letting a magical season slip away

[Guest lurtz]

18 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

 Our success has to be compared to other programs in the power 5 and in the SEC. 

No it doesn't, and Bird gave you the reasons why.  Different schools have different standards.  Bird listed reasons why our relative standard should be higher than many power 5 schools.

Comparing power 5 schools as if being a power 5 school is the only metric, THAT's operating in a vacuum.

[I_M4_AU 8,933]

I think AUFriction might be Gus, look at his sig.  It’s the Whirly bird.  Who does that?

 

J/K AUFriction

[oracle79 3,569]

2 hours ago, JDUBB4AU said:

They need the right leadership. From HC to the BOT. Leadership at every level determines the product on the field .

This. The entire program and university, BOT, and PTB and donors/fans need to all row the boat together.

[AUFriction 1,179]

Just now, lurtz said:

No it doesn't, and Bird gave you the reasons why.  Different schools have different standards.  Bird listed reasons why our relative standard should be higher than many power 5 schools.

Comparing power 5 schools as if being a power 5 school is the only metric, THAT's operating in a vacuum.

That’s not at all what he was saying. I tried to compare our current coaches to existing coaches to show that our current coach is on par with other respected coaches in program history. 

He responded our history isn’t good enough because that’s averaging under 70%, which is a “failing grade.”

I responded by saying that the 70% as passing grade is arbitrary in this situation. If you aren’t going to compare your program internally to what your school has done historically, you have to compare it to what other programs a te doing. 

My point was, if he’s considering 70% as passing in college football, that’s mathematically a bad comparator.

[AUFriction 1,179]

28 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

The passing grade we’ve adopted in this country is arbitrary, based largely on educational studies decades and decades ago. A 70 is not the end all be all pass fail cutoff for everything. In a lot of circumstances, it makes no psychometric sense to use such a normative cutoff.

This is particularly true with relative as opposed to absolute performance metrics. What is considered passing is based on a standardized distribution, not a percentage in a vacuum. To do so violates the statistical assumption of observation independence. Our success has to be compared to other programs in the power 5 and in the SEC. If you do that, we aren’t doing that bad.

Also, If you look at the programs in the SEC over Malzahn’s tenure, Auburn is 4th in overall wins during that period. Bama has just beat everyone. Didn’t bother to examine their records. The next best programs are as follows:

UGA- 10 wins a season, which you do have to account for the fact that they play in a watered down SEC east and haven’t had the schedule we’ve had.

LSU- 9 wins a season

Auburn-8.8 wins a season (difference is probably not statistically significant from LSU)

Texas A&M- 8.2 wins a season

Florida- 7.3 wins a season and playing in a watered down SEC east

Every other team has been lower than this. 

So, accounting for sampling error, Auburn is tied for 3rd in the SEC in wins during Gus’s tenure. How is that utter failure, and why should we expect better?

 

 

[auburnphan 6,050]

Were Georgia and LSU wrong for wanting better in their programs when they fired Richt and Miles?

[bigbird 60,939]

1 minute ago, auburnphan said:

Were Georgia and LSU wrong for wanting better in their programs when they fired Right and Miles?

Apparently

[DAG 34,751]

53 minutes ago, fredst said:

And, to use the Clemson example again.... before 2010 their historical winning percentage was about 60% (and even with their incredible run they are still behind us all time). They found the right guy- maybe got lucky doing so- and are now on top of the mountain, considered one of the best programs in the nation. We may not get as lucky as them but we should aspire for nothing less.

They definitely got lucky but that is okay. My issue is the guys we pick have shown to be average or have zero experience before hand. Tubs wasn’t crazy good at Ole Miss, Gene was horrible at Iowa State and Gus had very little true experience. I don’t need a top 3 coach to be excited, if we can find a proven new up and comer I would be happy. 

[I_M4_AU 8,933]

Florida has gone through 3 coaches since Gus has been head coach at Auburn.  They’re not UT either.  Some stuff just don’t add up.

[Guest lurtz]

24 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

My point was, if he’s considering 70% as passing in college football, that’s mathematically a bad comparator.

He's not talking about college football. He's talking about Auburn.  Relative to what AU is capable of, Gus' results aren't satisfactory.

19 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

 why should we expect better?

 

If you don't aspire to better, you don't get better.  There's a reason we aren't still living in caves or bowing to kings.

[bigbird 60,939]

2 minutes ago, DAG said:

. I don’t need a top 3 coach to be excited, if we can find a proven new up and comer I would be happy. 

Heupel

Cristobal

Aranda

Jeff Scott

[AUFriction 1,179]

2 minutes ago, lurtz said:

He's not talking about college football. He's talking about Auburn.  Relative to what AU is capable of, Gus' results aren't satisfactory.

If you don't aspire to better, you don't get better.  There's a reason we aren't still living in caves or bowing to kings.

To your first point, I made that comparison. Look back a few pages. Auburn’s best coaches in history have averaged 8-9 wins. It would take quite a bit of analysis, but I’m guessing that’s where most of the good SEC programs are sitting as well. Compared to that standard, Gus is above the average for good coaches. 

Two your second point, you are sort of right. Things do change with time, and that’s how improvement happens. But your focusing on the wrong criterion.

Right now, to be successful, you generally have to run a shotgun heavy offense and use some tempo. You have to be able to move the ball in different ways, including the use of perimeter run and pass plays. The coaches that are not progressing are the ones refusing to do those things. Gus was actually ahead of the curve. He was already doing most of those things. He is running what can be considered a modern/progressive football program. 

