How do you feel

[LPTiger 5,533]

How do you feel about the silence surrounding the Hunter and Wilky situations?   As fans, many of us want to know as much as possible as soon as possible.   I am pleased that there is silence in these situations.   In Hunter's situation there is no benefit to us in telling Cal to prepare for or don't prepare for Hunter.  If Cal spends any time preparing for him and he doesn't play, that is good for us.   If they don't spend preparing for him and he does play, that is even better.   On Wilky, let's let the criminal justice system figure out what the facts are and what if any punishment should be administered, and then CHF can react.  I don't see a compelling need to address it until that point.   Maybe more important the silence shows me that the department is under control and is pushing/pulling in the same direction.   The absence of leaks is a good thing IMO. 

[gr82be 15,021]

I feel like the topic(s) need to be dropped until a statement comes out from someone in the Athletic Department. It's like the old saying, information is on a need to know basis and they obviously don't feel like everyone needs to know. 

[W.E.D 11,071]

I mean, I'd prefer to know everything and have al the details.  No news is probably good news.  It's okay to sweep s*** under the rug and protect our kids vs tossing them out at the first sign of screw up. Now, there is a quick line that this can fall off...just gotta do well

[cbo 8,960]

I'm fine with the silence on Hunter since it benefits us.

But I think it's odd. I don't remember a star player being out without any explanation. I could easily be wrong on that so feel free to correct me. 

[TitanTiger 21,558]

1 hour ago, LPTiger said:

How do you feel about the silence surrounding the Hunter and Wilky situations?   As fans, many of us want to know as much as possible as soon as possible.   I am pleased that there is silence in these situations.   In Hunter's situation there is no benefit to us in telling Cal to prepare for or don't prepare for Hunter.  If Cal spends any time preparing for him and he doesn't play, that is good for us.   If they don't spend preparing for him and he does play, that is even better.   On Wilky, let's let the criminal justice system figure out what the facts are and what if any punishment should be administered, and then CHF can react.  I don't see a compelling need to address it until that point.   Maybe more important the silence shows me that the department is under control and is pushing/pulling in the same direction.   The absence of leaks is a good thing IMO. 

It's not the sort of thing where anything is gained for Auburn or the players involved by litigating the details of it in public.  It's best for it to be handled internally with those relevant to the situations knowing the details and the press (and fans) to be left with nothing but rumor and vapor to go on.  

[80Tiger 907]

1 hour ago, LPTiger said:

How do you feel about the silence surrounding the Hunter and Wilky situations?   As fans, many of us want to know as much as possible as soon as possible.   I am pleased that there is silence in these situations.   In Hunter's situation there is no benefit to us in telling Cal to prepare for or don't prepare for Hunter.  If Cal spends any time preparing for him and he doesn't play, that is good for us.   If they don't spend preparing for him and he does play, that is even better.   On Wilky, let's let the criminal justice system figure out what the facts are and what if any punishment should be administered, and then CHF can react.  I don't see a compelling need to address it until that point.   Maybe more important the silence shows me that the department is under control and is pushing/pulling in the same direction.   The absence of leaks is a good thing IMO. 

 The Hunter situation has been talked about in the media for a while so no statement is fine. As for how Cal prepares for AU running game, IMO is no different on whether Hunter plays or not. They are more than likely looking at schemes, and personnel packages. While Hunter is a good back, I don't think he is the type that you scheme your defense around. Cal is probably more worried about the depth of AU running backs.

I believe there should be some type statement about Wilky acknowledging that AU is aware and will respond in more detail when more is known.

 

[GreenTiger 1,068]

It’s my understanding that this is a Title IX case. If that’s true then there should be very little information shared. 

[gr82b4au 5,583]

I just want to win football games. All of the off field stuff only matters if we are not winning. 

[Viper 3,576]

3 hours ago, LPTiger said:

In Hunter's situation there is no benefit to us in telling Cal to prepare for or don't prepare for Hunter.  If Cal spends any time preparing for him and he doesn't play, that is good for us.   If they don't spend preparing for him and he does play, that is even better.

What does Hunter do specifically that the other backs don’t do? Run a little faster? Break a few more tackles? Jump a little higher?

Unless the back is named Marshall Faulk or LaDainian Tomlinson, who averaged 3-4 receptions per game, why would a defense need to prepare for a different back getting handoffs?

