Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Kaos on May 24, 2024, 11:57:18 AM
-
Forget being out because of Freeze. That’s still there but now I’m out in general.
The decision allowing schools to directly pay players pushes this game I’ve loved for 50+ years into a future that doesn’t interest me.
-
Forget being out because of Freeze. That’s still there but now I’m out in general.
The decision allowing schools to directly pay players pushes this game I’ve loved for 50+ years into a future that doesn’t interest me.
We’ll notify the appropriate parties…
-
I'm not out because I love the game too much. However, this truly is the beginning of the end. And it's going to implode quickly. 5 years from now, we won't even recognize the sport. Sad, but greed on all levels has killed it.
-
Forget being out because of Freeze. That’s still there but now I’m out in general.
The decision allowing schools to directly pay players pushes this game I’ve loved for 50+ years into a future that doesn’t interest me.
I haven’t researched this. What is different? Is it only that the school can pay the athlete rather than the NIL entity?
If so, why is that such a big blow (like Steve gives)? It’s just changing the path that the money follows.
So, what am I missing here? Are we certain that this is not just another “stay of my lawn” rant? If it is, I fully support it, btw. And I will definitely help you burn this motherfucker down.
Come on, Pookie.
-
Forget being out because of Freeze. That’s still there but now I’m out in general.
The decision allowing schools to directly pay players pushes this game I’ve loved for 50+ years into a future that doesn’t interest me.
It’s still Auburn. Not life or death. Just a school and town we love. Come on, Pookie.
-
We’ll notify the appropriate parties…
Pretty sure this is the 335th "I'm out!" declaration.
-
So many questions about this....
Do schools have a salary cap? Is it by sport or by school? Is there a base salary per player? How's that work for non-revenue sports? Does a baseball player on a 1/4 athletic scholarship make the same as a women's golf player who is on a 1/2 athletic scholarship? Do scholarships get revoked and tuition/fees paid out of your salary? Will schools cut sports that are losing money? Will there still be roster limits or can a school like Alabama just pay players to keep them on the bench so they can't play for rivals? Will Title IX equalize pay for women/men players? Will players get bonuses (for post season, or individual accolades)?
And then there's the tax implications... I travel for work (or used to before COVID). I might support a client in California and New York in the same year, and any work I do on site for that client, I pay state taxes for the work done while on site. So, these players "should" be in the same boat. You play for Michigan, well, that's fine, but you're paying taxes in Michigan, Ohio, Nebraska, and Minnesota this year.
I've always been the type of person to really limit my criticism of student athletes - they are kids on scholarship after all.. But if a College QB is getting paid 1M a year, I'm going to critique him like I do the QB of an NFL team.
And how much will tickets go up to offset the cost? I stopped giving to Auburn years ago, because of NIL. I refuse to donate to an organization who will just hand it over to student athletes so they can go buy a new car. At least when I was giving to the TUF, the money (allegedly) went to scholarships.
-
I haven’t researched this. What is different? Is it only that the school can pay the athlete rather than the NIL entity?
If so, why is that such a big blow (like Steve gives)? It’s just changing the path that the money follows.
So, what am I missing here? Are we certain that this is not just another “stay of my lawn” rant? If it is, I fully support it, btw. And I will definitely help you burn this motherfucker down.
Come on, Pookie.
What it means is these kids are now employees. No way around it. That means a lot of things, including mandatory workers comp coverage. In Alabama, it's a lifetime medical benefit, which means any injury, no matter how slight or severe, is compensable, and if a player gets his knee busted up, the school is on the hook for that treatment until he dies.
Even if there's a way around the WC, the next step is unionization, Players Associations, strikes, lockouts etc.
That's not being Chicken Little. Think about how much has changed in the last 3-4 years alone. It's the players who have been suing for a piece of the pie, and now they've got it. The NIL, I get. Fine with that.
But, make no mistake, the players are running the show from here on out, and they're going to want more and more.
-
from CBS Sports. Long, but the first few paragraphs will give you the 411
The NCAA and the nation's five biggest conferences have agreed to pay nearly $2.8 billion to settle a host of antitrust claims,a monumental decision that sets the stage for a groundbreaking revenue-sharing model that could start directing millions of dollars directly to athletes as soon as the 2025 fall semester.
The Pac-12 became the final conference to sign off on the proposal Thursday when its university leaders voted to approve, according to a person with direct knowledge of the results.
The Southeastern Conference presidents and chancellors unanimously approved the deal earlier Thursday, another person with knowledge of that decision told The Associated Press. Both spoke spoke on condition of anonymity.
