aubiefifty

Statistically speaking: Where Auburn stands after bye week By Tom Green | tgreen@al.com 14-18 minutes Auburn enjoyed a welcome reprieve from the vigor of one of the nation’s toughest schedules last weekend, with the team’s bye week coming at an opportune time for the program. At 5-2 overall and 2-1 in SEC play, Auburn was off in Week 8. It gave the Tigers a chance for recovery, as well as an opportunity to look inward and focus on improving in some key areas as they prepare for the back stretch of their first season under head coach Bryan Harsin. Read more Auburn football: Two questions for Bryan Harsin for the final five games of the season Grading Auburn’s season to date in Year 1 under Harsin Five Auburn players who have impressed the most this season With the team off last weekend, let’s take a look at where Auburn stands statistically in various categories, both in the SEC and among FBS teams, as the Tigers turn the page to another ranked matchup against No. 10 Ole Miss coming off the bye: RUSHING OFFENSE (SEC rank, FBS rank) 2013: 328.3 (1st, 1st) 2014: 255.5 (2nd, 13th) 2015: 196.4 (5th, 35th) 2016: 271.3 (1st, 6th) 2017: 218.3 (4th, 26th) 2018: 167.5 (10th, 68th) 2019: 199.1 (4th, 33rd) 2020: 162.5 (7th, 67th) After Akron: 316.0 (3rd, 11th) After Alabama State: 340.0 (2nd, 3rd) After Penn State: 287.3 (3rd, 7th) After Georgia State: 257.0 (4th, 9th) After LSU: 238.2 (4th, 12th) After Georgia: 206.2 (6th, 32nd) After Arkansas: 196.0 (5th, 36th) After bye week: 196.0 (5th, 36th) Why: Auburn rushed for 135 yards against Arkansas before the bye. . PASSING OFFENSE 2013: 173.0 (11th, 106th) 2014: 229.5 (7th, 66th) 2015: 173.6 (12th, 110th) 2016: 169.5 (14th, 112th) 2017: 233.4 (5th, 65th) 2018: 222.5 (9th, 74th) 2019: 207.5 (9th, 87th) 2020: 220.3 (10th, 71st) After Akron: 297.0 (6th, 29th) After Alabama State: 235.0 (10th, 65th) After Penn State: 218.3 (9th, 77th) After Georgia State: 227.0 (9th, 72nd) After LSU: 239.6 (6th, 58th) After Georgia: 245.0 (6th, 57th) After Arkansas: 251.7 (6th, 49th) After bye week: 251.7 (6th, 49th) Why: Auburn threw for 292 yards against Arkansas before the bye. . PASS EFFICIENCY OFFENSE 2013: 149.63 (6th, 24th) 2014: 156.79 (1st, 8th) 2015: 124.47 (10th, 79th) 2016: 135.17 (6th, 54th) 2017: 153.59 (5th, 13th) 2018: 140.11 (8th, 51st) 2019: 128.35 (9th, 89th) 2020: 122.96 (11th, 89th) After Akron: 210.55 (1st, 9th) After Alabama State: 200.61 (1st, 4th) After Penn State: 151.55 (7th, 41st) After Georgia State: 137.01 (12th, 77th) After LSU: 129.00 (12th, 90th) After Georgia: 124.15 (12th, 96th) After Arkansas: 131.43 (12, 87th) After bye week: 131.43 (12th, 92nd) Why: Bo Nix completed 21-of-26 passes for 292 yards, two touchdowns and an interception before the bye week. . TOTAL OFFENSE 2013: 501.3 (2nd, 11th) 2014: 485.0 (2nd, 16th) 2015: 370.0 (10th, 94th) 2016: 440.8 (6th, 43rd) 2017: 451.6 (3rd, 26th) 2018: 389.9 (11th, 78th) 2019: 406.5 (6th, 64th) 2020: 382.8 (9th, 77th) After Akron: 613.0 (1st, 1st) After Alabama State: 575.0 (3rd, 7th) After Penn State: 505.7 (4th, 18th) After Georgia State: 484.0 (3rd, 18th) After LSU: 477.8 (3rd, 17th) After Georgia: 451.2 (7th, 31st) After Arkansas: 447.7 (6th, 30th) After bye week: 447.7 (6th, 30th) Why: Auburn had 427 yards of offense against Arkansas before the bye. . SCORING OFFENSE 2013: 39.5 (2nd, 12th) 2014: 35.5 (4th, 35th) 2015: 27.5 (8th, 75th) 2016: 31.2 (6th, 49th) 2017: 33.9 (4th, 27th) 2018: 30.9 (8th, 47th) 2019: 33.2 (3rd, 28th) 2020: 25.1 (9th, 89th) After Akron: 60.0 (1st, 3rd) After Alabama State: 61.0 (1st, 1st) After Penn State: 45.3 (2nd, 7th) After Georgia State: 42.5 (3rd, 11th) After LSU: 38.8 (5th, 14th) After Georgia: 34.0 (6th, 36th) After Arkansas: 34.6 (5th, 26th) After bye week: 34.6 (5th, 24th) Why: Auburn scored 38 points against Arkansas, though one touchdown came via the defense before the bye week. . SACKS ALLOWED 2013: 18 sacks, 1.29 per game (3rd, 22nd) 2014: 15 sacks, 1.15 per game (3rd, 15th) 2015: 19 sacks, 1.46 per game (4th, 33rd) 2016: 19 sacks, 1.46 per game (3rd, 27th) 2017: 36 sacks, 2.57 per game (10th, 100th) 2018: 23 sacks, 1.77 per game (6th, 39th) 2019: 18, 1.38 per game (4th, 18th) 2020: 20, 1.82 per game (6th, 41st) After Akron: 0, 0.00 per game (1st, 1st) After Alabama State: 1, 0.50 per game (1st, 5th) After Penn State: 1, 0.33 per game (1st, 3rd) After Georgia State: 3, 0.75 per game (2nd, 7th) After LSU: 3, 0.60 per game (2nd, 6th) After Georgia: 7, 1.17 per game (4th, 16th) After Arkansas: 7, 1.00 per game (3rd, 10th) After bye week: 7, 1.00 per game (3rd, 10th) Why: Auburn did not give up a sack against Arkansas before the bye week. . THIRD-DOWN CONVERSIONS 2013: 46.5 percent (4th, 24th) 2014: 52.5 percent (1st, 2nd) 2015: 41.3 percent (6th, 49th) 2016: 41.8 percent (4th, 53rd) 2017: 45.5 percent (3rd, 15th) 2018: 36.9 percent (11th, 90th) 2019: 40.5 percent (6th, 60th) 2020: 44.9 percent (6th, 32nd) After Akron: 66.7 percent (2nd, 2nd) After Alabama State: 58.8 percent (2nd, 8th) After Penn State: 58.8 percent (1st, 3rd) After Georgia State: 53.7 percent (5th, 11th) After LSU: 51.4 percent (3rd, 11th) After Georgia: 46.6 percent (5th, 24th) After Arkansas: 45.9 percent (5th, 28th) After bye week: 45.9 percent (6th, 26th) Why: Auburn converted 4-of-10 third downs against Arkansas before the bye. . RED ZONE OFFENSE 2013: 88.5 percent (2nd, 21st) 2014: 87.9 percent (4th, 31st) 2015: 90.2 percent (2nd, 13th) 2016: 85.5 percent (5th, 52nd) 2017: 88.1 percent (6th, 36th) 2018: 81.1 percent (11th, 88th) 2019: 90.4 percent (3rd, 21st) 2020: 85.0 percent (6th, 50th) After Akron: 100.0 percent (1st, 2nd) After Alabama State: 100.0 percent (1st, 1st) After Penn State: 90.9 percent (7th, 45th) After Georgia State: 92.9 (4th, 23rd) After LSU: 93.8 percent (3rd, 22nd) After Georgia: 89.5 percent (5th, 39th) After Arkansas: 90.9 percent (4th, 24th) After bye week: 90.9 percent (4th, 23rd) Why: Auburn was 3-for-3 on red-zone scoring opportunities, with two touchdowns and a field goal against Arkansas before the bye week. . RUSHING DEFENSE 2013: 162.1 (10th, 62nd) 2014: 168.8 (10th, 67th) 2015: 182.7 (11th, 81st) 2016: 132.8 (3rd, 27th) 2017: 137.0 (5th, 35th) 2018: 135.9 (6th, 32nd) 2019: 123.2 (4th, 25th) 2020: 163.4 (8th, 62nd) After Akron: -3.0 (1st, 2nd) After Alabama State: 21.5 (1st, 1st) After Penn State: 45.7 (1st, 3rd) After Georgia State: 98.5 (4th, 27th) After LSU: 85.4 (2nd, 8th) After Georgia: 104.7 (3rd, 23rd) After Arkansas: 122.9 (5th, 35th) After bye week: 122.9 (5th, 32nd) Why: Auburn gave up 232 rushing yards to Arkansas before the bye. . PASSING DEFENSE 2013: 258.6 (13th, 100th) 2014: 230.1 (12th, 68th) 2015: 222.5 (11th, 63rd) 2016: 229.2 (9th, 67th) 2017: 182.4 (5th, 18th) 2018: 219.5 (7th, 58th) 2019: 213.8 (8th, 47th) 2020: 242.6 (4th, 79th) After Akron: 191.0 (8th, 53rd) After Alabama State: 160.5 (4th, 28th) After Penn State: 207.7 (10th, 65th) After Georgia State: 185.0 (8th, 34th) After LSU: 213.0 (9th, 55th) After Georgia: 216.0 (9th, 52nd) After Arkansas: 217.7 (9th, 56th) After bye week: 217.7 (8th, 53rd) Why: Auburn gave up 228 passing yards and a pair of touchdowns against Arkansas before the bye. . PASS EFFICIENCY DEFENSE 2013: 126.88 (9th, 63rd) 2014: 124.19 (10th, 52nd) 2015: 116.99 (8th, 31st) 2016: 116.83 (4th, 22nd) 2017: 113.84 (4th, 19th) 2018: 118.12 (6th, 31st) 2019: 120.71 (9th, 32nd) 2020: 139.34 (7th, 75th) After Akron: 153.13 (13th, 98th) After Alabama State: 123.69 (10th, 68th) After Penn State: 144.08 (13th, 100th) After Georgia State: 136.87 (12th, 84th) After LSU: 131.61 (11th, 71st) After Georgia: 138.48 (10th, 79th) After Arkansas: 137.68 (9th, 83rd) After bye week: 137.68 (9th, 81st) Why: Arkansas’ K.J. Jefferson completed 