Recruiting & coaching

[tsande07 271]

33 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

 

50/50 makes us "competitive" with the average team on our schedule (including powder-puffs). 

To be "competitive" with the top teams in our league, we'd need to be 50/50 with those top teams. 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

6 minutes ago, tsande07 said:

50/50 makes us "competitive" with the average team on our schedule (including powder-puffs). 

To be "competitive" with the top teams in our league, we'd need to be 50/50 with those top teams. 

 

[dyehardfanAU 2,117]

9 hours ago, NoALtiger said:

I find it odd that folks reference him so much period, good or bad. It’s really weird to me how much people either love to defend or love to bash the man. Maybe if everyone could move on we could solve our current crapfest. 

I think it's completely fair to talk about him when discussing our current roster woes.  

[gr82b4au 5,583]

Taken from another board (not premium) 

The number of high school 5stars since 2017.
bama - 26
uga - 25
aTm - 14
LSU - 14
UF - 5
SCe - 3
UTk - 2
AU - 1
UK - 1
Mizz - 1
Miss St - 1
Ark, OM, Vandy - 0

And that one five star was an Auburn legacy quarterback who has since transferred. 
Recruiting under Gus his final years and now under Hars is not acceptable and is the reason we are where we are. 

we need to hire a recruiter who brings recruiters with him ha

Edited October 11, 2022 by gr82b4au

[NoALtiger 4,068]

17 minutes ago, dyehardfanAU said:

I think it's completely fair to talk about him when discussing our current roster woes.  

That’s fair enough and if the only talk involving our former coach was roster based it wouldn’t bug me so much. It’s the constant scheme discussions, contract extension debate, etc that go on ad nauseam that have nothing to do with our current roster woes. Basically folks like to argue imo and Gus is just the means to an end for that. I have no doubt someone will take these examples and try to correlate them into why using these translates to more Gus debate, which proves my last point on just wanting to argue with someone with a differing opinion lol. 

[1auburn1 1,131]

33 minutes ago, gr82b4au said:

Taken from another board (not premium) 

The number of high school 5stars since 2017.
bama - 26
uga - 25
aTm - 14
LSU - 14
UF - 5
SCe - 3
UTk - 2
AU - 1
UK - 1
Mizz - 1
Miss St - 1
Ark, OM, Vandy - 0

And that one five star was an Auburn legacy quarterback who has since transferred. 
Recruiting under Gus his final years and now under Hars is not acceptable and is the reason we are where we are. 

we need to hire a recruiter who brings recruiters with him ha

That's a crime against nature

[1716AU 800]

15 minutes ago, NoALtiger said:

That’s fair enough and if the only talk involving our former coach was roster based it wouldn’t bug me so much. It’s the constant scheme discussions, contract extension debate, etc that go on ad nauseam that have nothing to do with our current roster woes. Basically folks like to argue imo and Gus is just the means to an end for that. I have no doubt someone will take these examples and try to correlate them into why using these translates to more Gus debate, which proves my last point on just wanting to argue with someone with a differing opinion lol. 

I appreciate you speaking of this.  I actually had no issues with Gus' offense, except for reasons I will keep to myself.

It was the constant poor roster management and recruiting that was most upsetting to me. Especially when it came to the OL.  Harsin has not helped himself with his unwillingness to do what it takes to get the job done, but we are in the trash with the roster because of Gus.

[Hank2020 3,408]

6 minutes ago, 1716AU said:

I appreciate you speaking of this.  I actually had no issues with Gus' offense, except for reasons I will keep to myself.

It was the constant poor roster management and recruiting that was most upsetting to me. Especially when it came to the OL.  Harsin has not helped himself with his unwillingness to do what it takes to get the job done, but we are in the trash with the roster because of Gus.

I think roster problems are probably 70%_Gus, 30-Harsin. But in the end we are where we are, looking for a way up out of the hole. 

[Mikey 16,781]

9 hours ago, tsande07 said:

50/50 makes us "competitive" with the average team on our schedule (including powder-puffs). 

The 50/50 included only SEC games. That was SEC games AFTER Gus' two best seasons were removed from the numbers. The powder puffs weren't counted and Malzahn's two best seasons weren't counted..  Your buddy @Brad_ATX is the one who set those parameters. See earlier posts in this thread. In the future, please read more carefully.

