Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: JR4AU on March 20, 2012, 04:27:09 PM

Title: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: JR4AU on March 20, 2012, 04:27:09 PM
I am pretty much convinced of my suspicion now that Chiz is trying to mimic the two current top programs in the conference style wise.  Clearly (to me anyway) these hires, and what they're being paid, indicate a sea change in philosophical approach.   Play defense, run the ball, pound the shit out of your opponent.   I am also convinced that Chiz did put a leash on Malzahn last year, and I don't think Malzahn liked that.  I all but heard him say it, not in so many words, but the words were clear enough.  I do, however, think it was the wise move by Chiz,  He realized our defense sucked major ass, and so did our QB, and I think it's when he decided the focus needed to be on defense.   You don't need Cam to make Malzahn's shit go, but you need more than 3 Fr. OL, a QB that has no business in the SEC, a QB who just won't pull the trigger, and a RB that has an attitude problem.  He's gone now though, so it matters not.

We know why Van Gorder was hired.  I think the OC search consisted of finding a guy that A: wasn't married to  the scheme de jure, B: was willing to be flexible and be a team player (IE not get a case of the red ass when Chiz tells him how he wants the overall offensive plan to be slow, deliberate, and conservative)  I bet he got plenty of "thanks but no thanks" in his OC search. 

Quote
March 8, 2012
Auburn releases salary information for Brian VanGorder, Scot Loeffler and Willie Martinez


he contract Brian VanGorder signed to become Auburn’s new defensive coordinator ties him with Alabama’s Kirby Smart as the highest-paid defensive coordinator in the nation, according to contracts released by Auburn Thursday.

VanGorder signed a two-year contract with a base salary of $850,000 to become the highest-paid assistant on Gene Chizik’s newly-constructed staff.

Offensive coordinator Scot Loeffler signed a two-year contract worth $500,000 per year. Loeffler’s base pay replaces the $500,000 salary Ted Roof made as Auburn’s defensive coordinator last season.

Each coordinator gets a $25,000 bonus for each season he completes.

Combined, the two new coordinators will make $1.35 million per year, only $50,000 more than former offensive coordinator Gus Malzahn made as the nation’s highest-paid assistant coach last season.

With the new salaries, Auburn will save $450,000 this season on coaching contracts, although the Tigers will still likely have one of the highest-paid staffs in the country.

According to USA Today, Auburn paid its assistant coaches $4.2 million last year, more than any other program in the country.

“It’s a huge part of the puzzle,” Chizik said in December. “When you talk about paying assistants these days, if you’re going to go out and hire assistants that have proven themselves by their body of work, it’s about market value.”

New secondary coach Willie Martinez was signed for $255,000 per year, the same salary the man he replaced, Phillip Lolley, made last year.

Martinez, the former defensive coordinator for five seasons at Georgia, is now tied for the lowest salary on Auburn’s staff with special teams coordinator Jay Boulware, but he did receive a raise of $3,500 from his last stop as the secondary coach at Oklahoma.





Read more here: http://www.wareagleextra.com/2012/03/08/auburn-releases-salary-information-for-brian-vangorder-scot-loeffler-and-willie-martinez/#storylink=cpy (http://www.wareagleextra.com/2012/03/08/auburn-releases-salary-information-for-brian-vangorder-scot-loeffler-and-willie-martinez/#storylink=cpy)
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: jmar on March 20, 2012, 09:10:06 PM
I wanted us to be unique...not an also ran...and I think any effort to copy the two is in vain . Goddammit this is Auburn recruiting against an already three deep Bama and LSU. We are behind the eight ball as it is in recruiting...not that we can't compete...we can but they are ALABAMA. We either are sold that we can outcoach or out- recruit them. We had the difference maker in Malzahn, we just needed to mature on the defensive side and get some larger LBs that can man-up and teach the cover guys to fucking cover.

I'm pulling for Pike, Just as I was pulling for Todd ...and it helps to have a large number of returning starters and a couple of tough-assed  RF linemen up front with the earthmover  Prosch on hand. But I don't see us equalling or bettering 8 wins without a change at QB. I realize we will have to endure the maturing process but I thnk a guy with a personality like Pike's is necessary to make it happen. I'm not anti-Frazier, I'm pro-Pike. And I only say this due to the handcuffing of Frazier. God forbid the kid can spray it around  effectively and run it too after we were led to believe he was a huge risk throwing the football.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: JR4AU on March 21, 2012, 08:21:57 AM
Scheme wise, I've said this, I don't care how we get it done, as long as we get it done.  But this is more about the long term direction of the program, not what offense or defense we're running.   It is sorta about "scheme" but not really.  That is to say, it looks like Chizik has elected to take the program in a direction to go toe to toe with bammer and LSU (and whoever else rises).  That means he intends to recruit to being able to simply overpower opponents straight on.

I actually think bringing in Malzahn was completely contrary to Chizik's style, but I think he saw recruiting needed a quick shot in the arm at Auburn.  Now we have momentum in recruiting, and I think he's wanting to get back to being a conservative defensive coach.

I get mixed opinions from Auburn fans, and I just don't know if this is a good move or not.  Some like the strategy.   Some think it's a recipe for disaster with the current state of the SEC, bammer, and the SECW.  They cite recruiting.  Saying that although we've recruited well, we've still been a step behind bammer and LSU overall.  They think it will leave us in a similar position to Ark.  Able to beat most, but never able to go toe to toe with programs that are on par with where bammer and LSU are now or where FL was a few years ago.   I can see that point of view, but not sure I agree that it will remain that way.