[JDUBB4AU 5,375]

Call me a downer here, but Hunter may not play again. I’m not saying this to fire anyone up , but the current state of sports in general with anything to do with this type of situation is never good for anyone specifically the athlete. I don’t know the whole story, but I’m not optimistic. 

[AUloggerhead 2,567]

3 hours ago, LPTiger said:

How do you feel about the silence surrounding the Hunter and Wilky situations?   As fans, many of us want to know as much as possible as soon as possible.   I am pleased that there is silence in these situations.   In Hunter's situation there is no benefit to us in telling Cal to prepare for or don't prepare for Hunter.  If Cal spends any time preparing for him and he doesn't play, that is good for us.   If they don't spend preparing for him and he does play, that is even better.   On Wilky, let's let the criminal justice system figure out what the facts are and what if any punishment should be administered, and then CHF can react.  I don't see a compelling need to address it until that point.   Maybe more important the silence shows me that the department is under control and is pushing/pulling in the same direction.   The absence of leaks is a good thing IMO. 

It's interesting that CHF has been lauded for being unusually forthright & avoiding coach speak regarding just about everything in any of his interviews.  Yet, when it comes to the Hunter situation ... crickets.  If Hunter is being punished with a x-number of games suspension for, I don't know -- conduct unbecoming (for lack of a better description,) then why not just say so? Or, if the incident is out of CHF's hands and Samford Hall will be making a decision then why not come out & say that as well?  I don't think I'm alone in thinking the silence surrounding the situation somewhat suspicious.  And this goes beyond general curiosity, especially considering the candor which CHF has demonstrated with every other question posed to him to date.   Denaud's situation involves a criminal charge and there's not a whole lot of information to disclose until it's resolved.  

[LPTiger 5,533]

3 hours ago, Viper said:

What does Hunter do specifically that the other backs don’t do? Run a little faster? Break a few more tackles? Jump a little higher?

Unless the back is named Marshall Faulk or LaDainian Tomlinson, who averaged 3-4 receptions per game, why would a defense need to prepare for a different back getting handoffs?

Backs do a lot more than simply take handoffs.  If a back is great in all phases of the game it doesn't really matter.  But, what if he isn't great at certain roles?  Knowing that helps you make the defensive calls and advise the players about plays they can eliminate.  So, if I were on Cal's staff and I thought Hunter might play, I have available to me 2 years worth of film I can review.   I would be looking at how involved is Hunter in the pass game?  Is he kept in to block always (even when there is no pressure -- which tells me he either can't release or can't catch which in turn tells me blitzing is less risky) or does he release.   If he releases does the QB not ever check down to him (which tells me he can't catch -again less risk in blitzing) or does the QB check to him and he becomes a real threat (which means I have to account for him on every pass play).   What is his screen game like.  Does it appear that he catches the ball well, puts it away quickly and becomes an effective runner on the edge after the catch (which increases the risk of blitzing).  Or does it seem he struggles to catch it and or immediately transition to a running back.   Do I watch 24 games and see we never even attempted a screen pass to him or only tried it 3 times (is that poor coaching or the kid simply can't run the play).   How is he in pass pro?  100% of the time he effectively blocked up a blitz or 50% of the time he can't block up the blitz. The answers to these questions helps you set your defense when he is in the game.   You also can see tendencies of where he is most effective carrying the ball.   The analytics are so much more advanced that you could ever imagine.   Of course, this is a different staff with different plays.   But, if there is a thought Hunter is playing the other side isn't simply looking to see if he runs a little faster, breaks more tackles or jumps higher.  

[LPTiger 5,533]

4 hours ago, GreenTiger said:

It’s my understanding that this is a Title IX case. If that’s true then there should be very little information shared. 

Based on what I know, I feel very comfortable saying it is not a law enforcement matter at this point.  So GreenT is correct that it is either a university matter i.e. a Title IX matter or it is a CHF matter.    As @JDUBB4AUnoted above with respect to the current state of sports on this topic and with CHF's past, one can envision a scenario where in one of the earliest team meetings coach Freeze addressed "here are the things that are going to quickly land you in your new head coach's dog house -- #1 any conduct that brings or has the capacity to bring dishonor to this University, players, coaches, staff or program -- so men I am telling you the best thing you can do is to wholly avoid putting any private aspect of your life that is in any shape, form or fashion, suspect, out there for the public to see.   Know who you are hanging out with.   You, and you alone, are responsible for the company you keep..... "  If it is a CHF matter, I respect him keeping it between just him and Jarquez.   We simply don't need to know.   If it is a Title IX matter, there are strict rules governing it, and as GreenT said there shouldn't be much of anything said about it.   I believe we see Jarquez dress Saturday.    