The Big Ten, Big 12 and Atlantic Coast Conference voted to approve earlier in the week ahead of a Thursday deadline given by the plaintiffs' attorneys.
NCAA President Charlie Baker and the commissioners of the five conferences released a joint statement Thursday evening acknowledging the settlement, calling it "an important step in the continuing reform of college sports that will provide benefits to student-athletes and provide clarity in college athletics across all divisions for years to come."
"All of Division I made today's progress possible, and we all have work to do to implement the terms of the agreement as the legal process continues," the statement read. "We look forward to working with our various student-athlete leadership groups to write the next chapter of college sports." Translation: Future Players Association
The deal still must be approved by the federal judge overseeing the case and challenges could arise, but if the agreement stands it will mark the beginning of a new era in college sports where athletes are compensated more like professionals and schools can compete for talent using direct payments.
The details in the plan signal the end of the NCAA's bedrock amateurism model that dates to its founding in 1906. Indeed, the days of NCAA punishments for athletes driving booster-provided cars started vanishing three years ago when the organization lifted restrictions on endorsement deals backed by so-called name, image and likeness money.
Now it is not far-fetched to look ahead to seasons where a star quarterback or top prospect on a college basketball team are not only cashing in big-money NIL deals but have a $100,000 school payment in the bank to play.
There are a host of details still to be determined, but the agreement calls for the NCAA and the conferences to pay $2.77 billion over 10 years to more than 14,000 former and current college athletes who say now-defunct rules prevented them from earning money from endorsement and sponsorship deals dating to 2016.
Some of that money will come from NCAA reserve funds and insurance but even though the lawsuit specifically targeted five conferences that are comprised of 69 schools (including Notre Dame), dozens of other NCAA member schools will see smaller distributions from the NCAA to cover the mammoth payout.
Schools in the Big Ten, Big 12, Atlantic Coast and Southeastern conferences will end up bearing the brunt of the settlement at a cost of about $300 million each over 10 years, the majority of which will be paid to athletes going forward.
The Pac-12 is also part of the settlement, with all 12 sharing responsibility even though Washington State and Oregon State will be the only league members left by this fall after the other 10 schools leave.
In the new compensation model, each school will be permitted but not required to set aside up to $21 million in revenue to share with athletes per year, though as revenues rise so could the cap.
Athletes in all sports would be eligible for payments and schools would be given the freedom to decide how that money is divvied up among sports programs. Scholarship limits by sport will be replaced by roster restrictions.
Whether the new compensation model is subject to the Title IX gender equity law is unknown along with whether schools will be able to bring NIL activities in-house as they hope and squeeze out the booster-run collectives that have sprouted up in the last few years to pay athletes. Both topics could lead to more lawsuits.
The class-action federal lawsuit at the center of the settlement, House v. the NCAA, was set to go to trial in January. The complaint, brought by former Arizona State swimmer Grant House and Sedona Prince, a former Oregon and current TCU basketball player, said the NCAA, along with the five wealthiest conferences, improperly barred athletes from earning endorsement money.
The suit also made the case that athletes were entitled to a piece of the billions of dollars the NCAA and those conferences earn from media rights agreements with television networks.
Amid political and public pressure, and facing the prospect of another court loss that some in college sports claimed could reach $20 billion in damages, NCAA and conference officials conceded on what has long been a core principal of the enterprise: That schools don't directly pay the athletes to play beyond a scholarship.
That principle had already been dented numerous times over the last decade.
Notably, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the NCAA in 2021 in a case related to education-related benefits. The narrow focus of the Alston case didn't collapse the collegiate sports system, but the strong rebuke of the NCAA's model of amateurism flung the door open to more lawsuits. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a former Yale athlete, put it bluntly: "The bottom line is that the NCAA and its member colleges are suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year."
The settlement is expected to cover two other antitrust cases facing the NCAA and major conferences that challenge athlete compensation rules. Hubbard vs. the NCAA and Carter vs. the NCAA are also currently in front of judges in the Northern District of California.
A fourth case, Fontenot vs, NCAA, creates a potential complication as it remains in a Colorado court after a judge denied a request to combine it with Carter. Whether Fontenot becomes part of the settlement is unknown and it matters because the NCAA and its conferences don't want to be on the hook for more damages should they lose in court.
"We're going to continue to litigate our case in Colorado and look forward to hearing about the terms of a settlement proposal once they're actually released and put in front of a court," said George Zelcs, a plaintiffs' attorney in Fontenot.