Just curious to get some thoughts on if it's a good move, or even if you don't see it as being headed that direction. 
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: GH2001 on March 21, 2012, 09:34:59 AM
I think it's a wise move as well. He saw the Spread being at the end of it's life at Auburn. We got our good out of it. Other teams were catching on and we didn't have the personnel to run it any longer effectively. Again, wise move. Defense wins Championships for the most part (unless you have Cam Newton). And technically, our D (mainly Fairley) did win the BCSCG.

Ive heard this many a times and it still rings true: when you can run the ball effectively, you control the tempo of the game. Bruising Running Game + Stout D = good things.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: djsimp on March 21, 2012, 09:43:46 AM
Ive heard this many a times and it still rings true: when you can run the ball effectively, you control the tempo of the game. Bruising Running Game + Stout D = good things.

This type of thinking is absurd.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: GH2001 on March 21, 2012, 09:44:48 AM
This type of thinking is absurd.

LSU said it would never work against them in a rematch.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: djsimp on March 21, 2012, 09:48:48 AM
LSU said it would never work against them in a rematch.

Well it didn't. They let bama win.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Godfather on March 21, 2012, 11:40:11 AM
I like the direction.  He simply solved the problem. We needed a coffin... Er, a coach. There were no Coaches available on Christmas Eve. Malzahn left for Arky State so he replaced it as best he could. Voilà.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Snaggletiger on March 21, 2012, 11:51:13 AM
I like the direction.  He simply solved the problem. We needed a coffin... Er, a coach. There were no Coaches available on Christmas Eve. Malzahn left for Arky State so he replaced it as best he could. Voilà.

Lebo has to go
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: GH2001 on March 21, 2012, 02:09:25 PM
Lebo has to go

I mean, we should have known he was trouble when he ran Markos Killingsworth off when we first hired him. Guy will never win in the SEC.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Godfather on March 21, 2012, 02:19:45 PM
:crickets:

Really, all I get is Snaggle's fail?   :blink:
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Snaggletiger on March 21, 2012, 03:03:25 PM
:crickets:

Really, all I get is Snaggle's fail?   :blink:

Most of us just move on and try harder the next time.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: JR4AU on March 21, 2012, 03:12:41 PM
:crickets:

Really, all I get is Snaggle's fail?   :blink:

Went right over my head.   :blink:
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Godfather on March 22, 2012, 10:27:23 AM
Went right over my head.   :blink:
Where do you think you're going? Nobody's leaving. Nobody's walking out on this fun, old-fashioned family forum. No, no. We're all in this together. This is a full-blown, four-alarm emergency here. We're gonna press on, and we're gonna have the hap, hap, happiest forum since Bing Crosby tap-danced with Danny fucking Kaye. And when Loeffler takes the field tomorrow, he's gonna find the jolliest bunch of assholes this side of the nuthouse.


Where are Sani and Wes? 

Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Saniflush on March 22, 2012, 02:48:16 PM
Where do you think you're going? Nobody's leaving. Nobody's walking out on this fun, old-fashioned family forum. No, no. We're all in this together. This is a full-blown, four-alarm emergency here. We're gonna press on, and we're gonna have the hap, hap, happiest forum since Bing Crosby tap-danced with Danny fucking Kaye. And when Loeffler takes the field tomorrow, he's gonna find the jolliest bunch of assholes this side of the nuthouse.


Where are Sani and Wes?
Rollercoasters make me sick.


Been in Cleveland all week trying to get to the bottom of our powdercoating problems.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Godfather on March 22, 2012, 03:21:23 PM
Been in Cleveland all week trying to get to the bottom of our powdercoating problems.

Oh the Crunch Enhancer? Yeah it's a non-nutritive steel varnish. It's semi-permeable. It's not osmotic. What it does is it coats and seals the steel, prevents the weather from penetrating it.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: GH2001 on March 22, 2012, 03:23:33 PM
Where do you think you're going? Nobody's leaving. Nobody's walking out on this fun, old-fashioned family forum. No, no. We're all in this together. This is a full-blown, four-alarm emergency here. We're gonna press on, and we're gonna have the hap, hap, happiest forum since Bing Crosby tap-danced with Danny fucking Kaye. And when Loeffler takes the field tomorrow, he's gonna find the jolliest bunch of assholes this side of the nuthouse.


Where are Sani and Wes?

Would have played along had I caught onto your first one. There was enough altered in it that it didn't sound familiar.

I'm late but.....

Fixed the newel post!
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: djsimp on March 22, 2012, 03:27:41 PM
Can I refill your eggnog for you? Get you something to eat? Drive you out to the middle of nowhere and leave you for dead?
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Godfather on March 22, 2012, 03:29:32 PM
No..no.

It's is much too late now.

Deductions have been noted.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: GH2001 on March 22, 2012, 03:34:26 PM
No..no.

It's is much too late now.

Deductions have been noted.

so no better late than never? That hurt.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: djsimp on March 22, 2012, 03:36:51 PM
so no better late than never? That hurt.

He is a bloodthirsty Czar.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Godfather on March 22, 2012, 03:38:40 PM
so no better late than never? That hurt.

Oh! Sure! Sure! You an' your excuses! Sani's off in the Bizarro World, Snaggle only calls when he wants something, an' I'm left sitting here like this plate of cold chicken, which, by the way, was, for two.
Title: Re: It may be a simplistic view, but I think this is a clue where we're headed.
Post by: Jumbo on March 23, 2012, 02:53:50 AM
I like the direction.  He simply solved the problem. We needed a coffin... Er, a coach. There were no Coaches available on Christmas Eve. Malzahn left for Arky State so he replaced it as best he could. Voilà.
This is just a real nice suprise. Just a real nice suprise.