 4 years, but to claim that recruiting, in general, is our problem is questionable at best.

I find this hard to believe,sounds more like an excuse .

[lionheartkc 6,150]

31 minutes ago, PatBoCamRob said:

I would take Rivals.com, and all that, with a grain of salt and look at the details. 

#1: I don't think the recruiting services dedicate the resources and time to actually learning about players. They just rely on self reporting by HS players parents of who is offering them. It's just a feedback loop from which we have a loose understanding of the players' abilities. If an SEC school is recruiting that player they get some stars automatically. If not, they may not even be on the radar screen. (See Nick Brahms)

#2:  It appears the scouting services are just tallying up the stars a school gets for their composite rankings. Tennessee was high in the rankings a few years ago, because they had 33 incoming players, mostly 3*. How'd that work out for them?

#3:  What good is it to get six 5*s if they are all DEs?  Can those players do their jobs well if we don't bring in LBs?  (See AUs 5-2-star D)

#4:  I don't think rivals takes HS injuries into account as much as they should. I think our competitors are sifting those candidates out better than we are. 

#5:  I think if Rivals et al would take biometrics into account and give it higher weighting into composites we would get a better picture. Playing a position well in high school is different from being built for a position.  I think that goes back to "time and resources."  And I think our competitors are doing a better job of sifting through those than we are. ... or would you say we have the cream of the crop and we just aren't developing them?

I actually summed up my thoughts in a response to 72 a little ways up the page. I think our issue is in some ways related to your #3.  Gus has recruited extremely well for adding talent, but he's failed to fill holes, at times, and very definitely failed to anticipate attrition. FINALLY, in 2017, we should see the fruits of our great recruiting classes, because we won't have any major holes for the first time since before Gus was our head coach.

Oh... and one other thing, if you compare the talent on our team to the rest of the country instead of just the SEC, it becomes very obvious that we are landing some seriously great players. Unfortunately, we're more often compared to Dodge Charger U, the sole school of note in the state of Louisiana, and the sole school of note in the state of Georgia, who's recruiting is often even better than ours (but not as well utilized in many cases). 

[AUsince72 11,084]

45 minutes ago, lionheartkc said:

I don't think any coach could have gotten John into playing shape for this season. He even worked with outside coaches and he's still extremely inconsistent. 

I've heard from some insiders that Woody's issues are more personal than skill. He needs to grow up. Hurts also got A LOT more work, before the season, than Woody did.  Woody was late coming in, and had a depth chart in front of him. And, yes, Hurts also out-ranked him in the recruiting rankings. For the record... if it weren't for an all-world D, Hurts wouldn't be playing for a national championship, either.  He's very turnover prone.

I think your perception of our receiver play this year is skewed. You don't have a QB with the #1 completion ratio and #1 yards per completion without seriously good wide receiver play. Last year, they dropped as much as they caught, this year is was down to 1-2 drops per game, and almost all of those were the veterans, not the new crop of top recruits. Part of that was because the veterans are mainly made up of converted athletes. That is why, in 2016, we went lights out on our receiver recruiting. I have a feeling you will see even more improvement as they all have a year under their belts, now.

 

I'll take your word for it on the QB's, I just feel that to not be able to make at least one of those guys "seviceable" (or JJ, who at least should have been able to keep the spot warm for a couple games) just showed no real planning, foresight, etc.

The WR's though, that was sort of my point.  Sure, when Sean was healthy he had good completion % but you could see that was so often him working hard to find an open man.  Not really smart routes designed to CREATE an open man.  And when they were open, or caught the ball in traffic, that was pure talent. 

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

30 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I agree with you regarding the positions that were lacking.  Where I may deviate is as to WHY those positions were insufficient.  HINT: I don't think it's talent.

Now the LB's mentioned struggled and well....overall, they sucked... and that was poor recruitment.  But I contend that there's plenty talent at both WR and even QB if AU had truly good position coaching in those areas.  