The solution agreed to in the settlement is landmark, but not surprising. College sports has been trending in this direction for years, with athletes receiving more and more monetary benefits and rights they say were long overdue.
In December, Baker, the former Massachusetts governor who has been on the job for 14 months, proposed creating a new tier of Division I athletics where the schools with the most resources would be required to pay at least half their athletes $30,000 per year. That suggestion, along with many other possibilities, remain under discussion.
The settlement does not make every issue facing college sports go away. There is still a question of whether athletes should be deemed employees of their schools, something Baker and other college sports leaders are fighting against.
Some type of federal legislation or antitrust exemption is likely still needed to codify the terms of the settlement, protect the NCAA from future litigation and pre-empt state laws that attempt to neuter the organization's authority. As it is, the NCAA is still facing lawsuits that challenge its ability to govern itself, including setting rules limiting multiple-time transfers.
Federal lawmakers have indicated they would like to get something done, but while several bills have been introduced none have gone anywhere.
Despite the unanswered questions, one thing is clear: Major college athletics is about to become more like professional sports than ever before.
-
What it means is these kids are now employees. No way around it. That means a lot of things, including mandatory workers comp coverage. In Alabama, it's a lifetime medical benefit, which means any injury, no matter how slight or severe, is compensable, and if a player gets his knee busted up, the school is on the hook for that treatment until he dies.
Even if there's a way around the WC, the next step is unionization, Players Associations, strikes, lockouts etc.
That's not being Chicken Little. Think about how much has changed in the last 3-4 years alone. It's the players who have been suing for a piece of the pie, and now they've got it. The NIL, I get. Fine with that.
But, make no mistake, the players are running the show from here on out, and they're going to want more and more.
Ok this makes sense, which is very unusual for you. And this sounds like a negative for college athletics but as long as it applies to everyone, it’s something that is navigable. If it was only some teams then I’d be more concerned. We’ve already seen major shifts in the game. I loved the 1985 game more but it is what it is.
I’m capable of adapting unlike many of you very old and antiquated people.
I’m open minded. Not as much as Wes, no. He’s a little over the top with it, which is a high jump for him.
-
So. If we go play a team in California, will they be able to tax the players like they do in the NFL?
-
Don't think we'll be hearing the word parity again like we did over the last 25 years.
-
Pretty sure this is the 335th "I'm out!" declaration.
We wish your deddy had made the 336th one.
-
So many questions about this....
Do schools have a salary cap? Is it by sport or by school? Is there a base salary per player? How's that work for non-revenue sports? Does a baseball player on a 1/4 athletic scholarship make the same as a women's golf player who is on a 1/2 athletic scholarship? Do scholarships get revoked and tuition/fees paid out of your salary? Will schools cut sports that are losing money? Will there still be roster limits or can a school like Alabama just pay players to keep them on the bench so they can't play for rivals? Will Title IX equalize pay for women/men players? Will players get bonuses (for post season, or individual accolades)?
And then there's the tax implications... I travel for work (or used to before COVID). I might support a client in California and New York in the same year, and any work I do on site for that client, I pay state taxes for the work done while on site. So, these players "should" be in the same boat. You play for Michigan, well, that's fine, but you're paying taxes in Michigan, Ohio, Nebraska, and Minnesota this year.
I've always been the type of person to really limit my criticism of student athletes - they are kids on scholarship after all.. But if a College QB is getting paid 1M a year, I'm going to critique him like I do the QB of an NFL team.
And how much will tickets go up to offset the cost? I stopped giving to Auburn years ago, because of NIL. I refuse to donate to an organization who will just hand it over to student athletes so they can go buy a new car. At least when I was giving to the TUF, the money (allegedly) went to scholarships.
Do you expect anyone to read all of this? It’s not Snag’s level but it’s entirely too TL;DR. And I say this as a friend. You’re a much better poster than most but this was uncalled for. Cliff Notes, my man. We are all busy people.
-
So. If we go play a team in California, will they be able to tax the players like they do in the NFL?
Fucking kneelers.
-
Do you expect anyone to read all of this? It’s not Snag’s level but it’s entirely too TL;DR. And I say this as a friend. You’re a much better poster than most but this was uncalled for. Cliff Notes, my man. We are all busy people.
My bad. Let me make a Wiregrass-esqe version…
“What the fuck is going to happen to the teams?
And Wes is short.”
-
My bad. Let me make a Wiregrass-esqe version…
“What the fuck is going to happen to the teams?