21-of-35 passes for 228 yards and two touchdowns against Auburn before the bye week. . TOTAL DEFENSE 2013: 420.7 (12th, 86th) 2014: 398.8 (9th, 64th) 2015: 405.2 (13th, 71st) 2016: 361.9 (5th, 28th) 2017: 319.4 (5th, 14th) 2018: 355.4 (8th, 38th) 2019: 337.0 (7th, 28th) 2020: 406.0 (6th, 63rd) After Akron: 188.0 (4th, 10th) After Alabama State: 182.0 (2nd, 3rd) After Penn State: 253.3 (3rd, 13th) After Georgia State: 283.5 (4th, 19th) After LSU: 298.4 (5th, 22nd) After Georgia: 320.7 (6th, 32nd) After Arkansas: 340.6 (6th, 39th) After bye week: 340.6 (8th, 40th) Why: Auburn gave up 460 yards of total offense against Arkansas before the bye week. . SCORING DEFENSE 2013: 24.7 (9th, 48th) 2014: 26.7 (10th, 62nd) 2015: 26.0 (11th, 54th) 2016: 17.1 (4th, 7th) 2017: 18.5 (3rd, 12th) 2018: 19.2 (4th, 14th) 2019: 19.5 (6th, 17th) 2020: 24.7 (4th, 38th) After Akron: 10.0 (4th, 21st) After Alabama State: 5.0 (1st, 1st) After Penn State: 12.7 (3rd, 13th) After Georgia State: 15.5 (4th, 17th) After LSU: 16.2 (3rd, 16th) After Georgia: 19.2 (5th, 26th) After Arkansas: 19.7 (4th, 32nd) After bye week: 19.7 (4th, 29th) Why: Auburn allowed 23 points against Arkansas before the bye. . SACKS 2013: 32 sacks, 2.29 per game (4th, 46th) 2014: 21 sacks, 1.62 per game (11th, 95th) 2015: 19 sacks, 1.46 per game (13th, 104th) 2016: 25 sacks, 1.92 per game (8th, 75th) 2017: 37 sacks, 2.64 per game (5th, 25th) 2018: 38, 2.92 per game (3rd, 16th) 2019: 28 sacks, 2.15 per game (9th, 64th) 2020: 26 sacks, 2.36 per game (6th, 53rd) After Akron: 7 sacks, 7.00 per game (2nd, 3rd) After Alabama State: 9 sacks, 4.50 per game (4th, 9th) After Penn State: 9 sacks, 3.00 per game (5th, 22nd) After Georgia State: 12 sacks, 3.00 per game (5th, 32nd) After LSU: 15, 3.00 per game (4th, 24th) After Georgia: 16, 2.67 per game (6th, 36th) After Arkansas: 19, 2.71 per game (6th, 29th) After bye week: 19, 2.71 per game (7th, 31st) Why: Auburn had three sacks against Arkansas before the bye. . THIRD-DOWN DEFENSE 2013: 33.0 percent (1st, 13th) 2014: 36.0 percent (4th, 29th) 2015: 44.9 percent (13th, 109th) 2016: 34.8 percent (4th, 25th) 2017: 32.9 percent (3rd, 20th) 2018: 34.7 percent (6th, 30th) 2019: 29.9 percent (2nd, 8th) 2020: 50.3 percent (14th, 121st) After Akron: 21.4 percent (3rd, 14th) After Alabama State: 24.1 percent (3rd, 12th) After Penn State: 30.8 percent (5th, 28th) After Georgia State: 34.5 percent (8th, 51st) After LSU: 34.7 percent (8th, 45th) After Georgia: 35.3 percent (7th, 47th) After Arkansas: 38.5 percent (8th, 66th) After bye week: 38.5 percent (7th, 58th) Why: Arkansas converted 10-of-19 third-down tries against Auburn before the bye. . RED ZONE DEFENSE 2013: 73.1 percent (2nd, 10th) 2014: 74.1 percent (4th, 13th) 2015: 75.5 percent (5th, 15th) 2016: 74.4 percent (3rd, 11th) 2017: 83.3 percent (6th, 64th) 2018: 82.9 percent (9th, 64th) 2019: 71.8 percent (2nd, 8th) 2020: 76.3 percent (3rd, 27th) After Akron: 100.0 percent (7th, 62nd) After Alabama State: 66.7 percent (3rd, 26th) After Penn State: 85.7 percent (8th, 79th) After Georgia State: 90.0 percent (9th, 97th) After LSU: 92.9 percent (12th, 112th) After Georgia: 94.7 percent (14th, 123rd) After Arkansas: 90.9 percent (10th, 106th) After bye week: 90.9 percent (10th, 109th) Why: Arkansas scored on two of its three red-zone trips, with two touchdowns, against Auburn before the bye. . NET PUNTING 2013: 40.54 (2nd, 9th) 2014: 37.44 (12th, 67th) 2015: 37.58 (7th, 54th) 2016: 39.90 (5th, 21st) 2017: 35.61 (14th, 115th) 2018: 41.91 (2nd, 5th) 2019: 38.50 (9th, 63rd) 2020: 38.70 (9th, 64th) After Akron: 31.0 (11th, 114th) After Alabama State: 36.33 (11th, 99th) After Penn State: 41.00 (6th, 47th) After Georgia State: 43.25 (3rd, 15th) After LSU: 42.53 (4th, 20th) After Georgia: 43.48 (3rd, 15th) After Arkansas: 43.20 (2nd, 13th) After bye week: 43.20 (2nd, 12th) Why: Auburn averaged 41.8 net yards per punt against Arkansas before the bye. . KICK RETURNS 2013: 23.40 (5th, 27th) 2014: 20.03 (11th, 82nd) 2015: 27.94 (2nd, 4th) 2016: 19.04 (12th, 100th) 2017: 23.22 (3rd, 25th) 2018: 21.52 (6th, 48th) 2019: 20.50 (7th, 67th) 2020: 21.96 (6th, 43rd) After Akron: 20.33 (6th, 42nd) After Alabama State: 20.33 (8th, 61st) After Penn State: 20.33 (7th, 63rd) After Georgia State: 28.25 (3rd, 16th) After LSU: 27.22 (4th, 20th) After Georgia: 25.00 (5th, 27th) After Arkansas: 25.00 (5th, 29th) After bye week: 25.00 (5th, 28th) Why: Auburn did not return a kickoff against Arkansas before the bye. . KICK RETURN DEFENSE 2013: 25.79 (14th, 121st) 2014: 21.73 (9th, 84th) 2015: 21.17 (12th, 61st) 2016: 18.00 (1st, 13th) 2017: 27.20 (14th, 129th) 2018: 19.44 (3rd, 39th) 2019: 22.30 (11th, 96th) 2020: 26.67 (13th, 121st) After Akron: 15.33 (4th, 48th) After Alabama State: 14.25 (3rd, 22nd) After Penn State: 14.83 (3rd, 24th) After Georgia State: 14.83 (2nd, 14th) After LSU: 15.14 (2nd, 13th) After Georgia: 17.25 (2nd, 21st) After Arkansas: 18.78 (7th, 44th) After bye week: 18.78 (6th, 37th) Why: Auburn allowed one 31-yard kickoff return against Arkansas before the bye. . PUNT RETURNS 2013: 11.78 (2nd, 22nd) 2014: 17.82 yards per return (1st, 4th) 2015: 11.93 yards per return (7th, 28th) 2016: 10.69 (5th, 24th) 2017: 8.52 (8th, 51st) 2018: 10.75 (6th, 39th) 2019: 12.83 (4th, 18th) 2020: 9.11 (6th, 44th) After Akron: 15.0 (2nd, 16th) After Alabama State: 15.50 (2nd, 25th) After Penn State: 14.33 (1st, 24th) After Georgia State: 14.00 (1st, 29th) After LSU: 14.00 (1st, 21st) After Georgia: 12.44 (2nd, 27th) After Arkansas: 12.00 (1st, 26th) After bye week: 12.00 (2nd, 28th) Why: Auburn had one punt return for 8 yards against Arkansas before the bye. . PUNT RETURN DEFENSE 2013: 7.0 (8th, 51st) 2014: 7.79 (10th, 72nd) 2015: 12.43 (11th, 110th) 2016: 3.17 (1st, 8th) 2017: 11.43 (14th, 108th) 2018: 3.36 (3rd, 9th) 2019: 17.29 (14th, 130th) 2020: 2.75 (3rd, 17th) After Akron: 1.0 (10th, 66th) After Alabama State: 1.0 (4th, 40th) After Penn State: 8.5 (8th, 89th) After Georgia State: 8.5 (9th, 83rd) After LSU: 8.5 (9th, 85th) After Georgia: 6.0 (7th, 53rd) After Arkansas: 5.5 (6th, 48th) After bye week: 5.5 (5th, 44th) Why: Auburn allowed one punt return for 4 yards against Arkansas before the bye. . TURNOVER MARGIN 2013: even, 0.0 per game (9th, 61st) 2014: plus-seven, 0.54 per game (4th, 27th) 2015: plus-two, 0.15 per game (8th, 51st) 2016: plus-three, plus-0.23 per game (6th, 42nd) 2017: minus-one, 0.07 per game (7th, 71st) 2018: plus-nine, 0.69 (3rd, 16th) 2019: plus-six, 0.46 per game (3rd, 27th) 2020: plus-four, 0.36 per game (6th, 38th) After Akron: zero, 0.0 per game (7th, 60th) After Alabama State: plus-one, 0.50 per game (6th, 43rd) After Penn State: plus-one, 0.33 per game (6th, 52nd) After Georgia State: plus-one, 0.25 per game (8th, 58th) After LSU: plus-two, 0.40 per game (6th, 47th) After Georgia: plus-one, 0.17 per game (10th, 64th) After Arkansas: plus-one, 0.14 per game (9th, 66th) After bye week: plus-one, 0.14 per game (8th, 55th) Why: Auburn threw an interception but also forced a fumble for a touchdown against Arkansas before the bye. . PENALTY YARDS PER GAME 2013: 40.64 (7th 30th) 2014: 68.92 (14th, 112th) 2015: 46.38 (7th, 34th) 2016: 36.54 (1st, 6th) 2017: 38.36 (2nd, 13th) 2018: 56.69 (9th, 75th) 2019: 55.23 (10th, 74th) 2020: 49.82 (7th, 56th) After Akron: 25.0 (3rd, 15th) After Alabama State: 46.00 (3rd, 41st) After Penn State: 45.67 (2nd, 31st) After Georgia State: 50.50 (4th, 47th) After LSU: 49.40 (3rd, 51st) After Georgia: 46.83 (4th, 38th) After Arkansas: 47.14 (4th, 41st) After bye week: 47.14 (5th, 39th) Why: Auburn committed six penalties for 49 yards against Arkansas before the bye. Tom Green is an Auburn beat reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @Tomas_Verde.

