realistic expectations

[gctiger 931]

52 minutes ago, keesler said:

Watch out!  

I've been told many times that our attrition is normal and comparative to our conference brethren.  Nothing to worry about, nothing is out of the ordinary with our annual exodus of talent.  All is well, we are just like everybody else.

(sorry can't find the sarcasm font)

Nice catch!   I actually had the same thought while I was writing the post, and I don't buy into it either.  IMO attrition may be less of a factor if you can make up for it in another area such as player development or consistently superior game day coaching, but we have neither so it's a liability. 

[ToomersStreet 795]

The Gys should get an above average coaches salary

[auskull 239]

On 10/18/2017 at 7:49 AM, AUFlyer99 said:

The talent level under Chiz and Gus is collectively higher than it was under previous staffs.  On-field results should reflect that, and that's where the problem lies.  

We did not have the level of recruiting information prior to 2000 that we have now. It is much more detailed, sophisticated and comparable. During Pat Dye's tenure, Auburn and Southern Cal led the nation with the most players playing in the NFL. Each had 61 at their peeks. I would offer that Dye was one of the better recruiters and player developers in the nation at that time. The schedule was brutal. I don't know if the "collectively higher" is completely accurate.

[ChltteTiger 649]

On 10/18/2017 at 7:13 AM, aubiefifty said:

Sports

AL.com All-Access: What should realistic expectations be at Auburn?

Updated on October 17, 2017 at 2:00 PM Posted on October 17, 2017 at 9:45 AM

80

Gallery: Auburn at LSU: Oct. 14, 2017

56 shares

By Creg Stephenson

cstephenson@al.com

Saturday was another example of how maddening it must be to be an Auburn football fan.

As we know, a solidly favored Tigers team went into Baton Rouge, jumped out to a 20-0 lead and somehow lost 27-23. It was an incredibly frustrating day for Auburn, and led to renewed calls for Gus Malzahn to lose his job (some more rational than others).

But what if I told you that we might just be seeing what Auburn is and what it nearly always has been? The Tigers are 5-2 this season, which projects to 8.57 victories in a 12-game regular season, 9.28 victories if the Tigers were to win a bowl game.

If you break down the previous 10 seasons (2007-2016), Auburn totaled 82 wins, an average of 8.2 per season. There were some very high highs during that period -- a 14-0 record and a national championship in 2010, plus a 12-2 run to an SEC title in 2013 -- but also some very low lows -- a 3-9 mark that led to the ouster of Gene Chizik in 2012, a 5-7 record that cost Tommy Tuberville his job in 2008.

And it's not just the last 10 years. If you take the 10 years before that (1997-2006), Auburn totaled 84 wins -- 8.4 per season.

The 10 years before that? From 1987-96, Auburn totaled 83 wins (8.3 per year).

From 1977-86? 77 wins (7.7 per year). From 1967-76, 71 wins (7.1 per year). (Note: Teams typically played fewer games in the 1960s, 70s and 80s than they do now).

And lest you think I'm using arbitrary end points, it's largely true of any 10-year period in Auburn football over the last half-century.

I think most of us would agree that the 1980s were a glorious time for Auburn football, when Pat Dye led the Tigers to four SEC titles and a near national championship in 1983. If you take any 10-year period from that era, you get between 8 and 9 wins every year.

Here's the list:

1982-91 -- 89 wins, 8.9

1983-92 -- 85 wins, 8.5

1984-93 -- 85 wins, 8.5

1985-94 -- 85 wins, 8.5

1986-95 -- 85 wins, 8.5

Again, while you had glorious seasons such as 11-1 in 1983 and 11-0 in 1993, you also had clunkers like 5-6 in 1981 and back-to-back 5-win seasons in 1991 and 1992.

(If you use just 1983-90, Auburn averaged 9.6 wins while playing 12 games every year, but it's worth noting that Alabama football was in post-Bryant turmoil during that time).

