97% of Signees Have Enrolled Under Gus

[Cardin Drake 1,857]

Guys, I'm going to make a couple of points, respond to a couple of things, let you guys all  hate on me, and then move on.  I'm not interested in becoming Gus's chief defender because (1) it's not fun, and (2) I'm frustrated by most of the same things you guys are. I just don't understand how you let your O-line pipeline get depleted, and the Tennessee & LSU games among others, absolutely drove me all the way to crazy.

Regardless, on any objective basis, Gus is the best head coach we've had in the last 50 years, including Shug.  I'm not interested in keeping him because I want to go 8-5 every year. I want to keep him (for now) because he gives us our best chance to win national championships. He has put together a staff that is recruiting very, very well, better than we have under any other coach we've had. The recruiting is consistent, and getting better. I'm not interested in dismantling that to get the unproven guy we will land who is somehow going to immediately recruit like Alabama, Clemson, & Georgia. It just isn't going to happen. I laugh at some of the names thrown out. Brent Venerables, seriously?  Go read the OU boards. They trashed him for years, ran him out of town, and still blame him for the god awful mess that is the Sooners defense.  For most teams, the formula to the national championship game is the same. Stockpile talent, and get yourself an exceptional quarterback.That was true for 3 of the 4 teams in this year's playoff.  I don't rate Fromm as exceptional, but he is very good. Murray was so good that the Sooners did it by outscoring everybody even though their defense sucked.  As good as Clemson is, they don't win it if Trevor Lawrence wasn't inhuman. And it's really helpful to have a relatively easy schedule—I'm looking at you, OU & Clemson. We will never have that advantage. We have the talent in place to make a run this year if our QB is exceptional. If he is not, we are looking at 3 or 4 losses. If he is average or below average, we could lose 6 or 7. I like the choices we are betting on at QB a lot, but there are no guarantees. And that's how it is ALWAYS going to be in this league, with Gus or anybody else. Even with really good talent, you are going to have years that are 8-5 if you have the slightest weakness. We aren't in the ACC or Big 12. If our coach loses the confidence of the fan base (regardless of why or whether it's fair) and he can't recruit, then it's time to move on, regardless of what anyone thinks. I'm now done with this topic, and I'm sure many of you have a different opinion I'd just as soon not hear it, although I'm suspect I will. War Eagle; I'm looking forward to beating Oregon.

 

 

[aujeff11 6,243]

31 minutes ago, ellitor said:

This used to be a nice, peaceful, positive thread, then...

It might’ve been peaceful, but not positive. Unless being negative is the new positive.

 

 

I kid. I kid. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 hour ago, AU64 said:

Auburns school of Science and Math looking pretty suspect considering that people are having trouble dealing with single digit numbers on this thread.  Any math majors out the to bail them out..... 

To be fair, a certain member on the coaching staff couldn’t count to 4. 

[gr82be 14,475]

23 minutes ago, Cardin Drake said:

Guys, I'm going to make a couple of points, respond to a couple of things, let you guys all  hate on me, and then move on.  I'm not interested in becoming Gus's chief defender because (1) it's not fun, and (2) I'm frustrated by most of the same things you guys are. I just don't understand how you let your O-line pipeline get depleted, and the Tennessee & LSU games among others, absolutely drove me all the way to crazy.

Regardless, on any objective basis, Gus is the best head coach we've had in the last 50 years, including Shug.  I'm not interested in keeping him because I want to go 8-5 every year. I want to keep him (for now) because he gives us our best chance to win national championships. He has put together a staff that is recruiting very, very well, better than we have under any other coach we've had. The recruiting is consistent, and getting better. I'm not interested in dismantling that to get the unproven guy we will land who is somehow going to immediately recruit like Alabama, Clemson, & Georgia. It just isn't going to happen. I laugh at some of the names thrown out. Brent Venerables, seriously?  Go read the OU boards. They trashed him for years, ran him out of town, and still blame him for the god awful mess that is the Sooners defense.  For most teams, the formula to the national championship game is the same. Stockpile talent, and get yourself an exceptional quarterback.That was true for 3 of the 4 teams in this year's playoff.  I don't rate Fromm as exceptional, but he is very good. Murray was so good that the Sooners did it by outscoring everybody even though their defense sucked.  As good as Clemson is, they don't win it if Trevor Lawrence wasn't inhuman. And it's really helpful to have a relatively easy schedule—I'm looking at you, OU & Clemson. We will never have that advantage. We have the talent in place to make a run this year if our QB is exceptional. If he is not, we are looking at 3 or 4 losses. If he is average or below average, we could lose 6 or 7. I like the choices we are betting on at QB a lot, but there are no guarantees. And that's how it is ALWAYS going to be in this league, with Gus or anybody else. Even with really good talent, you are going to have years that are 8-5 if you have the slightest weakness. We aren't in the ACC or Big 12. If our coach loses the confidence of the fan base (regardless of why or whether it's fair) and he can't recruit, then it's time to move on, regardless of what anyone thinks. I'm now done with this topic, and I'm sure many of you have a different opinion I'd just as soon not hear it, although I'm suspect I will. War Eagle; I'm looking forward to beating Oregon.