Bryan Harsin declines to address vaccination status in light of university mandate By Tom Green | tgreen@al.com 5-7 minutes Bryan Harsin declined again to discuss his vaccination status, even as a deadline looms following an Auburn University mandate for all employees. Auburn announced on Friday that all university employees will be required to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Dec. 8 or else be subject to termination. Harsin, who previously declined to disclose his vaccination status at SEC Media Days in July, when he said it was a deeply personal decision for everyone, was asked again Monday during his weekly press conference whether he has received the vaccine and, if not, whether he plans to comply with the school’s mandate prior to the deadline. Auburn considers someone to be fully vaccinated two weeks after they have received the second dose of a two-dose series or two weeks after receiving a one-dose shot. “I’m aware of the new policy,” Harsin said. “I appreciate you have to ask the question and understand it, but it doesn’t change -- I mean, the executive order, all those things, it doesn’t change the fact I’m not going to discuss any individual’s decision or status on the vaccine or anyone else’s, including my own, like I said before.” Auburn’s vaccination mandate for employees was made in compliance with federal requirements announced Sept. 9 by President Joe Biden, who issued an executive order requiring all federal contractors provide adequate COVID-19 safeguards for their workforce, including vaccination of covered contractor employees. Auburn, a public research institution, is considered a federal contractor and maintains $200 million worth of federal contracts that are impacted by the order. The university’s mandate, in accordance with that executive order, applies to all full-time and part-time employees, undergraduate and graduate student employees, as well as Temporary Employment Services employees at Auburn’s main campus, Auburn University at Montgomery, the Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station and the Alabama Cooperative Extension System. The Dec. 8 deadline for providing proof of vaccination means employees will have to received the second dose of the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines by Nov. 24 or the single-dose Johnson & Johnson vaccine by Nov. 24. The university will also provide religious or medical exemptions from the mandate in “limited circumstances.” Harsin has been consistent in his approach to questions about the vaccines -- all three of which have been approved by the CDC -- as it relates to his own status as well as that of his teams. At SEC Media Days, Harsin said Auburn’s roster had a vaccination rate of about 60 percent, which was well below the SEC’s recommended threshold. He has not provided an updated number since, though on multiple occasions over the last three months he has indicated the percentage of the Tigers’ roster that has received the vaccine has improved. Harsin, who tested positive for COVID-19 on Aug. 19, was forced to miss 10 days of fall camp leading up to Auburn’s season opener. His most extensive comments about the vaccine came on Aug. 26, when he proclaimed he is “not anti-vaccine” and detailed the mitigation tactics Auburn has used within its program to help navigate the ongoing pandemic. While Auburn’s 2021 season to date has not been drastically impacted by coronavirus-related setbacks and quarantines, the question of Harsin’s vaccination status now looms large over the final five games of the coach’s first season on the Plains, which includes three remaining games against teams currently ranked in the AP top 25 -- Saturday’s home game against No. 10 Ole Miss, next week’s road trip to No. 14 Texas A&M and the Iron Bowl on Nov. 27 against No. 3 Alabama. Harsin, if not already fully vaccinated, will have to provide proof of vaccination or receive an exemption by Dec. 8 or risk termination less than a year after agreeing to a six-year deal worth $31.5 million. One Power 5 head coach has already been fired for failing to comply with a vaccine mandate this season as Washington State fired Nick Rolovich and four assistant coaches last week after they refused to get vaccinated following an order by Washington Governor Jay Inslee requiring all state employees and healthcare workers to be fully vaccinated by Oct. 18. “From the beginning, I think I’ve made it clear that that wasn’t something that I was going to talk about or discuss,” Harsin said. “I wasn’t going to go down that road and don’t feel like right now that’s any different. We’re focused on Ole Miss. We’re focused on the things we have to do to get prepared for this week. There’s a lot of other things right now that we have to make sure we’re ready for on this football team. That’s what I’ve got to stay focused on with our players and our staff and the people in this program. So we’ve had those conversations, but that doesn’t change what I said before.” Tom Green is an Auburn beat reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @Tomas_Verde.

