AURex

My parents used to comment about all the stars they grew up with dropping away -- and then they left as well. Even my friends who were only a bit older than me who grew up with the "rock and roll" stars like Elvis and Buddy Holly. Now (being a Boomer) it's our turn. So many of the stars we grew up with have already left us, and there are some true superstars who are getting on up there in age -- hello Dylan, Clapton, Jagger, Caine, Joni, etc. Of course, they may outlive us for awhile, as we also march towards our own transition into the ..............

IMO, this was surely one of Wendell's best games ever for Auburn. 16 points, 12 assists, only 2 turnovers. But they sure looked good today. USCe has a few guys who can drop some baskets, but they don't play tough defense and aren't really organized offensively. I'm so glad to see Auburn take care of business against teams like LSU, USCe, and the Missies, because the second half of the season is going to be brutal. Playing these teams has really given the guys some on-floor time to find themselves as a team. They are going to need that down the stretch.

Damn, two rock legends lost in one week. First Jeff Beck and now ....... David Crosby, a founding member of The Byrds and CSN(Y), some notable solo albums, and endless performances as a side due to his incredible voice, dies at 81. On the brink of his 80th birthday, as his new album For Free was being released, he said "Being old is not something to celebrate." That's understandable, given his years of drug addiction, followed by 3 heart attacks, a liver transplant, diabetes and various other medical issues. His cause of death was only explained as "after a lengthy illness." Crosby commented several times, with sympathy and remorse, how surprised he was that he had outlived some of his friends -- Jimmy Hendrix, Janis Joplin, etc. I laughed, reading his biography years ago, how he was commonly referred to by Stills and Nash and other friends as "ole tripod" because he seemed insatiable with the opposite sex. But he settled down, happily married for the past 3 decades. Perhaps not the most creative of musicians in the Byrds and CSN(Y), but with a voice that made him a part of our music history.

Man, that LSU arena was quiet.

Auburn decided not to rename Wallace Hall, which was named after the fanatically racist George C Wallace. https://www.theplainsman.com/article/2021/09/trustees-approve-plaque-to-contextualize-name-of-wallace-hall

As for renaming Auburn buildings ...... Tiger Hall has been named in honor of Bessie Mae Holloway, and Eagle Hall has been named in honor of Josetta Brittain Matthews. Recent Board of Trustees decisions concerning the names of certain buildings on campus are part of an ongoing effort by Auburn to honor individuals whose contributions to the university have led to meaningful change and are deserving of such recognition. All of these changes have come amid the creation of two task force groups—the Presidential Task Force for Opportunity and Equity and the Auburn Board of Trustees Task Force. This February [2021], Auburn’s Board of Trustees voted to rename two residence halls in recognition of two Auburn trailblazers, Bessie Mae Holloway and Josetta Brittain Matthews. Holloway was the first Black person to serve as a member of the Board of Trustees and only the second woman, serving from 1985-2000. Matthews was the first Black student to graduate from Auburn, earning a master’s degree in 1966 and a doctorate in 1975, both in education. She was also the first Black faculty member at the university, joining the College of Liberal Arts as a French and history instructor around 1972. Most recently, Auburn’s student center was named in honor of Harold D. Melton, the chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court and first Black president of the Auburn Student Government Association. Additionally, in November 2020, the Board unanimously supported the removal of Gov. Bibb Graves’ name from the campus amphitheater and drive that bore his namesake. The resolution stated that keeping his name on campus would be “inconsistent with the university’s mission and the Auburn Creed and would chill, rather than encourage, broad use of facilities that are intended to be enjoyed as sites for engagement by the campus community.” https://ocm.auburn.edu/newsroom/campus_notices/2021/04/091545-building-naming-qa.php