Edited October 11, 2022 by Mikey

[gr82b4au 5,583]

we are where we are due to Harsin and Gus. 
I mean both can be true at the same time.
Gus was an average coach and was losing in recruiting, especially on the OL… and Harsin is a terrible coach who walked into a roster that was teetering on the edge and pushed it over the cliff. 
Those that could see where this was going many years ago said that it would never get worse, especially recruiting the offensive line. That was wrong. We went from below average to the worst ever. 
I just don’t understand why AU people are arguing about this. Our program is where it is and we need to hire some good people to get us out of this. 

Clean house, hire some good recruiters, and maybe in 2 years we can be competitive again. 

[einatlanta 502]

When a football team is in disarray it is time for a coach to narrow the focus on recruiting. Saban was unfortunately able to grasp this idea and focused all energy on the offensive and defensive lines. After he shored them up he started winning big and that pulled in the highly rated skill positions. Any coach we bring in needs to listen to the money makers and go all in on rebuilding the lines. I will take a 3 star qb and 4-5 star lineman any day of the week.

[dyehardfanAU 2,117]

33 minutes ago, Mikey said:

The 50/50 included only SEC games. That was SEC games AFTER Gus' two best seasons were removed from the numbers. The powder puffs weren't counted and Malzahn's two best seasons weren't counted..  Your buddy @Brad_ATX is the one who set those parameters. See earlier posts in this thread. In the future, please read more carefully.

Thinking that going 50% against the SEC is competitive is a bit laughable.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

Gus or, Harsin is an inane discussion.

Neither is the answer.  Neither can coach or, recruit at the level we need in order to compete.  They share the same fatal flaws, stubborn, arrogant, too insecure to listen to advice.

[aubaseball 2,876]

15 hours ago, Mikey said:

Head to head coaching records show this to be false.

I knew this would be the comeback.   So, Miss State and Ole Miss are better jobs, better resources, better facilities than Auburn?   You know this isn’t true and that it’s way harder to win at those schools than Auburn.   Don’t be biased in your evaluation of what a good coach looks like.   

[80Tiger 907]

6 hours ago, gr82b4au said:

Taken from another board (not premium) 

The number of high school 5stars since 2017.
bama - 26
uga - 25
aTm - 14
LSU - 14
UF - 5
SCe - 3
UTk - 2
AU - 1
UK - 1
Mizz - 1
Miss St - 1
Ark, OM, Vandy - 0

And that one five star was an Auburn legacy quarterback who has since transferred. 
Recruiting under Gus his final years and now under Hars is not acceptable and is the reason we are where we are. 

we need to hire a recruiter who brings recruiters with him ha

While I agree with your post, just for clarification, I thought Tank and Pappoe were 5 starts also.

[cbo 8,898]

12 hours ago, dyehardfanAU said:

Thinking that going 50% against the SEC is competitive is a bit laughable.

No, it's just what the word means. Winning half your games against the SEC, with the best seasons excluded, is literally what it means to be competitive. 

And, no, it's not good enough. Which is why I'm glad Gus was fired. But you guys are just arguing semantics at this point. 

[tsande07 271]

1 hour ago, cbo said:

No, it's just what the word means. Winning half your games against the SEC, with the best seasons excluded, is literally what it means to be competitive. 

And, no, it's not good enough. Which is why I'm glad Gus was fired. But you guys are just arguing semantics at this point. 

50/50 in the SEC makes us "competitive" with the average SEC team.

To be "competitive" with the top teams in our league, we'd need to be 50/50 with those top teams. (Not to belabor the point...)

[cbo 8,898]

15 minutes ago, tsande07 said:

50/50 in the SEC makes us "competitive" with the average SEC team.

To be "competitive" with the top teams in our league, we'd need to be 50/50 with those top teams. (Not to belabor the point...)

I feel like you're moving the goalpost. I think all we've learned is that everyone has a different definition of competitive. This is kind of a pointless argument. I weighed in because people were piling on someone who I think is right in this case. 

I'm pretty sure "competitive" means you are able to compete with your peers. If you're in the SEC, your SEC opponents are your peers. Winning half the games clearly shows you are able to compete. 

If you were beating most teams in the conference and splitting with the top teams, you would be dominant. 

 

[tsande07 271]

4 minutes ago, cbo said:

I feel like you're moving the goalpost. I think all we've learned is that everyone has a different definition of competitive. This is kind of a pointless argument. I weighed in because people were piling on someone who I think is right in this case. 

