bigbird 60,524 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 2 minutes ago, Mikey said: 18 Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McLoofus 35,182 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 Uh oh. We might have finally entered the post-soap sock beatdown phase of Private Pyle's tenure on this board. "18" is the new "I am... in a world... of A4E posts." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 10 minutes ago, bigbird said: Link? No link is coming and you know very well why it isn't. You'll have to set a better trap than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyehardfanAU 2,117 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 9 minutes ago, Mikey said: No link is coming and you know very well why it isn't. You'll have to set a better trap than that. Why can't you link what you consider to be a basic fact? Certainly you got your information somewhere...or I guess you could've made the whole thing up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAG 33,982 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 When you beat Bama then lose to Minnesota, it just doesn’t feel the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 11 minutes ago, dyehardfanAU said: Why can't you link what you consider to be a basic fact? Certainly you got your information somewhere...or I guess you could've made the whole thing up. Ask @bigbird. He's the one who brought up the subject of a link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 6 minutes ago, DAG said: When you beat Bama then lose to Minnesota, it just doesn’t feel the same. The bowl game loss spoiled what could have been a very satisfying close to the season, no doubt about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyehardfanAU 2,117 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 1 minute ago, Mikey said: Ask @bigbird. He's the one who brought up the subject of a link. Why would I ask bird? You're the one who made the claim. Please link me to the 7.2 or however many OTs you claimed plus the other 10.8 OL. TIA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 2 minutes ago, dyehardfanAU said: Why would I ask bird? You're the one who made the claim. Please link me to the 7.2 or however many OTs you claimed plus the other 10.8 OL. TIA. Are you dense? Ask bird why you'd ask him. For the last time, he brought up the subject of a link. Ask him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyehardfanAU 2,117 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 45 minutes ago, Mikey said: Are you dense? Ask bird why you'd ask him. For the last time, he brought up the subject of a link. Ask him. Why would I ask him? It's your claim, the burden of proof is on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbird 60,524 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 1 hour ago, Mikey said: No link is coming and you know very well why it isn't. Can't link a figment of the imagination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ATX 13,654 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 11 hours ago, bigbird said: Can't link a figment of the imagination? If you truly don't know why I won't link it, send me a PM and I'll refresh your memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbird 60,524 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 9 hours ago, Mikey said: If you truly don't know why I won't link it, send me a PM and I'll refresh your memory. We all know why you won't link it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamp Eagle 5,135 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 On 1/23/2020 at 3:51 PM, TigerCatcher said: My sarcasm meter on this subject is enhanced by my current MBA studies. You'll be unhappy to note that the athletic department just released the financial statements for the most recent fiscal year. In terms of how the corporate world works, there is no lowering of standards. Revenues are historically high, profits also very strong. Those are figures that overrule any "expectation or self goals" where Dr. Gougue is concerned, and he's the only PTB that matters .... Auburn athletics reports record revenue, increased profit during 2018-19 fiscal year AUBURN — Auburn's athletics department reported a record revenue of more than $152.4 million during the 2019-fiscal year, according to the university’s NCAA Membership Financial Report. That's an increase of nearly $5 million from the 2017-18 total of $147.6 million, which was the previous record. It also marks the seventh straight year that revenues have increased. Auburn's profit margin also rose, according to the annual report released to the Montgomery Advertiser on Thursday in response to a Freedom of Information Act request — the department reported an operating excess of nearly $13.2 million. That's more than the $7.8 million total reported during the 2017-18 fiscal year, but not quite as high as the $14.6 million and $15.2 million in profit Auburn claimed in 2016-17 and 2015-16, respectively. Auburn's operating expenses decreased, from $139.7 million in 2017-18 to $139.2 million in 2018-19. Football ($95.1 million) and men's basketball ($15.5 million) accounted for more than 70% of the department's revenue. Both sports made more than they did the year prior ($93.5 million and $11.2 million, respectively). https://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/story/sports/college/auburn/2020/01/23/auburn-athletics-department-reports-record-revenue-increase-profit-2018-19-fiscal-year-allen-greene/4554072002/ I was referring to individuals within an organizational structure of industry where my experience lies. More than once, I've witnessed self-inflicted problems turned around on everyone except the one who inflicted it and it became someone else's problem. Those are the best kinds of people to work for or with...😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToraGirl 5,498 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 2 hours ago, bigbird said: We all know why you won't link it. That moment when the "burden of proof squad" won't provide it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 23 hours ago, bigbird said: We all know why you won't link it. Funny boy! No, all the readers don't know why neither one of us will link it. But you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn2Eugene 2,317 Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyehardfanAU 2,117 Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 1 hour ago, Mikey said: Funny boy! No, all the readers don't know why neither one of us will link it. But you do. I can't imagine why you'd be floundering about posting a link to 7.2 Offensive Tackles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nixtosanders94 2,180 Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 I don’t know what the hell is going on but its very entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn2Eugene 2,317 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 10 hours ago, nixtosanders94 said: I don’t know what the hell is going on but its very entertaining. There was a discussion about how thin we are at certain positions on the line. Someone counted all the "OL" we had which included counting walk-ons and long snappers. If you see someone make a comment about our 6'4 230 long snapper counting as on offensive lineman, it is part of this conversation. Anyway the certain poster said there was "plenty of depth" and counted 18 OL and said there was absolutely no problem of depth along the OL. In doing so, things like depth between interior OL and OTs was completely ignored... while that was the point of the entire conversation was the lack of serviceable OTs on the roster... Anyway the poster who will remain anonymous said there were 18 OL and 18 OL between 5 positions gave 3.6 players per position. So any time you see someone on here list a number containing a "." (such as 3.6 or 5.2 or 7.4) it's a laugh at the argument of the total number of players divided by 5 (for the 5 positions along the OL.) The list or link being requested is for the link to the claimed number of OL. This way the walk-ons and long snappers (like the pic below) can be pointed out they in fact do not count as "serviceable" OL especially for OT where we are actually lacking quality depth. We have recruited well on the inside of the line but have recruited OTs terribly. I am not claiming this to be 100% accurate. This is the rundown I can do off the best of my memory. Now I may have some of my numbers off a tad bit. But the story as a whole is as accurate as I remember it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn2Eugene 2,317 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 11 hours ago, nixtosanders94 said: I don’t know what the hell is going on but its very entertaining. Here is the long snapper who was counted among the "OL." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,597 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 9 hours ago, Auburn2Eugene said: I am not claiming this to be 100% accurate. It's not. 9 hours ago, Auburn2Eugene said: Someone counted all the "OL" we had which included counting walk-ons and long snappers. It's very good that you aren't claiming this to be 100% accurate, because it is not. The 18 O-linemen were all scholarship players. One of the 18 was a long snapper. There's a simple solution: Get a 2018 roster, count the scholarship O-linemen and you will have 18. It's not rocket science. If you want to bring it up to current times, do the same for the 2019 roster and you'll find 17 scholarship O-linemen. If you don't think a long snapper is an O-lineman, decrease the number by one. EDIT: I did a re-count on the 2019 numbers and apparently I had overlooked one. The 2019 squad had 18 scholarship 0-line players, same number as 2018. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr82be 14,424 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 3 hours ago, Auburn2Eugene said: There was a discussion about how thin we are at certain positions on the line 3 hours ago, Auburn2Eugene said: Here is the long snapper who was counted among the "OL." We even look thin at long snapper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowebb11 9,321 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Gee, this story about the o line is very intriguing, fresh, and new. Maybe we should keep rehashing it months after the original discussion. 😤 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.