Auburn's history has been that it will most of the time be an above-average team, and every five years or so make a run at a championship. Maybe after the three-game surge against Mississippi State, Ole Miss and Missouri (plus a close loss to Clemson), Tigers fans thought this would be one of those years.

But after Clemson lost at Syracuse and the bottom of the SEC continues to show its weakness, maybe Auburn is simply an above-average team again. Dreams of knocking off unbeaten Georgia and Alabama late in the season appear less and less likely to become reality.

Can Auburn football be better than it is this year? Certainly, history has shown that.

Can Auburn football be better than it is this year on a consistent basis over a long period of time? History would suggest that's unlikely.

None of this is to imply Auburn fans should accept blowing a 20-0 lead against a team coached by Ed Orgeron. But the road of Auburn football history is paved with similar maddening inconsistency.

What do you think? I'll take your questions and comments on this or anything else on your mind beginning at 10 a.m.

If Pat Dye's teams had played 12 regular season games a year like we have been doing since the mid to late 2000s the average for those years you quote would have likely been higher!

[AUld fAUx@ 2,584]

On 10/19/2017 at 11:43 AM, ChltteTiger said:

If Pat Dye's teams had played 12 regular season games a year like we have been doing since the mid to late 2000s the average for those years you quote would have likely been higher!

 

If Pat Dye's teams had played 12 regular season games a year like we have been doing since the mid to late 2000s the average for those years you quote would have likely been higher!

Edited yesterday at 11:45 AM by ChltteTiger

 

 

You are correct, and prompt me to revert to math-nerd mode. The author of the article presented in the OP makes many apples-to-oranges comparisons in terms of average wins, in seasons of both differing length and differing likelihood of ties. That author also seems to conflate cherry-picked historical averages to “realistic expectations…at Auburn” in the tenure of Coach Malzahn.

 

In another thread, I’ve noted that “average” is, by definition, batting .500.  W/(W+L), over all teams and over any span of time, will always = 50%. Same result is forthcoming with the traditional tie-correction adjustment of accounting for a tie as 1/2W + 1/2L (tie-corrected W/total games = 50%). Such a statistic can be extended to comparison of seasons of any length and tie occurrence.

 

The author, however, is concerned with historical averages for AU, and not for all teams. Beginnings of an AU baseline can be derived from what I’ll call, just for fun, the “Golf” perspective.

 

 

AU football is, over its history, obviously above the all-team average. For perspective, the all-time adjusted Win% (called AU “par” here), projected into a 12-game season, = ~7.5 W/yr. The author, though, seemed more focused on a more recent (relevant?) timeline.

 

 

AU’s W% since joining the SEC is (really) barely distinguishable from AU “par.” With the narrowed focus, however, there seems a distinct improvement in AU success subsequent to the hire of Coach Jordan (“Since Jordan” on the chart refers to average of all coaches including and subsequent), and a lesser but further improvement with Coach Dye (ditto). It is this latter, “Since Dye” average (a “modern” perspective) that I use for further comparisons (12-game projection = ~8.20 W/yr), as a likely better measure of expectations.

 

 

Disaggregating individual-coaching records out of the “Modern” Era shows clearly that the Malzahn regime (so far) is underperforming recent performance (by ~0.18 W/yr) when projected to a 12-game schedule.

 

Use this as you wish. I’m gonna drink a beer and cuss (it’s gotten me through so far).

 

 

[tigereye78 61]

 Mr Stephenson is your perfect example of someone who promotes a defeatist mentality. Paraphrasing: Well that's just how its always been so why should Auburn aspire to greater achievement? What a snowflaked punk! Unfortunately many of our fellow fans have bought into this mentality. Bottom Line: you will never achieve greatness(in this case win championships or be a championship program) until you believe in yourself enough to try. AU athletics has all the resources to field championship programs in all sports. If you have a defeatist( that's how its always been mentality) you have no demand for consistent winning. I believe Auburn can be a consistently winning program with the right leadership. Now if only the PTB did as well... WDE!! 