[aubiefifty 18,454]

3 hours ago, AUloggerhead said:

It's interesting that CHF has been lauded for being unusually forthright & avoiding coach speak regarding just about everything in any of his interviews.  Yet, when it comes to the Hunter situation ... crickets.  If Hunter is being punished with a x-number of games suspension for, I don't know -- conduct unbecoming (for lack of a better description,) then why not just say so? Or, if the incident is out of CHF's hands and Samford Hall will be making a decision then why not come out & say that as well?  I don't think I'm alone in thinking the silence surrounding the situation somewhat suspicious.  And this goes beyond general curiosity, especially considering the candor which CHF has demonstrated with every other question posed to him to date.   Denaud's situation involves a criminal charge and there's not a whole lot of information to disclose until it's resolved.  

freeze has a boss and he would look bad throwing the Ad under the bus. it might not matter in the big scheme of things but there is no need to embarrass the young man anymore than has already been done even if he did make a mistake.and no one is asking about all the others being involved either that i know of. thats my take for what it is worth.

[Chaotic_zx 1,070]

My take is this. It is none of my business. Yes, I'd like to know if Hunter is playing Saturday but on the other side, it makes no difference to me. I'd like for him to play but I'd also like to be able to take the higher ground when other teams sit their starters for a quarter against directional schools when the player breaks laws. Or nothing at all when they are a accomplice to murder. I'd like to think that Auburn is better. Other people are effected by actions of these players thumbing their noses at rules and authority. Those people effected need to know that these athletes will be held to account. Being in their position is a great privilege but with it comes responsibility. I don't subscribe to the thought that these athletes are children. I know some do but I don't. 

With that, I'd like to point out that Auburn is not in bad shape with regards to the RB room. Yes Hunter is very talented. His backups are as well. They on the other hand have not had the chance to shine yet. Hunter needs to take the consequences of the mistake he made and hope that his replacements don't make him irrelevant. I also really(badly) want to see him behind a competent offensive line. 

[bdc81 90]

8 hours ago, W.E.D said:

I mean, I'd prefer to know everything and have al the details.  No news is probably good news.  It's okay to sweep s*** under the rug and protect our kids vs tossing them out at the first sign of screw up. Now, there is a quick line that this can fall off...just gotta do well

Can you translate concisely

[Viper 3,576]

21 hours ago, LPTiger said:

Backs do a lot more than simply take handoffs.  If a back is great in all phases of the game it doesn't really matter.  But, what if he isn't great at certain roles?  Knowing that helps you make the defensive calls and advise the players about plays they can eliminate.  So, if I were on Cal's staff and I thought Hunter might play, I have available to me 2 years worth of film I can review.   I would be looking at how involved is Hunter in the pass game?  Is he kept in to block always (even when there is no pressure -- which tells me he either can't release or can't catch which in turn tells me blitzing is less risky) or does he release.   If he releases does the QB not ever check down to him (which tells me he can't catch -again less risk in blitzing) or does the QB check to him and he becomes a real threat (which means I have to account for him on every pass play).   What is his screen game like.  Does it appear that he catches the ball well, puts it away quickly and becomes an effective runner on the edge after the catch (which increases the risk of blitzing).  Or does it seem he struggles to catch it and or immediately transition to a running back.   Do I watch 24 games and see we never even attempted a screen pass to him or only tried it 3 times (is that poor coaching or the kid simply can't run the play).   How is he in pass pro?  100% of the time he effectively blocked up a blitz or 50% of the time he can't block up the blitz. The answers to these questions helps you set your defense when he is in the game.   You also can see tendencies of where he is most effective carrying the ball.   The analytics are so much more advanced that you could ever imagine.   Of course, this is a different staff with different plays.   But, if there is a thought Hunter is playing the other side isn't simply looking to see if he runs a little faster, breaks more tackles or jumps higher.  

We’re not talking the difference between Bo Jackson and The Lizard. The difference between Hunter & Alston in pass pro and screen game is minimal. Bottom line…it’s not enough for Justin Wilcox to spend an extra 15 mins of this week prepping for.

[aubiefifty 18,454]

i feel kinda sexy at the moment TP.............