Damn we sucked....

[Buzz Killington]

Yeah, that's the ticket!

Just ask my wife...Morgan Fairchild!

[Saniflush]

Just ask my wife...Morgan Fairchild!

Speaking of, I would still hit that a lick as well!

http://www.morganfairchild.com/photos.htm

[Buzz Killington]

Speaking of, I would still hit that a lick as well!

http://www.morganfairchild.com/photos.htm

Good God, yes!

[GH2001]

Speaking of, I would still hit that a lick as well!

http://www.morganfairchild.com/photos.htm

Good grief, yes. Ive always loved her boobies.

[dallaswareagle]

Good grief, yes. Ive always loved her boobies.

Good God, yes!

There getting closer to her pussy.

[Godfather]

This is the football forum and basketball doesn't start for months.

This might be your strongest hustle...evah!

[Godfather]

Incorrect.

The MSU Game was on the list too. 


Watching that game terrified me.  Trotter was sporadic (way the fuck better than anything we saw from Moseley subsequently) but sporadic.  Still we scored 41 points but had to hold them off at the end. 

We've gotten used to scoring points in bundles.  Even with Chris Todd, even with B Trotter. 

When we DON'T score points in bundles?  We get our ass handed to us on a shiny silver platter. 

Since the Chiz/Malz train arrived, our point totals in losses are as follows:

2009: 23, 14, 10, 24, 21 (five lowest totals of the year).  In those games we got out hammered by a total of 61 points.  Even so, most of those games were competitive.  The only rapings were at LSU and Arkansas.

2010:  Blessed perfection.

2011: 24, 14, 10, 7, 14 (again the five lowest totals of the year).  Point difference? 139.  Raped by LSU, Bama, Georgia, Arkansas. 

We only gave up 216 TOTAL points in 2008 and still went 5-7.  Gave up 376 last year. 

New OC isn't going to put 450-500 points on the board.  Be lucky to rack up 350. 

Going to need the defense to limit the opposition to 300 or less to be anywhere close to where we hope we can be.  That's a big burden.

One day y'all will learn.

[Saniflush]

This might be your strongest hustle...evah!

That's not really saying all that much.

[Godfather]

That's not really saying all that much.

For a guy so in shape, you would think it would though.

[Snaggletiger]

For a guy so in shape, you would think it would though.

I got passion in my pants and I ain't afraid to show it.
 

[Buzz Killington]

I got passion in my pants and I ain't afraid to show it.

So, that's what she replaced them with?

[Snaggletiger]

So, that's what she replaced them with?

[Godfather]

He's pretty hung for a eunuch.

[Kaos]

At least both of the games we made the list for are W's.

Also, I understand K's need for "cautious negativity", but I don't really understand the point you're trying to make. You do realize we have a new defensive coordinator too, right? One that, from all accounts so far, is an improvement over Roof by leaps and bounds.

No negativity.  You people need to yank your fucking panties off your head. 

Merely made a point. 

The defense gave up 376 total points last year.  If it makes a significant improvement and shaves 76 points off that total -- essentially a touchdown a game improvement over the year -- you'd have to consider that good. 

I'd love to think that it could reverse the same kind of trend that occurred when Roof came in and flip from 376 points back to 220 or so.  That's a 12 point per game improvement which would be huge.  Is that possible?  Who knows?  I sure don't. 

Before Roof, no Auburn defense had EVER given up 300 points in a season.  All three of his did.  So let's say Van Gorder IS able to slice it back to under 300.  Let's say he can knock it back by 10 points per game.  Thats 246 for the year.  Over 13 games?    Still have to cover 18 points per. 

Based on what I saw in the MSU and Utah State games I'd be really happy with a defense that gave up ten points per game less. 

So let's look at the offense for a minute.  While we all agree that Roof's defense was statistically the worst we've ever seen, we also have to agree that Malzahn's was the MOST productive in Auburn history. 

Is it realistic to expect the new OC -- who is admittedly not as "wide open" and more traditional than Gus -- to post 34 points per game as Gus did over three years (and with Todd/Moseley/Trotter for two of those)? 

For three years we've relied on offense to bail out the defense.  Can we count on that any longer?  Don't think anybody knows. 

The point was that if even if the defense makes what anybody in their right mind would consider SIGNIFICANT improvement -- ten points per game -- the offense may still have to bear an undue burden. 

And if the offense isn't prolific, even a significant improvement by the defense may not make a major change in the outcomes. 

It's just an observation, it's not negative or positive. 

I'd love to say I'm confident AU will win ten or more (or by the same token be confident enough to say we'd lose five). 

There's just too much we don't know on BOTH sides of the ball to do that.  Only saying that while it's reasonable to expect the defense to be better than the worst we've ever seen, it's also reasonable to expect the offense to slip some from the best we've ever seen.  We hope the defense improves drastically while we also hope the offense doesn't suffer a dropoff at all.  Maybe it happens that way. 

 How much one improves versus how much the other slips is the answer nobody has. 

[Godfather]

I take offense!



I like panties on my head.

[Godfather]

No negativity.  You people need to yank your fucking panties off your head. 

Merely made a point. 

The defense gave up 376 total points last year.  If it makes a significant improvement and shaves 76 points off that total -- essentially a touchdown a game improvement over the year -- you'd have to consider that good. 