[beaumak 174]

1 hour ago, AUld fAUx@ said:

 

If Pat Dye's teams had played 12 regular season games a year like we have been doing since the mid to late 2000s the average for those years you quote would have likely been higher!

Edited yesterday at 11:45 AM by ChltteTiger

 

 

You are correct, and prompt me to revert to math-nerd mode. The author of the article presented in the OP makes many apples-to-oranges comparisons in terms of average wins, in seasons of both differing length and differing likelihood of ties. That author also seems to conflate cherry-picked historical averages to “realistic expectations…at Auburn” in the tenure of Coach Malzahn.

 

In another thread, I’ve noted that “average” is, by definition, batting .500.  W/(W+L), over all teams and over any span of time, will always = 50%. Same result is forthcoming with the traditional tie-correction adjustment of accounting for a tie as 1/2W + 1/2L (tie-corrected W/total games = 50%). Such a statistic can be extended to comparison of seasons of any length and tie occurrence.

 

The author, however, is concerned with historical averages for AU, and not for all teams. Beginnings of an AU baseline can be derived from what I’ll call, just for fun, the “Golf” perspective.

 

 

AU football is, over its history, obviously above the all-team average. For perspective, the all-time adjusted Win% (called AU “par” here), projected into a 12-game season, = ~7.5 W/yr. The author, though, seemed more focused on a more recent (relevant?) timeline.

 

 

AU’s W% since joining the SEC is (really) barely distinguishable from AU “par.” With the narrowed focus, however, there seems a distinct improvement in AU success subsequent to the hire of Coach Jordan (“Since Jordan” on the chart refers to average of all coaches including and subsequent), and a lesser but further improvement with Coach Dye (ditto). It is this latter, “Since Dye” average (a “modern” perspective) that I use for further comparisons (12-game projection = ~8.20 W/yr), as a likely better measure of expectations.

 

 

Disaggregating individual-coaching records out of the “Modern” Era shows clearly that the Malzahn regime (so far) is underperforming recent performance (by ~0.18 W/yr) when projected to a 12-game schedule.

 

Use this as you wish. I’m gonna drink a beer and cuss (it’s gotten me through so far).

 

 

DO you have one for LSU-UGA and UA only please???

[AU '76 16]

On 10/18/2017 at 9:56 AM, aucom96 said:

If we're an 8 win team, we're paying far too much for it. There is no universal law that sets in stone that "this team is an 8 win team" and "this team is a national champion". FSU was a girls school and football afterthought. Tulane was once a strong football program. Notre Dame used to be the pinnacle of college football. If Auburn wants to get their investment, they have to invest wisely and operate with the same level of professionalism. Instead we get low leverage head coaches that our brain trust of good ol' boys can bullet-point which flavor-of-the-month coordinators, former Auburn greats and general playing philosophy they expect to see on Saturdays...all with a top ten paycheck. If the best we can do is high school coaches and failed coordinator projects, then pay accordingly and stop trying to act like Auburn is elite. If we want to be elite, we've got to act like it. 

Please name the "good ol boys" who control everything Auburn Football.

[mickeyspano 40]

On 10/18/2017 at 10:08 AM, triangletiger said:

We should be able to, over time, break even against our biggest rivals.  It's not as if UGA has a history any different than ours.  We ought to be able to win as many as we lose against them.  Alabama is in an unprecedented run and it may be too much to expect to break event with them right now (nobody is!), but we should be able to pull one out against them at least 1/3 of the time, I'd think. 