 

 

 

[Mikey 16,746]

11 hours ago, McLoofus said:

-Would love to know who says "that can't happen at AU".

Someone who calls the likelihood of hiring an  unsuccessful coach "a minimal risk".

[McLoofus 35,182]

14 hours ago, Mikey said:

Someone who calls the likelihood of hiring an  unsuccessful coach "a minimal risk".

Whoa. You don't know the difference between might and can't. 

Seek help.

Edit: Also, the question isn't if the next coach would be unsuccessful. It's if he would average 5 losses a year. Which, for $7 million a year, is somewhere south of unsuccessful.

[DAG 34,018]

I find the biggest problem is some posters are never wrong, even in the light of proven data, they will never admit "Hey, I was wrong and you were right." That leads to most of the derailment. 

[DAG 34,018]

Also, I will say that there are posters who are considered "rational" who do in fact refuse to engage when there is complete evidence against their debating point. This is just my opinion. For some odd reason negative has been equated with rational. It may be rationale in some parts, yet it is still negative. The same thing can be deemed from a positive stance. To me, if someone has a credible post, whether they are in your  AUFamily group or not, give them props. Mikey and Cole could legitimately post the same content, just said differently and get the opposite amount of responses. Like why? lol. I also think we can really learn from each other differences. I and @abw0004 use to be at each other's necks, we are polar opposites, yet I think we are like super cool with each other now. One thing I can say about @aujeff11, even though we argue like cats and dogs, is he does bring credible evidence at times. For that reason alone, I will never mute him. He is a poster, you can look things up on and learn from. Take it for what is worth. Also, can football season finally get here.

[abw0004 10,134]

51 minutes ago, DAG said:

Also, I will say that there are posters who are considered "rational" who do in fact refuse to engage when there is complete evidence against their debating point. This is just my opinion. For some odd reason negative has been equated with rational. It may be rationale in some parts, yet it is still negative. The same thing can be deemed from a positive stance. To me, if someone has a credible post, whether they are in your  AUFamily group or not, give them props. Mikey and Cole could legitimately post the same content, just said differently and get the opposite amount of responses. Like why? lol. I also think we can really learn from each other differences. I and @abw0004 use to be at each other's necks, we are polar opposites, yet I think we are like super cool with each other now. One thing I can say about @aujeff11, even though we argue like cats and dogs, is he does bring credible evidence at times. For that reason alone, I will never mute him. He is a poster, you can look things up on and learn from. Take it for what is worth. Also, can football season finally get here.

I knew you had personal feelings for me.  It was the sex-appeal I bet   

Not to mention there are a few posters, when disagreed with they immediately throw personal shots.  Very immature.  

[DAG 34,018]

3 minutes ago, abw0004 said:

I knew you had personal feelings for me.  It was the sex-appeal I bet   

Not to mention there are a few posters, when disagreed with they immediately throw personal shots.  Very immature.  

Okay now let's not go too far lol 

But I agree, and I can say I am still working towards being mature in that regard, as we should all be as adults. 

[Gowebb11 9,383]

21 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

I'm not interested in dismantling that to get the unproven guy we will land who is somehow going to immediately recruit like Alabama, Clemson, & Georgia.

Chizik was 5-19 at Iowa State and Gus had exactly one year of HC experience in the Sunbelt, so hiring unproven HC is the way we roll it seems. 