Auburn’s Jeremiah Wright won’t return this season from spring ACL tear By Tom Green | tgreen@al.com 3-4 minutes Jeremiah Wright (76) goes through drills during Auburn spring practice on Thursday, March 18, 2021 in Auburn, Ala. Todd Van Emst/AU Athletics Auburn defensive tackle Jeremiah Wright is progressing in his recovery from a spring ACL tear but will not be cleared to return to the field this season. Auburn coach Bryan Harsin announced Monday that the 6-foot-5, 338-pounder will miss the remainder of the season, though he has made promising steps in his rehab process. Wright, who underwent surgery on his left knee in the spring, has been cleared to run and has been a limited participant in recent practices, with Harsin noting that he was in shoulder pads during the bye week. “I wish he could (return),” Harsin said. “... He’s out there doing things. Will he be ready to play this year? No, he’s not going to be ready to play this year.” Auburn is being cautious in its approach to Wright’s recovery, choosing to not rush a return to action for the Selma native who was an early standout in spring practices. A former offensive line signee, Wright moved to the defensive side of the ball prior to the start of his freshman season in 2020 to provide the Tigers with additional depth along the defensive line. He appeared in six games and had four total tackles as a freshman, but he made a leap in his development during the second half of the year and carried that into the offseason and through the start of spring practices under a new coaching staff and defensive scheme. Wright was seen getting first-team reps at defensive tackle in Auburn’s 3-4 and 4-3 fronts early in spring practice, and he appeared to be a breakout candidate on that side of the ball. However, he tore his ACL during a scrimmage on March 25 and underwent surgery to repair it shortly thereafter. “You don’t want to reinjure an ACL; you want to make sure that guys are completely healthy, fully at that full strength, full capacity where they can make all the moves and things they have to do to play at their level,” Harsin said. “But it’s good to see him out there. He’s running with the guys, he’s got pads on. He’s got help. He’s got a helmet on at times, so it’s just good to have him out there.” Though Wright will not see the field this season, Harsin expressed plenty of excitement about his progress and optimism for his future along the defensive line for Auburn. “He’s got a vibe about him that you want on this team,” Harsin said “He’s got, I think, leadership qualities that you want on this team. He is very aware of what’s going on with this football team, so the more he’s around, the better that we are. I wish he could play. We could use him. That guy would be a difference maker for us without a question. Tom Green is an Auburn beat reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @Tomas_Verde.

Jason Caldwell's Monday Morning quarterback column ByJason Caldwell 4-5 minutes Huge Opportunity Ahead With a third Top 10 opponent on the schedule this week against Ole Miss and No. 3 Alabama still remaining along with No. 15 Texas A&M, Coach Bryan Harsin and the Auburn Tigers have plenty of opportunities to make a serious run in his first year on the job. Already with a win over a ranked Arkansas team, Auburn could make big noise with a few more Top 25 wins in games that will get plenty of attention around the country. That’s exactly what Harsin and the program needs at the moment with several big-time prospects continuing to watch what the team and staff are doing on the field. Building relationships is a big deal and something that is vitally important. Auburn is doing that. Now it’s about showing them what you’re telling them is a reality. There’s no better selling point than going out on Saturday and winning games. I did a few calculations about potential additions for the class the rest of the way in 2022. With just four players added, guys the Tigers have got a serious chance to land, Auburn would move all the way to the No. 12 class in the country. That’s how close this class is to being much, much better than people realize. Auburn has already added help on the offensive line, but more is needed. The same is true on the defensive line, linebacker and at wide receiver. Adding one significant player each in of those four spots and just like that the Tigers are rolling on the recruiting trail. If you do that it opens up the door for more prospects as well. That’s just how it works. Now is the time for Auburn to strike and continue the momentum. That starts with Saturday’s game against Ole Miss at home. Around The World Of College Football Nothing has changed my mind that Georgia is the best team in the country, but this Alabama offense is starting to roll and one of the reasons why is on third down. The Tide has converted 27-36 third downs the last two games. That’s next level football and makes it very, very difficult to stop a team like that unless it turns the ball over. I still think the defense has some issues which could cause problems, but they are playing well after the hiccup at Texas A&M. The team that everyone forgot about has quietly put itself in a position to be back in the playoff hunt at the end of the year. Currently 6-1, Oregon’s only real test the rest of the way is a game at Utah. Already with a win over Ohio State in Columbus, the Ducks could have one of the statement wins at the end of the year if the Buckeyes keep winning. Don’t look now but the Ducks are in a great position. The same is true of the Buckeyes. With Penn State floundering at the moment it certainly looks like the Big 10 is Ohio State’s to lose. Michigan looks like it will have a team to challenge, but I am not sure the Wolverines can score enough points to beat the Buckeyes. As for Oklahoma, the Sooners may be undefeated at the end of the season, but they have been anything but impressive to this point. If people are going to question Cincinnati for barely beating Navy, then let’s do the same for the Sooners against Tulane and Kansas. 17COMMENTS As for life in the SEC, I have been impressed by what Tennessee has done offensively, but that defense is struggling and more struggles are coming as the Vols continue to play up-tempo. Already with four losses and games at Kentucky and against Georgia at home, even with the new energy around the program it looks like a 6-6 regular season for the Vols unless they pull off an upset.