Actually in the past 7 years we won 2 out of 7 against UAT. Not quite what you ask for but those years have  been unusually tough for everybody against them.If you take a longer view it really doesn't look quite that bad. Sure the bear beat everybody but then he had a few unfair advantages. All his games against us were home games and he was the only one allowed to pay the players. Since Pat Dye took over we are a more respectable 18-19 against them. Once the games were moved out of  Birmingham we are 2-2 in Montgomery.8-6 in Auburn  and 7-5 in Tuscaloosa. If you look at all games back to the 1890"s we have won 43% of our games against them and if you take out our 4-19 record against the bear ( before many of you were born)  we have a winning record of 31-26 against them. Looks like we turned it around about 30 years ago. I apologize if any of these numbers are incorrect ( I got them from Wikipedia) but they are surely close. Yes the past 5 years are unacceptable and I believe Gus bears most of the responsibility for this and yes I believe he is in over his head but this too will pass and I am not ready to drink the kool-aid yet. 

[TAYLORKEETON 792]

2010 & 2013 has changed the expectations, IMO. 

[au1duke 12]

On 10/18/2017 at 1:42 PM, Tiger said:

8 wins should be the absolute floor for us -- a program with national title hopes. I mean in rebuilding years we can take 8 wins once in a while, and understandable that sometimes thats how the ball bounces. But the way we recruit we should ALWAYS sweep the Arkys and MS schools and we should be no worse than splitting with Bama, UGA, LSU, TAMU consistently.  Seriously our record against these 4  -- whom recruit on the same level of us -- is inexcusably BAD for a program like ours. Basically with same level of talent we have been largely outclassed, to put it lightly, under the Malzahn regime.

8 wins the absolute floor, I don’t agree. I feel that 10 wins should be the absolute floor. We can’t be satisfied with an 8 win season. 8 wins gets you to a mid level bowl and gets you mid level recruits. Until we spend the money on a top tier coach that demands close to perfection from his players, we will be on this forum whining about how the program sucks and especially how the head coach sucks and needs to be fired. I expect more from Auburn. I expect Auburn to be a consistent top 10 team. I expect Auburn to play for and win championships. I expect Auburn to put the fear in Alabama. I expect Auburn to beat Alabama. We need a coach that expects the exact same thing! Right now we are doing none of the above!

[Tiger 8,827]

38 minutes ago, au1duke said:

8 wins the absolute floor, I don’t agree. I feel that 10 wins should be the absolute floor. We can’t be satisfied with an 8 win season. 8 wins gets you to a mid level bowl and gets you mid level recruits. Until we spend the money on a top tier coach that demands close to perfection from his players, we will be on this forum whining about how the program suck and especially how the head coach suck and needs to be fired. I expect more from Auburn. I expect Auburn to be a consistent top 10 team. I expect Auburn to play for and win championships. I expect Auburn to put the fear in Alabama. I expect Auburn to beat Alabama. We need a coach that expects the exact same thing! Right now we are doing none of the above!

By floor I don't mean we should really be there. 8 wins gets you on the hot seat here -- and it does. You're not supposed to have our program on the floor for very long is what I'm saying. And this is looking like it could to be the next of a series of 8 win (or less!) seasons. But yes, we are trying to put ourselves into that 10 win category and I agree 100% on everything you're saying honestly I'm not sure why you said you don't agree lol

[Eagle Eye 7 2,535]

2 minutes ago, Tiger said:

By floor I don't mean we should really be there. 8 wins gets you on the hot seat here -- and it does. You're not supposed to have our program on the floor for very long is what I'm saying. And this is looking like it could be the next in a series of 8 win (or less!) seasons. But yes, we are trying to put ourselves into that 10 win category and I agree 100% on everything you're saying honestly I'm not sure why you said you don't agree lol

When you consider 2 games are give aways and we get at least a week sec team each year and 8 win season means you actually won 5 out of 9 real games. I don’t think if your expectations are to be a decent team with our yearly schedule at least a 9 preferably a 10 win season should be bottom expectations. 

[Auhud08 596]

This is the part that most frustrates me: 

 but it's worth noting that Alabama football was in post-Bryant turmoil during that time

thats how football works; teams seize control when another team tumbles. The wording makes it sound as if the only reason auburn was successful was bc alabama was in turmoil. 