And Wes is short.”
I like you, sir. You don’t say much but when you do, you get right to the point.
-
My bad. Let me make a Wiregrass-esqe version…
“What the fuck is going to happen to the teams?
And Wes is short.”
This is absolutely perfect. I honestly believe you may have just made the best post in the history of the x (formerly known as Twitter). I am proud of you.
-
from CBS Sports. Long, but the first few paragraphs will give you the 411
The NCAA and the nation's five biggest conferences have agreed to pay nearly $2.8 billion to settle a host of antitrust claims,a monumental decision that sets the stage for a groundbreaking revenue-sharing model that could start directing millions of dollars directly to athletes as soon as the 2025 fall semester.
The Pac-12 became the final conference to sign off on the proposal Thursday when its university leaders voted to approve, according to a person with direct knowledge of the results.
The Southeastern Conference presidents and chancellors unanimously approved the deal earlier Thursday, another person with knowledge of that decision told The Associated Press. Both spoke spoke on condition of anonymity.
The Big Ten, Big 12 and Atlantic Coast Conference voted to approve earlier in the week ahead of a Thursday deadline given by the plaintiffs' attorneys.
NCAA President Charlie Baker and the commissioners of the five conferences released a joint statement Thursday evening acknowledging the settlement, calling it "an important step in the continuing reform of college sports that will provide benefits to student-athletes and provide clarity in college athletics across all divisions for years to come."
"All of Division I made today's progress possible, and we all have work to do to implement the terms of the agreement as the legal process continues," the statement read. "We look forward to working with our various student-athlete leadership groups to write the next chapter of college sports." Translation: Future Players Association
The deal still must be approved by the federal judge overseeing the case and challenges could arise, but if the agreement stands it will mark the beginning of a new era in college sports where athletes are compensated more like professionals and schools can compete for talent using direct payments.
The details in the plan signal the end of the NCAA's bedrock amateurism model that dates to its founding in 1906. Indeed, the days of NCAA punishments for athletes driving booster-provided cars started vanishing three years ago when the organization lifted restrictions on endorsement deals backed by so-called name, image and likeness money.
Now it is not far-fetched to look ahead to seasons where a star quarterback or top prospect on a college basketball team are not only cashing in big-money NIL deals but have a $100,000 school payment in the bank to play.
There are a host of details still to be determined, but the agreement calls for the NCAA and the conferences to pay $2.77 billion over 10 years to more than 14,000 former and current college athletes who say now-defunct rules prevented them from earning money from endorsement and sponsorship deals dating to 2016.
Some of that money will come from NCAA reserve funds and insurance but even though the lawsuit specifically targeted five conferences that are comprised of 69 schools (including Notre Dame), dozens of other NCAA member schools will see smaller distributions from the NCAA to cover the mammoth payout.
Schools in the Big Ten, Big 12, Atlantic Coast and Southeastern conferences will end up bearing the brunt of the settlement at a cost of about $300 million each over 10 years, the majority of which will be paid to athletes going forward.
The Pac-12 is also part of the settlement, with all 12 sharing responsibility even though Washington State and Oregon State will be the only league members left by this fall after the other 10 schools leave.
In the new compensation model, each school will be permitted but not required to set aside up to $21 million in revenue to share with athletes per year, though as revenues rise so could the cap.
Athletes in all sports would be eligible for payments and schools would be given the freedom to decide how that money is divvied up among sports programs. Scholarship limits by sport will be replaced by roster restrictions.
Whether the new compensation model is subject to the Title IX gender equity law is unknown along with whether schools will be able to bring NIL activities in-house as they hope and squeeze out the booster-run collectives that have sprouted up in the last few years to pay athletes. Both topics could lead to more lawsuits.
The class-action federal lawsuit at the center of the settlement, House v. the NCAA, was set to go to trial in January. The complaint, brought by former Arizona State swimmer Grant House and Sedona Prince, a former Oregon and current TCU basketball player, said the NCAA, along with the five wealthiest conferences, improperly barred athletes from earning endorsement money.
The suit also made the case that athletes were entitled to a piece of the billions of dollars the NCAA and those conferences earn from media rights agreements with television networks.
Amid political and public pressure, and facing the prospect of another court loss that some in college sports claimed could reach $20 billion in damages, NCAA and conference officials conceded on what has long been a core principal of the enterprise: That schools don't directly pay the athletes to play beyond a scholarship.
That principle had already been dented numerous times over the last decade.
