Cecil Hurt confirms it

[GalensGhost 0]

Tuscaloosa News sports editor Cecil Hurt yesterday unwittingly confirmed in his column what Auburn fans have been saying for 25 years -- the era of Tahd dominance is long past. I don't think it dawned on Hurt, the ultimate Bama homer, just what his column really inferred.

Here is a snippet:

Once upon a time, the University of Alabama seemed to have a near-monopoly on a steady stream of talent from such schools. There were occasional exceptions, like Auburn defensive lineman Frank Warren, but from the 1970s until the early part of the 1990s, most of the big names seemed to end up playing for the Crimson Tide. Really big names, too -- names like Cornelius Bennett (Ensley) and Bobby Humphrey (Glenn) and David Palmer (Jackson-Olin) all came from Birmingham’s inner-city schools, along with a lot of others.

In 2005, the University of Alabama football roster featured a grand total of one player from Birmingham’s city schools -- defensive tackle Dominic Lee of Huffman, who just happens to be Andre Smith’s cousin. The total was the same from the city schools of Montgomery -- one (Antoine Caldwell of Lee). And, most amazing of all, from the urban schools of the Mobile-Prichard area -- schools like Blount, Vigor, LeFlore, Murphy and Davidson -- Alabama’s 2005 roster did not have one single scholarship player. Not one.

He goes on to make a lot of excuses about race, the decline of inner city schools, more athletes choosing basketball, school systems being less interested in "churning out football prospects" and other unrelated babble.

Meanwhile he ignoresthe (pardon the pun) white elephant that is sitting squarely in the middle of the room.

And for those who care to read the rest....

[saniflush 0]

NICE!

[WarTim 3,456]

Ghost, your observations are right on the money. Thanks for sharing.

p.s. This guy could use a remedial course or two in journalism.

[quietfan 233]

He goes on to make a lot of excuses about race, the decline of inner city schools, more athletes choosing basketball, school systems being less interested in "churning out football prospects" and other unrelated babble.

214615[/snapback]

Unrelated is right...none of those factors has anything to do with recruits picking other schools instead of Bama. I suppose they might relate to a reduction in the overall number of football prospects, but not whether they go to UA or somewhere else.

Unless of course, you want to argue that schools being less interested in "churning out football prospects" means they're focusing more on academics--in which case it makes perfect sense that better educated high school seniors would be more likely to have the intelligence to avoid the Crapstone!

[BamaGrad03 0]

Unless of course, you want to argue that schools being less interested in "churning out football prospects" means they're focusing more on academics--in which case it makes perfect sense that better educated high school seniors would be more likely to have the intelligence to avoid the Crapstone!

Uh...ok. For the last ~4 years or so I think AU and UA have been within 5 spots of one another in the USA Today rankings. But whatever.

And I think its obvious why our team was depleted of top talent over the last few years...its called probation.

[quietfan 233]

Unless of course, you want to argue that schools being less interested in "churning out football prospects" means they're focusing more on academics--in which case it makes perfect sense that better educated high school seniors would be more likely to have the intelligence to avoid the Crapstone!

Uh...ok. For the last ~4 years or so I think AU and UA have been within 5 spots of one another in the USA Today rankings. But whatever.

And I think its obvious why our team was depleted of top talent over the last few years...its called probation.

214636[/snapback]

Actually, BG, I wasn't really comparing the relative academic ratings of the two schools...rather I was poking fun at making the intelligent choice regarding Auburn vs. Alabama in anything!

Guess it's hard to see my tongue in my cheek on-line...

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

Uh...ok. For the last ~4 years or so I think AU and UA have been within 5 spots of one another in the USA Today rankings. But whatever.

214636[/snapback]

It's US News and World Report, not USA Today. I don't put any stock in anything that USA Today says beyond the cute little pie charts that show me which shopping day is actually the busiest in terms of fannies in the mall.

Nice try, though, it almost made you look like we should put some stock in your opinion.

"Probation"...keep clinging to that. One more year and you can use "coaching instability" again in its place.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Actually, BG, I wasn't really comparing the relative academic ratings of the two schools...rather I was poking fun at making the intelligent choice regarding Auburn vs. Alabama in anything! poke1.gif

Heh...thats fair

It's US News and World Report, not USA Today. I don't put any stock in anything that USA Today says beyond the cute little pie charts that show me which shopping day is actually the busiest in terms of fannies in the mall.

Nice try, though, it almost made you look like we should put some stock in your opinion.