Column: Why is Trump running for president again? To stay out of jail Doyle McManus Sun, October 24, 2021, 6:00 AM Former President Trump's company is under criminal investigation by a district attorney in a New York City suburb into whether it misled officials to cut taxes for a golf course there, according to the New York Times. (Seth Wenig / Associated Press) Throughout his epic, scandal-ridden career, Donald Trump has compiled an astonishing record of impunity, constantly staying one jump ahead of prosecutors, plaintiffs and creditors. He is the only president to be impeached twice, and acquitted twice by the votes of Republican senators. He spent almost three years under investigation for what looked like collusion with Russia, only to walk away scot-free. His former lawyer, Michael Cohen, went to prison for paying hush money to an adult entertainer known as Stormy Daniels, but “Individual-1,” the man who ordered him to write the check, was never held accountable. That record of escapes would make Houdini envious. But Trump remains under the gun. He's still in search of escape routes. A House committee is examining his attempts to overturn last year’s presidential election, including his actions when a mob of his supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6. A prosecutor in Georgia is investigating whether he violated state law against soliciting election fraud when he demanded that officials “find 11,780 votes” — the number he needed to undo Joe Biden’s victory in that state. And prosecutors in New York are looking into allegations that Trump, or at least the closely held family business he runs, committed tax and bank fraud. But don’t count him out. “His life has been a series of lessons showing that with aggressive lawyering and a lot of chutzpah, you can achieve almost total immunity,” Norman Eisen, a counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during Trump’s first impeachment, told me. The former president’s most visible battles are against the Democratic-led House of Representatives, which asked the Justice Department last week to prosecute his former aide Stephen K. Bannon after Bannon refused to comply with a subpoena. Trump has ordered Bannon and other former associates to stonewall on the grounds that all of his conversations with them are protected by executive privilege. That’s the legal doctrine that allows a president to protect internal White House deliberations from congressional snooping, a claim Trump asserted broadly when he was president. In this case, the claim sounds far-fetched: How can a former president assert executive privilege, especially over conversations with someone like Bannon, who wasn’t a government official at the time? But constitutional lawyers say Trump has several arguments he can make. He’ll probably try them all. First, a former president does have the right to assert executive privilege. Trump can thank former President Nixon for that, fittingly enough. In 1977, Nixon tried to block the federal government from releasing his presidential papers; he lost, but in deciding the case, the Supreme Court declared that former presidents can assert the privilege under some circumstances. As for Bannon, the Justice Department has long argued that executive privilege can protect a president’s meetings with nonemployees as long as the discussion covers official business. In January, Bannon reportedly urged Trump to block Congress from certifying Biden’s election, then told listeners of his Jan. 5 podcast: “All hell is going to break loose tomorrow.” “If the cases are argued on the merits, Trump and Bannon are unlikely to prevail,” Jonathan Shaub, a former Justice Department lawyer who now teaches at the University of Kentucky's law school, told me. “Executive privilege doesn’t apply to acts taken in a personal or political capacity, and it doesn’t apply when there are concrete allegations of wrongdoing.” But winning may not be the point. “In the end, this is all about delay,” Shaub said. Trump and his supporters know that if they can tie the House committee in knots until the 2022 congressional election, there’s a good chance Republicans will win control of the chamber and kill the investigation. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and committee Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) know that too. That’s a major reason they asked the Justice Department to prosecute Bannon for criminal contempt; it’s faster than a civil suit. The next step is up to Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland, who has exasperated some Democrats by keeping his distance from the Trump investigations. President Biden said last week that he thinks Garland should prosecute Bannon and others who reject congressional subpoenas. That was an improper, Trump-style act of presidential jawboning; Garland pushed back, saying he wanted to return the Justice Department to its apolitical norm. But Biden was right on the merits; without the threat of prosecution, Bannon and others will continue to stonewall. Meanwhile, Trump has made his defense almost entirely political, not only denouncing the House investigation but praising the mob that invaded the capital. “The insurrection took place on Nov. 3, election day,” he said in a written statement last week. “Jan. 6 was the protest!” He’s used the investigation to raise money for his political action committee, which has collected millions. “The Left will never stop coming after me,” he wrote in an email to donors last week. “Please contribute ANY AMOUNT IMMEDIATELY to make a statement to the Left that you’ll ALWAYS stand with YOUR President.” And there, no matter how the legal wrangles turn out, lies the answer to a persistent question about Trump: What makes him run? Ego, surely, in part. A desire to take revenge on his adversaries too. But two practical reasons, as well. One is money. Political contributions may be the most reliable revenue stream the Trump family enterprise has at the moment. The other, equally important, is to bolster his legal defense. As long as he’s running (or even sort of running), Trump can denounce every inquest and subpoena as just another part of a political vendetta. It’s a way to hold his troops together — and to make every prosecutor think twice. He's notching up another presidential first: He’s running for reelection to stay out of jail. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Paul Gosar assured Jan. 6 protest organizers they would get a 'blanket pardon' while they were planning rallies: report Matthew Loh 4 minutes Representative Paul Gosar (R-AZ) speaks at a news conference on January 7, 2016. Photo by Paul Morigi/WireImage Rep. Paul Gosar offered protest organizers a "blanket pardon" to motivate them to plan rallies on Jan. 6, reported Rolling Stone. Gosar told the organizers he had spoken with former President Donald Trump about the pardons, which were never realized. The GOP congressman has defended US Capitol rioters before, saying they were "peaceful protestors." GOP congressman Paul Gosar encouraged pro-Trump rally organizers to plan protests in Washington DC on January 6 by telling them they would get a "blanket pardon" for another, unrelated investigation, according to two of the protest's planners. Gosar had repeatedly assured them of the pardons, to the point where they believed it was a "done deal," they told Rolling Stone in an exclusive released Sunday. Both organizers have been speaking with the congressional committee investigating the US Capitol riots, per Rolling Stone, and were kept anonymous. It is unclear what the original unrelated investigation mentioned by the pair was. In the interview, one organizer said they were given the impression that Gosar spoke to former President Donald Trump about the pardons and that they had been mentioned by name. "They were working on submitting the paperwork and getting members of the House Freedom Caucus to sign on as a show of support," the organizer told Rolling Stone. The two anonymous sources said Gosar told them: "I was just going over the list of pardons and we just wanted to tell you guys how much we appreciate all the hard work you've been doing," according to the outlet. To their dismay, the offer was never fulfilled, but they added that the pardons alone were not the sole impetus for their plans on January 6. "I would have done it either way with or without the pardon," the organizer told Rolling Stone. "I do truly believe in this country, but to use something like that and put that out on the table when someone is so desperate, it's really not good business," the organizer continued. They told Rolling Stone that they were unsettled by how the pro-Trump rallies on January 6 eventually turned into the violent attack on the US Capitol, prompting them to cooperate with investigations. Meanwhile, Gosar, the representative for Arizona, has said that he "never instigated violence," and that the idea that he involved in the Capitol riots was "devoid of reality." But he has also been outspoken in his defense of US Capitol rioters, calling them "peaceful protestors" who were being harassed by the Justice Department. One of Trump's most ardent supporters, Gosar also said that Ashli Babbitt, a protestor who was shot by Capitol Police on January 6 and later died from her wounds, was "executed." Gosar's office did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment. Read the original article on Business Insider Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting

EXCLUSIVE: Jan. 6 Protest Organizers Say They Participated in ‘Dozens’ of Planning Meetings With Members of Congress and White House Staff Hunter Walker 17-21 minutes j6-trump-stop-the-steal - Credit: Nate Gowdy for Rolling Stone As the House investigation into the Jan. 6 attack heats up, some of the planners of the pro-Trump rallies that took place in Washington, D.C., have begun communicating with congressional investigators and sharing new information about what happened when the former president’s supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol. Two of these people have spoken to Rolling Stone extensively in recent weeks and detailed explosive allegations that multiple members of Congress were intimately involved in planning both Trump’s efforts to overturn his election loss and the Jan. 6 events that turned violent. Rolling Stone separately confirmed a third person involved in the main Jan. 6 rally in D.C. has communicated with the committee. This is the first report that the committee is hearing major new allegations from potential cooperating witnesses. While there have been prior indications that members of Congress were involved, this is also the first account detailing their purported role and its scope. The two sources also claim they interacted with members of Trump’s team, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who they describe as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence.

how much would you charge to come over and scare the kids this halloween? i kist believe you would do a jam up job. grins

well here is one says we are a dog. lol who knows? Auburn football opens as very slight underdog to Ole Miss Lance Dawe 4-5 minutes eric Auburn football opens as very slight underdog to Ole Miss Auburn opens as an incredibly narrow underdog against the No. 10 team in the nation. The Ole Miss Rebels (6-1, 3-1 SEC) will travel up to Auburn to take on the No. 18 Tigers (5-2, 2-1 SEC) in a battle that has some very serious SEC West implications. Auburn controls its own destiny to Atlanta. If they win out (ESPN’s FPI gives Auburn a 0.3% chance to do so), they’re in the SEC championship game. Ole Miss needs a little extra help. If the Rebels defeat Auburn, they will need Alabama to lose one more game on their remaining schedule. Alabama’s best chance to lose (according to ESPN’s FPI) will come in their regular-season finale against Auburn (Auburn has a 17.3% chance to win as of October 24th). As would be expected, because the game is in Jordan-Hare Stadium, the line for this game is incredibly small in favor of Ole Miss. Odds provided by Tipico Sportsbook Line: Ole Miss (-0.5) O/U: 66.5 Auburn is coming off of a huge momentum-building win over Arkansas on the road. The Tigers took their bye week this weekend as well, giving themselves time to both rest and prepare for Ole Miss on October 30th.

it could be that but i forget what i am saying and just have to shut up. i take super vitamins and did an old school test like they would give you in the military and passed. but my friends have to remind me what i was saying because i forget and draw blanks. maybe it is just old age. i am not aging gracefully. i am proud to be here but it scares me a little.

Auburn slightly favored at home against Ole Miss By Tom Green | tgreen@al.com 2 minutes Oct 16, 2021; Fayetteville, AR, USA; Zakoby McClain (9) between Auburn and Arkansas at Donald W. Reynolds Razorback Stadium. Mandatory Credit: Todd Van Emst/AU AthleticsTodd Van Emst/AU Athletics Auburn will be favored in a top-25 matchup for the first time this season when it returns to the field next weekend. Fresh off its bye week, No. 18 Auburn opened as a one-point favorite against No. 10 Ole Miss, according to VegasInsider.com. The two SEC West foes will meet on Saturday at Jordan-Hare Stadium, with kickoff set for 6 p.m. and the game airing on ESPN. Read more Auburn football: Two questions for Bryan Harsin for the final five games of the season Grading Auburn’s season to date in Year 1 under Harsin Five Auburn players who have impressed the most this season The Tigers (5-2, 2-1 SEC) head into the game coming off an open date in Week 8 that followed their road blowout of Arkansas. The Rebels (6-1, 3-1) defeated LSU, 31-17, over the weekend. Saturday’s matchup will be the 46th all-time meeting between Auburn and Ole Miss. The Tigers lead the all-time series, 34-11, and have won each of the last five games against the Rebels. Auburn’s last loss in the series came in 2015 at Jordan-Hare Stadium, but the program holds a 16-3 record against Ole Miss when the series is on the Plains. Tom Green is an Auburn beat reporter for Alabama Media Group. Follow him on Twitter @Tomas_Verde.

First look: Ole Miss at Auburn odds and lines Joe Williams 3-4 minutes The No. 9 Ole Miss Rebels (6-1, 3-1 SEC) meet the No. 21 Auburn Tigers (5-2, 2-1) at Jordan-Hare Stadium in Auburn, Ala. Kickoff is scheduled for 7 p.m. ET. Below, we look at the Ole Miss vs. Auburn odds and lines; check back for our college football picks and predictions. The Rebels won for the third consecutive time since their setback at Alabama Oct. 2. Ole Miss’ most recent win was 31-17 against LSU Saturday as the Rebels covered back-to-back games for the first time this season. The Under also has hit in two straight for the first time. The Tigers topped Arkansas 38-23 in Fayetteville as four-point underdogs Oct. 16 and they had a bye last week. They’re 2-1 SU/ATS 9 (straight up/against the spread) in the previous three as underdogs. Auburn ranks 23rd in the nation with 35.4 points per game (PPG) on offense, while ranking 30th with 19.7 PPG allowed on defense. Rankings according to the AFCA Coaches Poll powered by USA TODAY Sports. Odds provided by Tipico Sportsbook; access USA TODAY Sports’ betting odds for a full list. Lines last updated Monday at 7:46 a.m. ET. Money line: Ole Miss -103 (bet $103 to win $100) | Auburn -117 (bet $117 to win $100) Against the spread (ATS): Ole Miss +1.5, -112 (bet $112 to win $100) | Auburn -1.5, -108 (bet $108 to win $100) Over/Under (O/U): 65.5, O: -115 (bet $115 to win $100) | U: -105 (bet $115 to win $100) PLAY: Try our new, free daily Pick’em Challenge and win. Play now! 2021 betting stats: ML: Ole Miss 6-1 | Auburn 5-2 ATS: Ole Miss 4-2-1 | Auburn 4-3 O/U: Ole Miss 3-4 | Auburn 4-3 Ole Miss at Auburn head-to-head The Tigers have dominated the all-time series, leading 34-11, including each of the past five. The last time Ole Miss won in this series was Halloween of 2015, posting a 27-19 win. Auburn won last season’s battle 35-28 in Oxford, and also took the most recent meeting at Jordan-Hare by a 20-14 count on Nov. 2, 2019. If you’re looking for more sports betting picks and tips, access all of our content at SportsbookWire.com and BetFTW. Please gamble responsibly. Follow @WinWithJoe on Twitter. Follow SportsbookWire on Twitter and like us on Facebook. if no one is interested in these kind of articles let me know so i am not wasting my time or yours.