Notably, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the NCAA in 2021 in a case related to education-related benefits. The narrow focus of the Alston case didn't collapse the collegiate sports system, but the strong rebuke of the NCAA's model of amateurism flung the door open to more lawsuits. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a former Yale athlete, put it bluntly: "The bottom line is that the NCAA and its member colleges are suppressing the pay of student athletes who collectively generate billions of dollars in revenues for colleges every year."
The settlement is expected to cover two other antitrust cases facing the NCAA and major conferences that challenge athlete compensation rules. Hubbard vs. the NCAA and Carter vs. the NCAA are also currently in front of judges in the Northern District of California.
A fourth case, Fontenot vs, NCAA, creates a potential complication as it remains in a Colorado court after a judge denied a request to combine it with Carter. Whether Fontenot becomes part of the settlement is unknown and it matters because the NCAA and its conferences don't want to be on the hook for more damages should they lose in court.
"We're going to continue to litigate our case in Colorado and look forward to hearing about the terms of a settlement proposal once they're actually released and put in front of a court," said George Zelcs, a plaintiffs' attorney in Fontenot.
The solution agreed to in the settlement is landmark, but not surprising. College sports has been trending in this direction for years, with athletes receiving more and more monetary benefits and rights they say were long overdue.
In December, Baker, the former Massachusetts governor who has been on the job for 14 months, proposed creating a new tier of Division I athletics where the schools with the most resources would be required to pay at least half their athletes $30,000 per year. That suggestion, along with many other possibilities, remain under discussion.
The settlement does not make every issue facing college sports go away. There is still a question of whether athletes should be deemed employees of their schools, something Baker and other college sports leaders are fighting against.
Some type of federal legislation or antitrust exemption is likely still needed to codify the terms of the settlement, protect the NCAA from future litigation and pre-empt state laws that attempt to neuter the organization's authority. As it is, the NCAA is still facing lawsuits that challenge its ability to govern itself, including setting rules limiting multiple-time transfers.
Federal lawmakers have indicated :facepalm: :facepalm::facepalm:they would like to get something done, but while several bills have been introduced none have gone anywhere.
Despite the unanswered questions, one thing is clear: Major college athletics is about to become more like professional sports than ever before.
the shareholders of this message board have to pay for the bandwidth that is used. And I happen to know that they are tired of your long winded diatribes. If they liked you, it would be one thing. But I’m in some text groups and secret forums that indicate otherwise. I’m only trying to warn you. Cut back on the number of ridiculously long and boring posts. And quit trying to be funny. It has never worked. I would recommend sticking to posting about something that you know something about. Well, never mind. That’s impossible.
Just keep doing the same shit, I guess. But remember, I warned you. Either you are bound to get banned or have the fuck slapped out of you by Wes. Those of us who are sorry for you because of the retardation cannot be with you every moment to protect you.
-
I like ice cream
-
I like ice cream
And I'm so very proud that you do.
-
I like ice cream
And long snappers and porn.
-
And long snappers and porn.
You had me at hello.
-
The SEC Spring Meetings wrapped up last week, with a lot of talk being about some of the non-revenue producing sports possibly being cut. Then you hear about Tennessee going forward with a $99 million renovation project for the baseball stadium. Now Auburn is directing $25.7 million to the north end scoreboard.
Well, there goes the tennis team.
-
some of the non-revenue producing sports possibly being cut.
And at Auburn, the only two sports that generate revenue are Football and Men's basketball.
-
And at Auburn, the only two sports that generate revenue are Football and Men's basketball.
I haven't looked at any numbers, but if the baseball team is not, they need to fire whoever be in charge. Despite the crappy season, they still drew record numbers. If you're pretty close to capacity in most games, and you're still not profitable, sum ting wong.
-
I haven't looked at any numbers, but if the baseball team is not, they need to fire whoever be in charge. Despite the crappy season, they still drew record numbers. If you're pretty close to capacity in most games, and you're still not profitable, sum ting wong.
https://1819news.com/news/item/how-much-money-did-auburn-and-alabama-make-from-sports-in-2023
In 2023, Baseball spent 6.2M, and took in 1.8M, for a net loss of 4.4M.
-
And at Auburn, the only two sports that generate revenue are Football and Men's basketball.
As passionate as our fans are, this is nuts to me.
-
I haven't looked at any numbers, but if the baseball team is not, they need to fire whoever be in charge. Despite the crappy season, they still drew record numbers. If you're pretty close to capacity in most games, and you're still not profitable, sum ting wong.