Step back from the politically loaded gatling gun. Here is the official code of ethics for ALL librarians in ALL types of libraries. Librarians must have a Bachelors level degree before they can enter a graduate program to become a librarian. All librarians have a masters degree in Library & Information Science, and often other degrees as well. Note that the purpose of libraries -- ALL libraries -- is to meet the interests and needs of its clientele -- ALL of its clientele. Is there any confusion about the word "ALL"? Here is their Code of Ethics. Of note, refer to numbers I, II, III, VII, and IX. We provide the highest level of service to all library users through appropriate and usefully organized resources; equitable service policies; equitable access; and accurate, unbiased, and courteous responses to all requests. We uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources. We protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted. We respect intellectual property rights and advocate balance between the interests of information users and rights holders. We treat co-workers and other colleagues with respect, fairness, and good faith, and advocate conditions of employment that safeguard the rights and welfare of all employees of our institutions. We do not advance private interests at the expense of library users, colleagues, or our employing institutions. We distinguish between our personal convictions and professional duties and do not allow our personal beliefs to interfere with fair representation of the aims of our institutions or the provision of access to their information resources. We strive for excellence in the profession by maintaining and enhancing our own knowledge and skills, by encouraging the professional development of co-workers, and by fostering the aspirations of potential members of the profession. We affirm the inherent dignity and rights of every person. We work to recognize and dismantle systemic and individual biases; to confront inequity and oppression; to enhance diversity and inclusion; and to advance racial and social justice in our libraries, communities, profession, and associations through awareness, advocacy, education, collaboration, services, and allocation of resources and spaces. Any librarian who removes materials from their library due to the demands of a specific person who happens to dislike a particular topic or subject matter, is violating his/her code of professional ethics. Librarians who chose to contest attempts at censorship or political machinations can receive legal support from the American Library Association.

Hoping our recruits can get us there. !!

UGA showed up. TCU didn't. Frogs croaking.

I'm not a UGA fan, but I must admit, UGA is eating frogs legs so far tonight.

Auburn is pretty much legislated to provide access to education for as many high school graduates as possible. Look at minority Alabama enrollments at Bammer vs Auburn. Bammer sucks in a very large percentage of its student enrollment from out-of-state -- i.e., high paying out of state students. Auburn is required to absorb as many in-state students as possible. Many of the Auburn applicants cannot afford even in-state tuition and fees. Even if they have high grades and sparkling letters of support. As a result, kids with good grades from privileged backgrounds and well-supported school districts might not receive scholarships that are targeted for minority and underprivileged kids. Even with all the efforts by Auburn to recruit and support minority students, the reality is that less than 6% of Auburn students are black. The percentage of minority students (primarily Asian) is higher in STEM graduate programs, but if the highest scoring applicants for STEM graduate programs were admitted, there would not be a single white grad student in Chemistry, Physics, Biological Sciences, Engineering, etc. I worked my way through Auburn without a scholarship. So did my (now) wife. Even though both of us scored in the very top of the ACT and had top grades in high school. Just because you are white and have good grades does not assure a scholarship. And I am 100% okay with that. If we can pull some kids out of poverty, out of an environment of ignorance and give them an opportunity to build a better life for themselves and their families, I'm 100% okay with that.

I was overall happy about the outcome of this game. Who can complain about beating the #12 ranked team? But I'm still confused. We lose to a junky team like UGA, but beat a (supposedly) solid team like Arkansas. Was Arkansas wildly overrated? Was UGA wildly underrated? Was the outcome of both games just a matter of matchups between Jimmys and Joes? At this point, I can't really get much of a sense of whether Auburn is improving as a team. I'm hoping that, as the season progresses, CBP can pull together a very competitive team in SEC play. Right now, there's just too much inconsistency.

Our Founding Fathers were VERY clear on the fact that a Republic (or as we refer to our system today, a Democracy) depends TOTALLY on an educated citizenship. Thus they supported public education as a means to assure an educated citizenship. Well, back then, women and minorities were not real people. They weren't voting citizens. But the basic tenet of our Founding Fathers remains. Public education that assures a well informed, well educated populace remains the foundation of our country. The whole notion of meritocracy in high schools is a sham. Our high schools should be assuring that ALL of the youth of our country are well educated and able to analyze/reason at a functional level. The idea of excluding children from a well-rounded education is anathema to the basic foundations of our country. And BTW, this includes ALL youth -- not just the children of gun toting, bible toting, Trumpist denialists. ALL children, of ALL religious beliefs, ALL political persuasions, ALL sexual identities, ALL racial heritages, deserve -- and according to our founding fathers should be provided -- a quality education. Denying youth the benefit of the highest quality education simply because they do not score as high on some test or because they didn't adequately impress some white teacher -- this is totally opposite of the entire concept of our founding fathers, to assure a well educated citizenry. The reality of our world is that some children are not raised in an environment that emphasizes or supports learning. It is our societal need and requirement to elevate them educationally so that they may become, as our Founding Fathers proposed, an informed electorate and well-educated citizens of our great country.

I was simply distilling your post to a single brief point. But it would be useful if you supported your point with some actual "analytics" since you are referring to "analytics." Is shooting percentage better or worse in recent years than in the past, as you claim? I.E., Is shooting percentage in college basketball better or worse than in the past? If you are going to proclaim how wonderful the past was compared to today, give us some stats -- not one guy who shot good back in the day and some guys today who don't. How about some real stats. Shooting percentage of college teams back then (whenever you think was the golden age) from 2 or 3 vs shooting percentage of modern college teams from 2 and 3. Don't just throw out random stuff like how college teams shot better in the 70s and 80s. I'm not disputing you because I haven't looked at any stats. I would just like you to give some actual evidence to support your claim.