I suspect there are many coaches who could have made JF3, at least a serviceable, "plan B" guy and I'm no recruitnick but was Hurts supposed to be THAT much better than Barrett? IE: Starting QB for team playing in Natty Title Game vs Never even sniff the depth chart?

As for the WR's, I do believe they MAY have rec'd better coaching this year than previously but I'm just not sure Gus has a passing game system conducive to getting the most out of them.  There were a TON of big names come in this year and outside of a circus catch here or there (and a senior FINALLY show up to play...well, for 1/2 the season anyway) nobody could ever get open and you rarely even heard their names.  Were they really not that talented after all?

I'm blaming coaching for this disaster.  

Now if Gus would only LISTEN TO ME!!!!!

I suspect I've become a Johnny-one-note here, but I think it is an essential nut.

QB depth was not the only problem, but was the most crucial.

IFF Mr. Johnson had (as echoed cross-country) been a game-ready Heisman candidate, many, many other pieces become available to plug many, many other holes.

Our inability to recognize lack of readiness, and/or our disinterest in even bothering to rectify such early on, reverberated across the program. The "unexpected emergency" aspect of bootstrapping a Plan B together rendered previously thought well-considered development plans untenable.

As much as I recognize his obvious skills, I kind'a wish Mr. Williams had never shown up here.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

2 minutes ago, kd4au said:

I find this hard to believe,sounds more like an excuse .

I can sound like whatever you want it to, but historically, Gus wouldn't give the time of day to a player who doesn't protect the ball and he gave A LOT of time to John. That means he has an issue with Sean (which no one has seen any evidence of), he didn't think he could win with a passing QB (which I know is a popular theory, but again, doesn't fit his history), or someone who holds the purse strings said he'd better get a dual threat QB on the field or else. Just reading all of the people around this board who go one and on about needing a dual-threat to win championships makes it pretty easy for me to believe that one or more of the PTB are adamant about it, too.

[AUsince72 11,084]

3 minutes ago, AUinTLoosa said:

I suspect I've become a Johnny-one-note here, but I think it is an essential nut.

QB depth was not the only problem, but was the most crucial.

IFF Mr. Johnson had (as echoed cross-country) been a game-ready Heisman candidate, many, many other pieces become available to plug many, many other holes.

Our inability to recognize lack of readiness, and/or our disinterest in even bothering to rectify such early on, reverberated across the program. The "unexpected emergency" aspect of bootstrapping a Plan B together rendered previously thought well-considered development plans untenable.

As much as I recognize his obvious skills, I kind'a wish Mr. Williams had never shown up here.

YES!

And granted, that might start to lean toward recruiting but PLANNING for alternative solutions is coaching 101.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

6 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I'll take your word for it on the QB's, I just feel that to not be able to make at least one of those guys "seviceable" (or JJ, who at least should have been able to keep the spot warm for a couple games) just showed no real planning, foresight, etc.

Which goes back to my point that it's about recruiting.  Jeremy was a bust. It happens to ALL coaches. Queen broke... that happens too.  The thing is, it rarely happens all at once. The moment he knew Queen was out for a season, he should have added a QB to the next class.  Then when Jeremy was a bust, he should have added yet another real QB (non-project). He finally got it, this year.  A 3-Star who has the basic skills can "keep the spot warm" and can be coached up to be much more. Based on this year's class, I think Gus finally sees that.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

1 minute ago, AUsince72 said:

And granted, that might start to lean toward recruiting but PLANNING for alternative solutions is coaching 101.

Unfortunately, a plan can only go so far when the alternative solutions can't execute. For reference, see Ole Miss and Texas A&M after their QBs went down. Gus is not on an island when it comes to teams falling apart when they lose key players and having no real answer.