For that matter auburn was in turmoil after dye, whatd we do- oh went 11-0 and 9-1-1. And then won the west. After we fired bowden, that coach won 6 in a row against bama. This is a bs article. So tired of this: little brother, auburn is mediocre bull****. We’re a top 10-15 program all-time (depending on the metric you want to look at) 

auburn expects and should expect 10 wins a year, and should expect to be a top 10-15 team year-in and year-out.

War Damn Eagle

[doc4aday 1,887]

Did Mr. Stephenson get his journalism degree from bammer?

[Tiger 8,827]

28 minutes ago, Eagle Eye 7 said:

When you consider 2 games are give aways and we get at least a week sec team each year and 8 win season means you actually won 5 out of 9 real games. I don’t think if your expectations are to be a decent team with our yearly schedule at least a 9 preferably a 10 win season should be bottom expectations. 

I don't think you guys are getting me. IMO we should expect to average 10 wins but absolutely falling to the bottom (floor) is 8 wins because that likely means we are swept at least by LSU, UGA, TAMU, Bama. We have been on the floor for almost the entirety of Gus's tenure. We need to be hovering around 10 wins a year with good years being more and 9 win seasons being a let down with an 8 win season putting the coach on the hot seat. Anything below 8 wins is unacceptable, but we have been swimming in ~8 wins for a while now and we need to be in the 10 win range -- as you guys said. We are a national title caliber program for craps sake. I want us to finish with records that are indicative of our talent

[Eagle Eye 7 2,535]

11 hours ago, Tiger said:

I don't think you guys are getting me. IMO we should expect to average 10 wins but absolutely falling to the bottom (floor) is 8 wins because that likely means we are swept at least by LSU, UGA, TAMU, Bama. We have been on the floor for almost the entirety of Gus's tenure. We need to be hovering around 10 wins a year with good years being more and 9 win seasons being a let down with an 8 win season putting the coach on the hot seat. Anything below 8 wins is unacceptable, but we have been swimming in ~8 wins for a while now and we need to be in the 10 win range -- as you guys said. We are a national title caliber program for craps sake. I want us to finish with records that are indicative of our talent

I agree with you. I just keep hearing Gus supporters saying that wining 7 or 8 games is good. Maybe when we played 10 games and they all were some what tuff then 8 would be ok but not today . 

[DAG 33,989]

Just sick of losing to all of the quality opponents , including bowl games . Unacceptable 

[ChltteTiger 649]

12 hours ago, Auhud08 said:

This is the part that most frustrates me: 

 but it's worth noting that Alabama football was in post-Bryant turmoil during that time

thats how football works; teams seize control when another team tumbles. The wording makes it sound as if the only reason auburn was successful was bc alabama was in turmoil. 

For that matter auburn was in turmoil after dye, whatd we do- oh went 11-0 and 9-1-1. And then won the west. After we fired bowden, that coach won 6 in a row against bama. This is a bs article. So tired of this: little brother, auburn is mediocre bull****. We’re a top 10-15 program all-time (depending on the metric you want to look at) 

auburn expects and should expect 10 wins a year, and should expect to be a top 10-15 team year-in and year-out.

War Damn Eagle

The author of the article was probably a "kid" or not even born during the post-Bryant years. He is a fool for making it sound like turmoil ruled throughout that period.

[ChltteTiger 649]

11 minutes ago, DAG said:

Just sick of losing to all of the quality opponents , including bowl games . Unacceptable 

All of us sane fans feel the same way. Time for a change!

[Dan-0 479]

13 hours ago, TAYLORKEETON said:

2010 & 2013 has changed the expectations, IMO. 

Yup, and we are still one of the top programs in recruiting and facilities. So, to heck with "realistic expectations." That's another way of settling for mediocrity. Realistic expectations are for Kentucky and Vandy. We should expect to win the SEC every year- not demand, but expect.