"Probation"...keep clinging to that. One more year and you can use "coaching instability" again in its place.

What about Princeton review? You trust them? Or do you put more stock in "because you say so" than those who do annual reviews?

Im not using probation now. Im saying that when you are on probation you dont have good recruiting. Its a fact that isnt hard to prove.

Look at our recruiting heading into the trouble...look at it during the trouble...and look at it now.

How high is your class going to be ranked when you can only sign 17 guys?

We went 6-6 last year and still signed a top 20 class. Our second recruiting class after probation and we are pushing a top 10 class.

Seems to me the relationship is obvious.

[saniflush 0]

Not sure that is a realistic comparison. Using where your class is ranked. Nice for a lot of cannon fodder but not sure of the facts.

Stat have you seen any comparisons of classes, say through the last five to ten years in regards to how they were ranked after signing day and how many actual star athletes panned out? I guess it depends on the criteria you are using to say they were successful or flops.

[Guest Tigrinum Major]

What about Princeton review? You trust them? Or do you put more stock in "because you say so" than those who do annual reviews?

214650[/snapback]

I was pointing out that you used the wrong reference. Unless I am mistaken, USA Today does not rank colleges and universities. US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT does. Princton Review does.

Get your references correct and I will pay more attention to your drivel.

Yes, you are correct, those annual reviews do rank Auburn ahead of Alabama consistently, albeit by a slight margin and with an exception to the rule such as last year. To anyone outside of the borders of our fair state and respective alumni associations, the difference is undistinguishable. But Auburn is ranked higher.

Im not using probation now.

214650[/snapback]

You did an hour ago.

[WarTim 3,456]

What about Princeton review? You trust them? Or do you put more stock in "because you say so" than those who do annual reviews?

214650[/snapback]

I was pointing out that you used the wrong reference. Unless I am mistaken, USA Today does not rank colleges and universities. US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT does. Princton Review does.

Get your references correct and I will pay more attention to your drivel.

Yes, you are correct, those annual reviews do rank Auburn ahead of Alabama consistently, albeit by a slight margin and with an exception to the rule such as last year. To anyone outside of the borders of our fair state and respective alumni associations, the difference is undistinguishable. But Auburn is ranked higher.

Im not using probation now.

214650[/snapback]

You did an hour ago.

214655[/snapback]

P.S. bg, the REASON for probation is CHEATING (Or, in uat terms, CAUGHT cheating). Deal with that aspect and you will be making progress.

[vatz22au 142]

I was still in highschool when all this probation mess hit the fan with Alabama. I am now a junior here at Auburn.

Point being made....the probation excuse is being worn out.

[WarTim 3,456]

Vatz, Haven't you heard? It is lack of COACHING these days. Keep up!

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

I always find the Alabama Auburn thing kind of interesting.

Alabama goes on probation and says recruiting is bad because of it.

Auburn went on probation and we blamed our poor recruiting on the coach.

Auburn lost a year of TV and two bowl seasons over 2 years. Alabama lost two bowl seasons over five years. And unless I read it wrong, didn't we lose like 33 scholarships to Alabama's 25?

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

To anyone outside of the borders of our fair state and respective alumni associations, the difference is  undistinguishable.

214655[/snapback]

Actually a common mistake people make about Auburn is they believe that its a private school in Georgia.

[abrnfanatc 6]

To anyone outside of the borders of our fair state and respective alumni associations, the difference is  undistinguishable.

214655[/snapback]

Actually a common mistake people make about Auburn is they believe that its a private school in Georgia.

214694[/snapback]

Yes, I remember one of the few funny quotes from Tater Tot was that someone asked him what part of Georgia Auburn was in. His answer was very close to Charleston.

[BamaGrad03 0]

You did an hour ago.

You can't be that dense. Come on work with me here. The premise of the article and the subsequent crowing by you guys was that Bama hasnt been doing as well recently in recruiting.

And the timetable referenced was DURING our probation. If you'll read what I said...i spoke of probation being a reason why we didnt recruit well WHILE we were on probation. Is that not a fair assesment? I also pointed out an obvious trend of a steady increase in recruiting performance since we have been off of probation.

Unless you can say, with a straight face, that being on probation has no effect on recruiting...then my point holds true. And if you honestly believe that probation doesnt hurt recruiting, there is plenty of previous precident to prove you incorrect.

Again I ask...where should we be ranked in recruiting if we can only sign 17 guys? Name me ONE team that killed it in recruiting while they were on probation.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Actually weren't the AU classes of 94 and 95 highly ranked?