I'd love to think that it could reverse the same kind of trend that occurred when Roof came in and flip from 376 points back to 220 or so.  That's a 12 point per game improvement which would be huge.  Is that possible?  Who knows?  I sure don't. 

Before Roof, no Auburn defense had EVER given up 300 points in a season.  All three of his did.  So let's say Van Gorder IS able to slice it back to under 300.  Let's say he can knock it back by 10 points per game.  Thats 246 for the year.  Over 13 games?    Still have to cover 18 points per. 

Based on what I saw in the MSU and Utah State games I'd be really happy with a defense that gave up ten points per game less. 

So let's look at the offense for a minute.  While we all agree that Roof's defense was statistically the worst we've ever seen, we also have to agree that Malzahn's was the MOST productive in Auburn history. 

Is it realistic to expect the new OC -- who is admittedly not as "wide open" and more traditional than Gus -- to post 34 points per game as Gus did over three years (and with Todd/Moseley/Trotter for two of those)? 

For three years we've relied on offense to bail out the defense.  Can we count on that any longer?  Don't think anybody knows. 

The point was that if even if the defense makes what anybody in their right mind would consider SIGNIFICANT improvement -- ten points per game -- the offense may still have to bear an undue burden. 

And if the offense isn't prolific, even a significant improvement by the defense may not make a major change in the outcomes. 

It's just an observation, it's not negative or positive. 

I'd love to say I'm confident AU will win ten or more (or by the same token be confident enough to say we'd lose five). 

There's just too much we don't know on BOTH sides of the ball to do that.  Only saying that while it's reasonable to expect the defense to be better than the worst we've ever seen, it's also reasonable to expect the offense to slip some from the best we've ever seen.  We hope the defense improves drastically while we also hope the offense doesn't suffer a dropoff at all.  Maybe it happens that way. 

 How much one improves versus how much the other slips is the answer nobody has.

I don't know what all this means, I just wants the score to be 1 more than the other team has.

[GH2001]

No negativity.  You people need to yank your fucking panties off your head. 

Merely made a point. 

The defense gave up 376 total points last year.  If it makes a significant improvement and shaves 76 points off that total -- essentially a touchdown a game improvement over the year -- you'd have to consider that good. 

I'd love to think that it could reverse the same kind of trend that occurred when Roof came in and flip from 376 points back to 220 or so.  That's a 12 point per game improvement which would be huge.  Is that possible?  Who knows?  I sure don't. 

Before Roof, no Auburn defense had EVER given up 300 points in a season.  All three of his did.  So let's say Van Gorder IS able to slice it back to under 300.  Let's say he can knock it back by 10 points per game.  Thats 246 for the year.  Over 13 games?    Still have to cover 18 points per. 

Based on what I saw in the MSU and Utah State games I'd be really happy with a defense that gave up ten points per game less. 

So let's look at the offense for a minute.  While we all agree that Roof's defense was statistically the worst we've ever seen, we also have to agree that Malzahn's was the MOST productive in Auburn history. 

Is it realistic to expect the new OC -- who is admittedly not as "wide open" and more traditional than Gus -- to post 34 points per game as Gus did over three years (and with Todd/Moseley/Trotter for two of those)? 

For three years we've relied on offense to bail out the defense.  Can we count on that any longer?  Don't think anybody knows. 

The point was that if even if the defense makes what anybody in their right mind would consider SIGNIFICANT improvement -- ten points per game -- the offense may still have to bear an undue burden. 

And if the offense isn't prolific, even a significant improvement by the defense may not make a major change in the outcomes. 

It's just an observation, it's not negative or positive. 

I'd love to say I'm confident AU will win ten or more (or by the same token be confident enough to say we'd lose five). 

There's just too much we don't know on BOTH sides of the ball to do that.  Only saying that while it's reasonable to expect the defense to be better than the worst we've ever seen, it's also reasonable to expect the offense to slip some from the best we've ever seen.  We hope the defense improves drastically while we also hope the offense doesn't suffer a dropoff at all.  Maybe it happens that way. 

 How much one improves versus how much the other slips is the answer nobody has.

I like to give Gene credit in 2 areas that we don't often think about:

1. He knew we needed a jump start when he was hired. Enter the Spread NH offense of Gus. Gene rode the spread when it was right. We did very well with it, especially under Cam. It helped attract skill player recruits and build a base. But it has a lifespan in our league and he knew this. As Kenny Rogers said, know when to hold em and know when to fold em. Gene knew when to use it and when to throw it to the curb. He knew that his chances for longterm success in the SEC were better under the philisophy we have now - Pro Style O, Van Gorder D.

2. He also is willing to let go of coaches who aren't performing (Roof and Lolley). Roof was given A mulligan. Once it was up? GONE. He makes the changes needed WHEN they are needed. This one is a very welcome tactic. Tubs proved that being too nice a guy with your assts can cost you your ass. Gene isn't making the same mistakes. Not trying to knock Tubs here and worship CGC but this is something I really had issue with.

[Godfather]

As Kenny Rogers said, know when to hold em and know when to fold em. Gene knew when to use it and when to throw it to the curb.

I thought he said we need $200k but we will take $180k

[AU_Tiger_2000]

I thought he said we need $200k but we will take $180k

$200k?  I call that a damn good investment.

[Saniflush]

I thought he said we need $200k but we will take $180k

his chicken is expensive.