I'm pretty sure "competitive" means you are able to compete with your peers. If you're in the SEC, your SEC opponents are your peers. Winning half the games clearly shows you are able to compete. 

If you were beating most teams in the conference and splitting with the top teams, you would be dominant. 

 

Not here to pick on you or Mikey. I think, ultimately, this argument boils down to who you want to be competitive with, as I've alluded to multiple times. 

.

.

.

Having said that, the word "competitive" is defined as follows: 😁

Dictionary (Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more)

com·pet·i·tive
/kəmˈpedədiv/

adjective
adjective: competitive

1. relating to or characterized by competition. "a competitive sport"
Similar: ruthless, merciless, aggressive, fierce, dog-eat-dog, cutthroat
Opposite: gentlemanly

having or displaying a strong desire to be more successful than others. "she had a competitive streak"
Similar: ambitious, driven, vying, combative, contentious, aggressive, insistent, driving, pushing, zealous, keen, pushy, go-ahead
Opposite: apathetic

2. as good as or better than others of a comparable nature. "a car industry competitive with any in the world"

(of prices) low enough to compare well with those of rival merchants. "we offer prompt service at competitive rates"

[cbo 8,898]

16 minutes ago, tsande07 said:

Not here to pick on you or Mikey. I think, ultimately, this argument boils down to who you want to be competitive with, as I've alluded to multiple times. 

.
2. as good as or better than others of a comparable nature. "a car industry competitive with any in the world"
 

I'm sorry, but it doesn't boil down to who we want to be competitive with. We are talking about what that word means. You can't pile on someone who says that 8-5 is competitive. That doesn't make sense to me. 

Your second definition, highlighted here, is exactly my point. If you are 50/50 in the SEC, you are "as good as ... others of a comparable nature."

I like you and your posts and I'm sorry if I'm being pedantic or obnoxious. Wouldn't be the first time. But I just cant see it any other way. 

And again, it doesn't matter because everyone here wants better. You can look up a million posts where I wanted Gus fired before he was. I am not a Gus defender. Auburn deserves better than 8-5. 

[bigbird 60,963]

Squinting at competition or squinting at depth, it doesn't matter. When you have to significantly and repeatedly contort an argument to narrowly define a common understood concept, then there really isn't much debate.

[cbo 8,898]

24 minutes ago, bigbird said:

Squinting at competition or squinting at depth, it doesn't matter. When you have to significantly and repeatedly contort an argument to narrowly define a common understood concept, then there really isn't much debate.

Bird, you know I respect and appreciate and even like you. You have forgotten more about football than I will ever know. I think I get what you are saying here, but I'll admit I'm not sure. 

So let's dumb it down and maybe put a pointless argument to bed. Who do you think was the better coach for Auburn? Gus or Harsin?

[bigbird 60,963]

5 minutes ago, cbo said:

Bird, you know I respect and appreciate and even like you. You have forgotten more about football than I will ever know. I think I get what you are saying here, but I'll admit I'm not sure. 

So let's dumb it down and maybe put a pointless argument to bed. Who do you think was the better coach for Auburn? Gus or Harsin?

I think Gus is the better man and better ambassador. I believe Harsin is trash but has a better vision and process. I believe Gus damaged the program far more than Harsin has and with more long reaching consequences.

[cbo 8,898]

1 minute ago, bigbird said:

I think Gus is the better man and better ambassador. I believe Harsin is trash but a better "coach". I believe Gus damaged the program far more than Harsin has and with more long reaching consequences.

Do you think Gus damaged the program more because he had more time?

[bigbird 60,963]

12 minutes ago, cbo said:

Do you think Gus damaged the program more because he had more time?

I think time will always exacerbate something going wrong.  Gus and the team were going in the wrong direction since TAMU '14.  

His roster management, across the entirety, is why we are here.  CBH hasn't fixed it or done much to address it, so he's perpetuating it, but the reason we are sol low isn't on CBH.

Arguably QB is by far the most important position. Look at the QBs Gus recruited. Moseley, Frasier, White, Woody, Willis, Garrett, Queen, JF3, etc.

The OL and Wr moves were just as perplexing.  Offensively, we suck and our talent is worse. As of now, it seems that RB is the only positive on O

The other aspect that has put us so far down is the atrocious retention rate Gus had with his teams. He bring in top 15 teams, but routinely a 1/3 would never play before leaving.