[Aubie7 0]

You did an hour ago.

You can't be that dense. Come on work with me here. The premise of the article and the subsequent crowing by you guys was that Bama hasnt been doing as well recently in recruiting.

And the timetable referenced was DURING our probation. If you'll read what I said...i spoke of probation being a reason why we didnt recruit well WHILE we were on probation. Is that not a fair assesment? I also pointed out an obvious trend of a steady increase in recruiting performance since we have been off of probation.

Unless you can say, with a straight face, that being on probation has no effect on recruiting...then my point holds true. And if you honestly believe that probation doesnt hurt recruiting, there is plenty of previous precident to prove you incorrect.

Again I ask...where should we be ranked in recruiting if we can only sign 17 guys? Name me ONE team that killed it in recruiting while they were on probation.

214701[/snapback]

So, which is it?:

1) Are the top recruits NOT going to UAT because of probation OR

2) Are the top recruits ALWAYS going to UAT anyway becuase of tradition?

It can't be both!

[BamaGrad03 0]

I dont see how it could be. How many scholarships were you guys without during those two years?

And if I remember correctly, the big thing about CTT taking over was that he inherited a team devoid of talent.

2) Are the top recruits ALWAYS going to UAT anyway becuase of tradition?

I never said they were.

[WeagleDMS 0]

Unless of course, you want to argue that schools being less interested in "churning out football prospects" means they're focusing more on academics--in which case it makes perfect sense that better educated high school seniors would be more likely to have the intelligence to avoid the Crapstone!

Uh...ok. For the last ~4 years or so I think AU and UA have been within 5 spots of one another in the USA Today rankings. But whatever.

And I think its obvious why our team was depleted of top talent over the last few years...its called probation.

214636[/snapback]

Probation, waaah! You cheated, did you not? That is the worst excuse ever. Period. That's like a murderer complaining that he can't be a good father or get a job because he got sentenced to life in prison.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

I dont see how it could be. How many scholarships were you guys without during those two years?

And if I remember correctly, the big thing about CTT taking over was that he inherited a team devoid of talent.

2) Are the top recruits ALWAYS going to UAT anyway becuase of tradition?

I never said they were.

214709[/snapback]

94-95, means lot of those guys were leaving before Tuberville got here. Like I said we blame Bowden, his recruiting went downhill when his head got to big and he started messing with his staff.

One of those two classes was a top 10 class I'm sure of it, 95 had Jeno James, Jimmy Brumbaugh, Karsten Baily, Robert Baker, Takeo Spikes, Martavious Houston I think. Then some tailbacks like Rusty Williams and such that were rated high but never quite lived up to the hype. Davis, Craig, Beasley all Bowden recruits also I believe.

[Bama Bo 0]

I don't know what Auburn's recruiting classes were ranked during their probation, but they only lost a total of about 3 scholarships.

F. The Committee on Infractions adopts the penalties imposed by the institution upon itself and its coaches, staff and representatives of its athletics interests as follows:

1. Reduction of the initial grants-in-aid in the sport of football from 25 to 24 during the 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 academic years, and the annual limit on such grants from 88 to 86 for the 1993-94 academic year, and from 85 to 83 for the 1994-95 and 1995-96 academic years.

you can read this here <---Link to Infraction Report Page--->

or search it out your self here <---NCAA Data Base--->

[WarTim 3,456]

I don't know what Auburn's recruiting classes were ranked during their probation, but they only lost a total of about 3 scholarships.

F. The Committee on Infractions adopts the penalties imposed by the institution upon itself and its coaches, staff and representatives of its athletics interests as follows:

1. Reduction of the initial grants-in-aid in the sport of football from 25 to 24 during the 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 academic years, and the annual limit on such grants from 88 to 86 for the 1993-94 academic year, and from 85 to 83 for the 1994-95 and 1995-96 academic years.

you can read this here <---Link to Infraction Report Page--->

or search it out your self here <---NCAA Data Base--->

214718[/snapback]

If you would take the time to do the math, your own post shows more than "2" lost.

uaters......

[Bama Bo 0]

If you would take the time to do the math, your own post shows more than "2" lost.

uaters......    

214719[/snapback]

Where'd I say anything about 2?

I said 3.

1 in the 93-94 class

1 in the 94-95 class

1 in the 95-96 class

=3

I have no problem with the math. Now if the number would have risen above 21, I might be in trouble