There is no such thing as "Shooting In General." Shooting is 100% specific. It goes in the basket or it doesn't. Enough said.

I'm sure CBP is as frustrated with this team as we are as fans. I'm sure he did the best he could to help offset the losses of Jabari and Kessler. I'm sure he is just as disappointed as all of us regarding Westry and Flanigan. And ya know, I am absolutely certain that, if he could cure the systemic disability of this team -- he's trying his best to do that. Unfortunately, there is no easy cure and I suspect this team will be one of CBP's mediocre ones. But I'm also sure he is working his butt off to pull in players who will revitalize this team for next season. I'm watching the recruiting thread and trying to be optimistic. As for this year -- if you lose to Georgia ....... that's not a good omen of things to come.

For those of you too young to remember -- Tulane was a member of the SEC up until 1965. Tulane has a winning record vs Auburn 17-15-1. Glad to see the Green Wave back again.

SEC in Bowl Games so far -- Oregon State beat the crap out of Florida 30-3 Wake Forest soundly beat Missery 27-17 Arkansas squeaked out a win over Kansas 55-53 Texas Tech bludgeoned Ole Miss 42-25 Tennessee clobbered Clempson 31-14 Notre Dame bested South Carolina 45-38 Bama squashed Kansas State 45-20 Iowa embarrassed Kentucky 21-0 UGA snuck past Tosu 42-41 Incoming SEC teams -- FSU beat Oklahoma 35-32 UDub beat Texas 27-20 SEC Games Remaining -- Miss State vs Illinois LSU vs Purdue TCU vs UGA SEC not looking wonderful this bowl season so far. Only 4 wins of 9 games, and if you count the 2 SEC incoming teams, 4 of 11. 3 bowl games remaining. SEC cannot achieve a winning percentage in bowl games this year, but has a chance (again) at a Natty.

So, Tennessee beat the crap out of Clempson. South Carolina was just overwhelmed by the ND beef. Bama slapped around the inferior KSU as expected. Kentucky was helpless on offense without their QB. No real surprises here.

I did not see any favoritism towards TCU in the officiating. The officials called a bunch of pass interference penalties agaist TCU, but I saw some on Michigan that didn't get called. Overall, a fun game to watch. Michigan was definitely overrated because they played a traditional smash mouth running style that media loved. But I'm not convinced the Big10 is all that good. We'll see when Tosu meets UGA.

Well, most SEC bowl teams have not played yet. Razorbacks won their game, Ole Pissies lost theirs. The post season is just getting started.

Back in the day, January 1 was a huge day for bowl games. New Years Day bowls ruled! This time around, not one single big bowl game on New Years Day. A truckload on Saturday Dec 31, including the playoff semi bowls. On Monday, a bunch of bowl games. NONE on New Years Day. Now, because NYD is on a Sunday, all we got is a batch of NFL games. For those of us who do not give a crap about NFL football, this pretty much ruins the traditional NYD football tradition. Bummer

He's returning for another season at Duckville. Do you think CHF would throw buckets of NIL at him to get him back to Auburn? I don't. But that's JMO.

Just my opinion, but the best QB is not necessarily the highest rated by NFL scouts or media hype. (For example, IMO, Williams was not the best QB last season. Other QBs performed better. He was just high profile because Riley/USC. Media hype.) Anyway, just my opinion, but the best QB for Auburn is the one that would best fit CHF's offensive system. That ain't Williams or the previous Heisman winner from that little school north of Auburn. Neither would be a good "value" for Auburn. I'm not sure what the concept of "value" is these days. Rattler and Ewers were highly rated coming out of HS, but were they worth the buckets of money thrown at them at their first stop? Nope. Rattler seems to have finally found his footing at USCe, probably for much less NIL than he initially got at Okieville. Hooker was not so hot at Va Tech, but the kid turned out to be a great fit for Heupner's offense after transferring to Tennessee, so I'd consider him a great "value" for UT. Did UT give him buckets of money to transfer there? I dunno, but probably not. I really don't know who I'd pick as a QB worth throwing millions at for CHF offense. I'm gonna let him decide. If you were to ask him this question, I suspect his choices would be completely different from all the media hype and ratings sites. All JMO, of course.

And South Carolina vs Notre Dame Friday afternoon. How could I forget? Both 8-4, but Cocks on a hot streak.