 

[AUFriction 1,179]

11 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Heupel

Cristobal

Aranda

Jeff Scott

1. Same record as Gus right now in a weaker conference

2.Lost to Gus on a neutral field against a freshman QB making his first start

3-4. Have not been head coaches before, and we have no idea what they’d become. Their backgrounds are similar to that of Chad Morris and Jeremy Pruitt, and they could easily turn out as busts as head coaches. 

[bigbird 60,939]

9 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

1. Same record as Gus right now in a weaker conference

2.Lost to Gus on a neutral field against a freshman QB making his first start

3-4. Have not been head coaches before, and we have no idea what they’d become. Their backgrounds are similar to that of Chad Morris and Jeremy Pruitt, and they could easily turn out as busts as head coaches. 

1. Proven better offenses

2. Better recruiter, better coaching experience, and better team right now

3. Jeff Scott is very similar to Swinney and has been a multiple championship winning OC. 

4. Proven defensive mind at Wisconsin and LSU. One of the best at game planning, details, and adjustments.

 

All 4 have substantially better pedigree and coaching experience

 

Your argument against is weak and humorous

[johnnyAU 3,745]

Bird, how do you feel about Norvell or Dykes? They are kind of the hot names of the minute. 

[nixtosanders94 2,180]

8 minutes ago, bigbird said:

1. Proven better offenses

2. Better recruiter, better coaching experience, and better team right now

3. Jeff Scott is very similar to Swinney and has been a multiple championship winning OC. 

4. Proven defensive mind at Wisconsin and LSU. One of the best at game planning, details, and adjustments.

 

Your argument against is weak and humorous

 

[johnnyAU 3,745]

I heard this bit on a show this afternoon and it's of course true.

Gus is about 5 plays away from being undefeated....and about 5 plays away from being a 4 loss team heading into Amen Corner.

[DAG 34,751]

37 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Heupel

Cristobal

Aranda

Jeff Scott

I am not huge on Jeff Scott. I like Heupel, Campbell, Cristobal and Clark. If we can’t get those or of course Stoops then yes Aranda for sure. 

[fredst 9,070]

40 minutes ago, DAG said:

They definitely got lucky but that is okay. My issue is the guys we pick have shown to be average or have zero experience before hand. Tubs wasn’t crazy good at Ole Miss, Gene was horrible at Iowa State and Gus had very little true experience. I don’t need a top 3 coach to be excited, if we can find a proven new up and comer I would be happy. 

I can’t give this enough likes.Yes, yes, yes. Some actual leadership out of the AD to pick the guy that can take us to that next level-not some damn retread or a good “Auburn man”. Now, I don’t know who that guy is and I suspect that nobody on this board does. That’s why we have a professional athletic director (hopefully) to lead the process when/if it happens. And money men putting their egos aside to let the process unfold. That’s how we’ll take that next step. Will it ever happen in my lifetime? I am not overly optimistic because of JABA

[bigbird 60,939]

4 minutes ago, DAG said:

I am not huge on Jeff Scott. I like Heupel, Campbell, Cristobal and Clark. If we can’t get those or of course Stoops then yes Aranda for sure. 

Not disagreeing, but what do you not like about Scott?

[AU-24 3,130]

FSU is going after Stoops.

[Guest lurtz]

20 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

Auburn’s best coaches in history have averaged 8-9 wins. 

Being bound by the past is arbitrary, and in a real sense defeatist.  It also fails to take into account the enormous investment AU has made in its football program. It also ignores the way that our recruiting has improved over the last 10 years (for which I give Gus and Chiz their due).  Two names eviscerate the "its as good as we can do" argument: Bruce Pearl and Dabo Swinney.

Two your second point, you are sort of right. Things do change with time, and that’s how improvement happens. But your focusing on the wrong criterion. 

Ok, give me a criterion that takes into account  the advantages that Auburn has over so many schools and I will consider it.

Right now, to be successful, you generally have to run a shotgun heavy offense and use some tempo. You have to be able to move the ball in different ways, including the use of perimeter run and pass plays. The coaches that are not progressing are the ones refusing to do those things. Gus was actually ahead of the curve. He was already doing most of those things. He is running what can be considered a modern/progressive football program. 

This last paragraph is essentially a non sequitur when considering the rest of your post, but it illustrates something that many Gus loyalists do. You focus on the things you believe he does well while ignoring the things he does badly or fails to do at all.  And it's those things that have the rest of us at wit's end.  

I think that's it in a nutshell, at least for me.  So many of the problems we have now (and some of the losses we've suffered), are needless.

 

 

[bigbird 60,939]

42 minutes ago, AUFriction said:

Right now, to be successful, you generally have to run a shotgun heavy offense and use some tempo. You have to be able to move the ball in different ways, including the use of perimeter run and pass plays. The coaches that are not progressing are the ones refusing to do those things. Gus was actually ahead of the curve. He was already doing most of those things. He is running what can be considered a modern/progressive football program. 

 

[bigbird 60,939]

33 minutes ago, johnnyAU said:

Bird, how do you feel about Norvell or Dykes? They are kind of the hot names of the minute. 

Not a Dykes fan. I think Norvell could be successful. He adapts and doesn't seem to be stubborn towards a single type offense

[DAG 34,751]

15 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Not disagreeing, but what do you not like about Scott?

For me it’s the fact that for a good bit of time he has had the Co-OC role under Dabo. That’s a ton of support even if Clemson has success. Granted, he is learning from one of the best but I want to see someone with much more autonomy.