[kd4au 1,145]

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

I can sound like whatever you want it to, but historically, Gus wouldn't give the time of day to a player who doesn't protect the ball and he gave A LOT of time to John. That means he has an issue with Sean (which no one has seen any evidence of), he didn't think he could win with a passing QB (which I know is a popular theory, but again, doesn't fit his history), or someone who holds the purse strings said he'd better get a dual threat QB on the field or else. Just reading all of the people around this board who go one and on about needing a dual-threat to win championships makes it pretty easy for me to believe that one or more of the PTB are adamant about it, too.

Not trying to pick a fight with you.I generally agree with your post on most things.Just find it hard to buy that higher ups are dictating to Gus what he needs at QB.Just my two cents.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

15 hours ago, kd4au said:

Not trying to pick a fight with you.I generally agree with your post on most things.Just find it hard to buy that higher ups are dictating to Gus what he needs at QB.Just my two cents.

I wish I could agree with you, but there is a serious history of meddling from the PTB (I'm talking about the money people, not the administration). I wouldn't put it past them at all.

[ScottsboroAuburnFan 462]

Guess this is best place for this. 

Guess this should tell some about Woody,  after Week 1 JJ was scout team QB week 2 all way through Bowl game practice... Woody got no work it sounds like. 

[PatBoCamRob 30]

16 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

Unfortunately, a plan can only go so far when the alternative solutions can't execute. For reference, see Ole Miss and Texas A&M after their QBs went down. Gus is not on an island when it comes to teams falling apart when they lose key players and having no real answer.

He may be on an island, though, when it comes to the decision to reinvent the position on the fly. CoxCat etc in 2017 will lose AU a season ticket holder in 2018. 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Just now, PatBoCamRob said:

He may be on an island, though, when it comes to the decision to reinvent the position on the fly. CoxCat etc in 2017 will lose AU a season ticket holder in 2018. 

Last I checked, tickets were still so sought after that I have trouble getting them when I want to visit for a game, so I don't know that a season ticket holder walking because of some poorly thought out offensive wrinkles will matter to anyone but said ticket holder. Also, I can't give any examples, since I don't watch much outside of Auburn football, but I would be willing to bet that Gus is not the first to crap the bed with some ill-advised offensive trickery. 

[ScottsboroAuburnFan 462]

Took from Rant.

 

Word is Malzahn could potentially be looking at moving pieces around on his offensive staff, specifically when it comes to who handles the quarterbacks. The quarterback situation has been a mess at times over the last two seasons with the failure of Jeremy Johnson to live up to tremendous hype and Sean White succumbing to four major injuries. Meanwhile, John Franklin III never quite developed into a passing threat as the Tigers had hoped and it showed in the second half of the Allstate Sugar Bowl just how inept the offense looks without a capable quarterback like White (when healthy) on the field. 

There has been a tug of war of sorts with play calling throughout the season, and though the issues could not have been made better by either Malzahn or Rhett Lashlee solely handling the play calls, it was obvious Malzahn was more hands on near the end of the season per sources. 

What does this mean for Lashlee? He could see a new role on the staff in 2016, according to chatter around the program, and it's entirely possible the addition of a 10th assistant coach from the NCAA could make it possible for everyone to stay on staff — but not without some role changes. 

Just as Malzahn did with the defense the last two seasons, he knows changes may need to be made on offense, especially as he faces criticism about quarterback development and the lack of depth at the position the last two seasons. — Brandon Marcello

[PatBoCamRob 30]

1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

Last I checked, tickets were still so sought after that I have trouble getting them when I want to visit for a game, so I don't know that a season ticket holder walking because of some poorly thought out offensive wrinkles will matter to anyone but said ticket holder. Also, I can't give any examples, since I don't watch much outside of Auburn football, but I would be willing to bet that Gus is not the first to crap the bed with some ill-advised offensive trickery. 

Malzahn has to right the ship.  2017 is the year to do it.  And, I agree with all the previous comments.  He has all the tools going into next year, whereas personnel was an issue this year.  