How will Auburn handle a 'Not 100 percent' Matt Corral? Lance Dawe 2-3 minutes According to his head coach, Matt Corral was not 100% healthy heading into his matchup with LSU this past Saturday. There were rumors spread about who would start at QB over Corral assuming he wouldn’t play. Whether it be John Rhys Plumlee, who ran for over a thousand yards as a quarterback in 2019, Kinkead Dent, the second-string QB, or Luke Altmeyer, the redshirt freshman who Kiffin said would most likely get the start if Corral wasn’t healthy. Corral then proceeded to play the entire game, accounting for two touchdowns. Kiffin said post-game that Corral still isn’t 100% healthy, and neither are some of his teammates (Deep-threat receiver Braylon Sanders is out will an injury as well). Corral had his worst mark passing this season, completing 78% of his passes but only throwing for 185 yards. He only managed to pick up 24 yards on the ground and was sacked three times. Keep in mind this was against a porous LSU defense that doesn’t thrive in stopping much of anything. It’s clear that Corral is hurt. This does not bode well for Ole Miss, who will be playing a much better Auburn defense this weekend. Corral is expected to play, and there are a couple of ways Auburn could handle him. They could do what LSU tried to do, which is drop eight into coverage, pray that Ole Miss doesn’t run the ball, slow the game down, and put pressure on Corral on third down because he couldn’t escape (Corral averaged two yards a carry). Or, Auburn could elect to stop the Ole Miss ground game (Ole Miss ran the ball 50 times against LSU) and force Corral to throw on third and long and just hope that the secondary doesn’t get lost like it has at certain times this season. Note that this didn’t work for three quarters against Arkansas. The Tigers have their options defensively, but point being it may be easier to slow down this Ole Miss offense if Corral isn’t operating at 100%. We’ve seen him be turnover prone in the past, so Auburn should throw everything including the kitchen sink at him to see if he cracks. Contact/Follow us @theauburnwire on Twitter, and like our page on Facebook to follow ongoing coverage of Auburn news, notes, and opinion.

for the record i am having serious issues with my memory.i do not say this as an excuse. and it is getting worse. i have to google the easiest words to spell now because i cannot remember. i have a button at the top i use when i am at the source page for what i am looking at. and i just remembered......no joke......sometimes the plain text is not available and this is fact. why? i have no idea. and sometimes i post plain text and pics still show up. i try to do the best i can.

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A decade ago, North Carolina Republicans redrew their legislative districts to help their party in a way that a federal court ruled illegally deprived Black voters of their right to political representation. A state court later struck down Republican-drawn maps as based on pure partisanship. So, as the GOP-controlled legislature embarks this year on its latest round of redistricting, it has pledged not to use race or partisan data to draw the political lines. Still, the maps Republicans are proposing would tilt heavily toward their party. Several publicly released congressional maps dilute Democratic votes by splitting the state's biggest city, Charlotte — also its largest African American population center — into three or four U.S. House districts and giving the GOP at least a 10-4 advantage in a state that Donald Trump narrowly won last year. As the once-a-decade redistricting process kicks into high gear, North Carolina is one of at least three states where Republicans say they are drawing maps without looking at racial and party data. But those maps still happen to strongly favor the GOP. Democrats and civil rights groups are incredulous, noting that veteran lawmakers don't need a spreadsheet to know where voters of various races and different parties live in their state. Plus, under certain scenarios, the Voting Rights Act requires the drawing of districts where the majority of voters are racial or ethnic minorities. “This is the first redistricting round I've ever heard of this," said Thomas Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which is suing Texas Republicans over maps that the GOP said it drew without looking at racial data. “I suspect they're trying to set up a defense for litigation. Because they know the race data — they know where the Black community lives. They know where the Latino community lives.” Jason Torchinsky, general counsel to the National Republican Redistricting Trust, said ignoring racial data is proper in certain circumstances, as in the cases of North Carolina and Texas. “It depends on where you are,” Torchinsky said. The drawing of legislative lines is often a raw partisan fight because whichever party controls the process can craft districts to maximize its voters' clout — and scatter opposing voters so widely they cannot win majorities. In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Cour t ruled that federal courts cannot overturn unfair maps on the basis of partisanship. But state courts still can void maps for being too partisan and race remains a legal tripwire in redistricting. If mapmakers explicitly try to weaken voters' power based on race, they may violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law. But the Voting Rights Act requires them to consider race if the state has “racially polarized” voting, in which white people consistently vote against candidates backed by a minority racial or ethnic group. The mapmakers must then create a district in which that minority comprises a plurality or majority of voters so they can elect their preferred candidates. Republicans complain they cannot win. “It’s truly a conundrum and has been for the last decade for the GOP, because when we look at race, we were told we shouldn’t have, and those maps were struck down,” said North Carolina state Sen. Paul Newton, who co-chairs that state's redistricting committee. "Now that we’re not looking at race, the Democrat Party is telling us, ‘Oh, you should be looking at race.’” North Carolina's redistricting legal fight is part of why the new race-blind approach caught on. The Republican-controlled legislature has complete control of redistricting; its maps cannot be vetoed by its Democratic governor. A federal court in 2016 found North Carolina Republicans improperly crammed Black voters into two congressional districts to dilute African American votes elsewhere. It ordered the map redrawn. That updated map was the basis of the 2019 Supreme Court case. But, barely two months later, a North Carolina state court found the GOP advantage in some of the redrawn state legislative maps still violated the state constitution. Based on this and other rulings, Republicans redrew the maps once again in late 2019, this time saying they weren't looking at racial or partisan data, and they passed legal muster. Then, in August, the legislature formally adopted a rule that it wouldn't consider race or partisanship in its latest line-drawing that would begin after the U.S. Census Bureau released data on population changes over the past decade. Lawmakers noted that, during the epic litigation of the prior decade, a federal court had found the state didn't have racially polarized voting and didn't require special attention to racial data. Democrats and civil rights groups strenuously objected. The Southern Coalition for Social Justice wrote Republicans a letter warning they would be disenfranchising Black and Latino voters. “They’re not listening,” said Allison Riggs, head of the group's voting rights program. Other GOP-controlled states have followed North Carolina's example. For the past five decades, Texas has been found to have violated federal law or the U.S. Constitution in redistricting, including by shortchanging Black and Latino voters. This time, Republicans who control the state Legislature said they wouldn't consider racial data and their lawyers said that was OK. “I’ve stated it, and I’ll state it again — we drew these maps race blind,” Texas state Sen. Joan Huffman, a Republican who drew that state's maps, said in one Senate hearing. Although almost all of Texas' population growth has come from Latinos, African Americans and Asian Americans, the maps do not create any new majority Black or Latino districts. That latter omission is at the heart of suits by Latino civil rights groups last week as Texas approved its maps. “The only time that communities of color can get justice is going to the courthouse,” said Democratic state Rep. Rafael Anchia, chair of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus. Ohio Republicans are also enmeshed in litigation over their state legislative plan, which they said was drawn with no racial or partisan data. “It’s illegal to use race in drawing districts. That’s a violation of federal law,” Republican state Senate President Matt Huffman told reporters last month. Ohio Republicans said that even though they didn't use partisan data, they were targeted in a suit by several community and anti-gerrymandering groups for drawing a partisan map anyway. “The way the map performs is to really skew partisan outcomes in Ohio,” said Freda Levenson, legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, one of the plaintiffs. “It's very likely they did use partisan data.” ___ Riccardi reported from Denver. Associated Press writers Acacia Coronado in Austin, Texas, and Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.

did you see the free basketball scrimmage article i posted coming up? you and proud might want to go. right after a volleyball meet which is free as well. it is on the basketball page.

i have been so busy on the phone and stuff i have not had time to watch it yet but i will.

how big a boy are you and how close to a sonic are you? jacks will work since i love their lemonade cus i believe it might a long day kicking off in that feathered azz and i will probably get thirsty. lol

i told you guys long ago i am a big dummy...........lol

well harsin is 7 and 1 after a bye week.