[cole256 17,084]

1 hour ago, DAG said:

Also, I will say that there are posters who are considered "rational" who do in fact refuse to engage when there is complete evidence against their debating point. This is just my opinion. For some odd reason negative has been equated with rational. It may be rationale in some parts, yet it is still negative. The same thing can be deemed from a positive stance. To me, if someone has a credible post, whether they are in your  AUFamily group or not, give them props. Mikey and Cole could legitimately post the same content, just said differently and get the opposite amount of responses. Like why? lol. I also think we can really learn from each other differences. I and @abw0004 use to be at each other's necks, we are polar opposites, yet I think we are like super cool with each other now. One thing I can say about @aujeff11, even though we argue like cats and dogs, is he does bring credible evidence at times. For that reason alone, I will never mute him. He is a poster, you can look things up on and learn from. Take it for what is worth. Also, can football season finally get here.

One thing I can't stand is let's use me as the example, they can post and me wrong but then go to other people said this, or this happened in your past....like really? So because I've had debates with other people in the past that means you're right?

I also notice when people debate placing a bunch of arguments in one or two posts just jumbles things. But yes you are right, a person can clearly not be as informed on a particular subject and just won't simply admit. 

[GwillMac6 20,753]

2 hours ago, DAG said:

I find the biggest problem is some posters are never wrong, even in the light of proven data, they will never admit "Hey, I was wrong and you were right." That leads to most of the derailment. 

People have big egos. Even on a message board which is silly. Thankfully I never had any reason to have a big ego and walk with a Vinny Mac like power walk! lol. You will never see me having a problem saying I am wrong. Probaly because I am used to being wrong and hardly ever right. It is just so much easier and natural for me to say WELP LET ME TAKE ANOTHER L!!! No sweat off my back. But for some posters they would rather die than admit they were wrong! lmao

[DAG 34,018]

38 minutes ago, cole256 said:

One thing I can't stand is let's use me as the example, they can post and me wrong but then go to other people said this, or this happened in your past....like really? So because I've had debates with other people in the past that means you're right?

I also notice when people debate placing a bunch of arguments in one or two posts just jumbles things. But yes you are right, a person can clearly not be as informed on a particular subject and just won't simply admit. 

This forum is fun when there is different of opinions. It gets awkward when it gets personal, and I am one of the biggest culprits of it. So I apologize to the board about that. You are also right; there definitely can be some attached misinformed assumptions based on one interaction. What I won't apologize for is trying to be objective as possible. This season will cause many debates for sure unless this team is just going down the straight in narrow. That can be either completely getting to the playoffs or having an abysmal season, in between will cause reasons for disputes. I think that is fine as long as posters can at least be consistent in their postings. 

[abw0004 10,134]

21 minutes ago, GwillMac6 said:

People have big egos. Even on a message board which is silly. Thankfully I never had any reason to have a big ego and walk with a Vinny Mac like power walk! lol. You will never see me having a problem saying I am wrong. Probaly because I am used to being wrong and hardly ever right. It is just so much easier and natural for me to say WELP LET ME TAKE ANOTHER L!!! No sweat off my back. But for some posters they would rather die than admit they were wrong! lmao

Cannot be understated enough. 

[DAG 34,018]

This is what I call a family intervention 

[toddc 13,194]

I’m the most humble man to ever live, so I can’t have an ego!

[cole256 17,084]

Only thing better is the guy that don't have an ego who chastises everybody on the board and let them know how much different he is as opposed to everybody else 😂😂

[DAG 34,018]

11 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Only thing better is the guy that don't have an ego who chastises everybody on the board and let them know how much different he is as opposed to everybody else 😂😂

Sounds like we need some more interventions 

[cole256 17,084]

23 minutes ago, DAG said:

Sounds like we need some more interventions 

Even more than that!

[AUsince72 11,084]

How I view my posts...

 

[AUsince72 11,084]

How everyone else views my posts...

 

[GwillMac6 20,753]

2 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

How everyone else views my posts...

 

 

[abw0004 10,134]

I would have to say the biggest head scratcher is the guy/girl who thinks he knows so much about everything when in reality is he/she doesn’t.  That is what makes it so much fun when you can prove him/her wrong.  But to each their own.

[cole256 17,084]

58 minutes ago, DAG said:

Sounds like we need some more interventions 

👀