You can always get tickets.  It's just a question of price.  This year, I found myself in a situation where- the games I went to through my season tickets cost me more than buying tickets on the secondary market.  I didn't go to a few games, and I wasn't even close to recouping costs.  I went to the UGA game.  I could have bought those tickets for less than "face."  I paid the school face to get them.  And we were in the nosebleeds.  I can't justify continuing to do that.  It's not logical.  So... yeah.

By the way, I don't think the gray zone sells out most years.  Come join the ranks and see what it's like.  

 

[lionheartkc 6,150]

3 minutes ago, PatBoCamRob said:

Come join the ranks and see what it's like.

I would... if I didn't live in Kansas.

 

3 minutes ago, PatBoCamRob said:

You can always get tickets.  It's just a question of price.

Very true... I just have this thing where I refuse to pay more than face for a ticket.  I think all of the reseller sites should be shut down, or required to sell at face plus a reasonable service fee.

[PatBoCamRob 30]

Just now, lionheartkc said:

I would... if I didn't live in Kansas.

 

Very true... I just have this thing where I refuse to pay more than face for a ticket.  I think all of the reseller sites should be shut down, or required to sell at face plus a reasonable service fee.

Yeah.  I understand. I'm like 4 hours away and the big screen gets more tempting every year.  It never rains in my living room.  

Remember that "face value" is a construct.  Most of the "Football" is funded through scholarship donors.  The players cost about 90k each per year.  And that funding comes from Tigers Unlimited.  Ticket revenue goes to the school.

New ticket holders inside the 20s are paying $3k per seat for a season.  That's $430/game, including cupcakes.  You see a ticket for $90 that isn't in the upper decks, it's a steal.

Sideline seats acquired through priority payments that predate the increase are paying $280 to $890 for the season.  That tacks on an extra $40 to $130 per game on those tickets.  Even the lucky season ticker holders are paying 2x face or more.  They aren't ripping you off, I assure you.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

6 minutes ago, PatBoCamRob said:

Yeah.  I understand. I'm like 4 hours away and the big screen gets more tempting every year.  It never rains in my living room.  

Remember that "face value" is a construct.  Most of the "Football" is funded through scholarship donors.  The players cost about 90k each per year.  And that funding comes from Tigers Unlimited.  Ticket revenue goes to the school.

New ticket holders inside the 20s are paying $3k per seat for a season.  That's $430/game, including cupcakes.  You see a ticket for $90 that isn't in the upper decks, it's a steal.

Sideline seats acquired through priority payments that predate the increase are paying $280 to $890 for the season.  That tacks on an extra $40 to $130 per game on those tickets.  Even the lucky season ticker holders are paying 2x face or more.  They aren't ripping you off, I assure you.

Wow... thanks for the economics lesson.  I kind of knew all of that, but seeing it written out drives it home. I always just thought of it as the reseller sites making bank and didn't really think about the holders trying to recoup their actual investment. Of course, I still hate reseller sites as I know that they buy up piles of non-season ticket seats and sell them for major mark-ups.

[AUsince72 11,084]

20 hours ago, lionheartkc said:

Unfortunately, a plan can only go so far when the alternative solutions can't execute. For reference, see Ole Miss and Texas A&M after their QBs went down. Gus is not on an island when it comes to teams falling apart when they lose key players and having no real answer.

I hear ya' but for the record... I don't hold Freeze or Sumlin in much, if any, higher regard than Gus.

Just cuz they suck too doesn't invalidate my point.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

Just now, AUsince72 said:

I hear ya' but for the record... I don't hold Freeze or Sumlin in much, if any, higher regard than Gus.

Just cuz they suck too doesn't invalidate my point.

Have to say, I miss silver lining 72

I can't say I'm huge fans of Freeze or Sumlin, either, but I will say that they are better than 70% or more of the coaches out there, and on par with probably another 20-25%