Most Recent WEEK 9 WEEK 9 WEEK 8 WEEK 7 WEEK 6 WEEK 5 WEEK 4 WEEK 3 WEEK 2 WEEK 1 ALL VOTERS All voters Aaron McMann Adam Grosbard Adam Zucker Andy Greder Ben Portnoy Bennett Conlin Blair Kerkhoff Brett McMurphy Brian Howell Bryce Miller Cecil Hurt Chris Murray Chuck Carlton Colten Bartholomew Darren Haynes Dave Reardon David Briggs David Jablonski Don Williams Dylan Sinn Eric Hansen Ethan Joyce Garland Gillen Gentry Estes Jack Ebling John Clay John McGonigal Jon Wilner Jonas Pope Jordan Hill Marc Weiszer Matt Brown Matt Murschel Michael Lev Mike Barber Ryan Thorburn Tom D’Angelo Glenn Guilbeau Josh Furlong Kellis Robinett Lauren Brownlow Madison Blevins Matt Baker Nate Mink Nathan Baird Neill Ostrout Pete Martini Rece Davis Robbie Faulk Robert Cessna Ron Counts Scott Richey Steve Batterson Tom Murphy Trevor Hass James Kratch Kirk Bohls Mike Vorel Ryan Aber Ryan Pritt Sam McKewon Steve Virgen Zach Klein Johnny McGonigal Ben Portnoy Blair Kerkhoff Brett McMurphy Cecil Hurt Robbie Faulk Scott Richey Released October 24 Rank Team PV Rank Conference Points 1 Georgia (7-0) 1 SEC 1,575 (63) 2 Cincinnati (7-0) 2 American Athletic 1,477 3 Alabama (7-1) 4 SEC 1,417 ADVERTISEMENT 4 Oklahoma (8-0) 3 Big 12 1,383 5 Ohio State (6-1) 5 Big Ten 1,311 6 Michigan (7-0) 6 Big Ten 1,270 7 Oregon (6-1) 10 Pac-12 1,165 8 Michigan State (7-0) 9 Big Ten 1,160 9 Iowa (6-1) 11 Big Ten 1,035 10 Ole Miss (6-1) 12 SEC 1,034 ADVERTISEMENT 11 Notre Dame (6-1) 13 IA Independents 922 12 Kentucky (6-1) 15 SEC 849 13 Wake Forest (7-0) 16 ACC 801 14 Texas A&M (6-2) 17 SEC 700 15 Oklahoma State (6-1) 8 Big 12 682 16 Baylor (6-1) 20 Big 12 513 17 Pittsburgh (6-1) 23 ACC 510 ADVERTISEMENT 18 Auburn (5-2) 19 SEC 481 19 SMU (7-0) 21 American Athletic 473 20 Penn State (5-2) 7 Big Ten 471 21 San Diego State (7-0) 22 Mountain West 390 22 Iowa State (5-2) Big 12 298 23 UTSA (8-0) 24 Conference USA 235 24 Coastal Carolina (6-1) 14 Sun Belt 132 ADVERTISEMENT 25 Brigham Young (6-2) IA Independents 44 Others receiving votes: Arkansas 36, Louisiana-Lafayette 32, North Carolina State 28, Houston 12, Virginia 9, Oregon State 7, Arizona State 7, Texas 6, Appalachian State 5, Florida 3, Minnesota 1, UCLA 1 Point values in parentheses indicate the number of first place votes. i included the names of those voting but not sure if anyone cares?

i am fine with it as long as people do not use it to take shots of me. and aux knows i try to make sure the writer gets recognized for his article and he was just watching my back. no problems here you sexy beast...........lol

Bob Woodward finds 'seven conspiratorial actions' by Trump and Bannon Bob Woodward finds 'seven conspiratorial actions' by Trump and Bannon Daniel Chaitin Sat, October 23, 2021, 3:25 PM·4 min read In this article: Investigative journalist Bob Woodward said his reporting shows "seven conspiratorial actions" between former President Donald Trump and Steve Bannon as part of an effort to overturn the 2020 election. Claiming to have made a new discovery, Woodward said his book, Peril, which he wrote with fellow Washington Post journalist Robert Costa, lays out the blueprint of a scandal akin to the Watergate controversy that is now under investigation by a House select committee looking into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot. "I just looked back at what we have in the book, and quite directly, we have the dots. We didn't connect them, though they're there," Woodward said during a CNN interview Thursday. "There are seven conspiratorial actions by Trump and Bannon, essentially, to subvert and destroy the process of certifying who the next president is going to be. And when you think about it, it's just like Watergate." Woodward, who helped expose the 1970s Watergate scandal in the Nixon administration with Carl Bernstein, came on the air after CNN's John Berman played a clip of Rep. Liz Cheney, a member of the Jan. 6 panel, tying Trump to Bannon in the lead-up to the Capitol riot. "It appears that Mr. Bannon had substantial advanced knowledge of the plans for Jan. 6 and likely had an important role in formulating those plans," Cheney said at the select committee meeting. "Mr. Bannon was in the 'war room' at the Willard on Jan. 6. He also appears to have detailed knowledge regarding the president's efforts to sell millions of Americans the fraud that the election was stolen." CARL BERNSTEIN CALLS FOR INVESTIGATION INTO SUPPORTERS OF 'PSYCHOPATH' TRUMP Bannon served as Trump's White House chief strategist for much of 2017. And although he was not a member of the administration around the time of the 2020 election and the Jan. 6 siege of Congress as lawmakers met in Washington to certify Joe Biden's electoral victory, he had reemerged as a force on the outside boosting Trump. Bannon acted as a senior political adviser behind an effort, centered in what allies called a "command center" at the Willard InterContinental Washington hotel, to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Woodward picked up a page of notes and went over some of the "conspiratorial actions" he had mentioned. "First of all, on Dec. 30, Bannon talks to Trump and says, 'You've got to make a dramatic return to Washington,'" Woodward said, paraphrasing some of the quotes in Peril. "Trump is in Mar-a-Lago, he's going to have the New Year's Eve party down there, but he comes back, and Bannon says to Trump, 'You've got to call Vice President Pence off the ski slopes,' where Pence's staff and advisers have kind of stashed him away because they know in a week he's going to have to certify or decide what he's going to do about who the next president is. And then, Bannon says to Trump, 'Jan. 6 is the moment of reckoning here,' and if we can challenge the legitimacy of Biden, it casts a shadow over the Biden presidency, and then, he says, 'We are going to kill the Biden presidency in the crib.' The violent language, of course, it was manifest, the violence itself, on Jan. 6." "Then, on Jan. 5, as Liz Cheney was pointing out, Bannon meets with others, including Rudy Giuliani and their phony Republicans, to block the certification of Biden, and then, you put all this in, and Trump put out a phony statement at the time — this is on the public record — saying he and Pence agreed that Pence has the power to walk away and essentially get Trump certified as president. But that's totally untrue," Woodward added. Despite pressure from Trump and the chaos on Jan. 6, Pence did not try to send the results back to certain states Trump lost in November. In fact, he sent a letter to Congress saying he did not have the power to reject Electoral College votes, dealing a further blow to Trump’s hopes to deny a presidential victory to Biden. The House voted Thursday to hold Bannon in contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena from the select committee. Before that, during her speech, Cheney, a Republican, said arguments made by Trump and Bannon that relevant information sought by the committee is protected by executive privilege "appear to reveal" that Trump was "personally involved in the planning and execution" of the events on Jan. 6. CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER If the Justice Department prosecutes Bannon and he is convicted, he could face fines up to $100,000 and up to a year in prison. Woodward predicted the Justice Department will go further and appoint a special counsel. "We have a very clear-cut case. I would suspect it is quite possible that Attorney General Merrick Garland will appoint a special counsel to look at this, because the evidence is so clear for a massive Watergate-style attempt to destroy the process of electing a president," Woodward said.