Unfortunately attendance doesn’t really equate directly to profitability.
-
As passionate as our fans are, this is nuts to me.
Agreed. That said, our non-revenue sports are pretty well-attended, you just can't juice folks for tix like FB/BB can do.
-
Agreed. That said, our non-revenue sports are pretty well-attended, you just can't juice folks for tix like FB/BB can do.
Has to come down to operational costs & being locked into contract bids w/ vendors that monopolize goods and services, I would have to think.
I do know that baseball unleashed the new HOF lounge this past season, so I am sure that put a hurtin’ on things, too.
-
Has to come down to operational costs & being locked into contract bids w/ vendors that monopolize goods and services, I would have to think.
That's probably a big piece of it, for sure.
I do know that baseball unleashed the new HOF lounge this past season, so I am sure that put a hurtin’ on things, too.
You sly dog.
-
As passionate as our fans are, this is nuts to me.
Boggles my mind that Gymnastics lost 2.5M in 2023.
-
Just a theory but I think you are about to see serious reductions in staff, assistants, and support areas for the non-revenue sports. Additionally, HC salaries are about to come way down. Whether they accomplish that by letting folks go, encouraging retirement, I don't know, but that's a big piece of ops costs - salary and benefits - and is the usual answer when an entity wants to "cut costs while maximizing returns" and such. You will also likely see more "juice" on the tickets for said events or a lot of NASCAR-type advertising on facilities, uniforms, etc.
-
https://1819news.com/news/item/how-much-money-did-auburn-and-alabama-make-from-sports-in-2023
In 2023, Baseball spent 6.2M, and took in 1.8M, for a net loss of 4.4M.
You really think that you’re some kind of Mr. Big Shot with all of your fancy math and stuff. Guess what, Bucko. I know Mr. Mathnasium. I will have these numbers checked and verified in no time.
I have his cell number.
-
You really think that you’re some kind of Mr. Big Shot with all of your fancy math and stuff. Guess what, Bucko. I know Mr. Mathnasium. I will have these numbers checked and verified in no time.
I have his cell number.
I was told there would be no math.
-
I was told there would be no math.
Harsin also told us "Let's ride" but we didn't hear the part where he whispered "all the way to my bank."
-
Harsin also told us "Let's ride" but we didn't hear the part where he whispered "all the way to my bank."
The sumbitch made Doug Barfield look like an offensive genius.
-
The sumbitch made Doug Barfield look like an offensive genius.
I will always maintain he tanked the second season after the failed coup d'etat following year one. (Some which may have even been true, but was executed worse than the Auburn passing game.) After that, I think he and his agent said, fine, let's get this buyout.
-
The sumbitch made Doug Barfield look like an offensive genius.
I'd argue that Phil Montgomery made Hagrid & Keisau look like offensive geniuses on the flip side of that.
2023 was as frustrating as 2012 on the offensive side of the ball. Our saving grace that kept us from 3-9 was a salty defense (in some games).
-
I will always maintain he tanked the second season after the failed coup d'etat following year one. (Some which may have even been true, but was executed worse than the Auburn passing game.) After that, I think he and his agent said, fine, let's get this buyout.
Please refrain from reciting the Finebaum mantra in this forum. Failure to comply will result in the Bailiff whacking your pee-pee.
Seriously, that was his standard line, repeated about 1,000X a day. Auburn's two failed coup attempts on Harpin.
The first failed "coup" attempt, was after Gus was fired, and it was reported that a group of influential boosters wanted Kevin Steele to take over. Maybe that was true, maybe not. Seems a bit far-fetched given Steele's stellar coaching record. But hey, we did hire 5-19 Gene.
Small problems with that. First, who cares? Does anyone think there aren't influential boosters at LSU, Tennessee, Florida, Bama etc. who have their own ideas when a coaching change is being made? But more importantly, the rumor about Steele was being circulated before Gus' tail lights were across the Lee County line. Halpin's name wasn't even mentioned until 8 days later. Hardly a coup attempt on Haysin, but don't let facts get in the way of PF stirring a pot.
As for the second "coup", let's see, after one year on the job, the man they hired to get it going in the right direction, had:
*The first losing record in over a decade
*The greatest exodus of players from the program evah, and some of them weren't saying very nice things about Breeman Hatpin
* He fires a coach mid-season. He fires his OC after the season. His DC leaves for a lesser job, and has some parting shots for his old boss. Several other coaches leave on the own accord as well.
* He hires a guy as his OC, who has never been an OC, and who decides...naaaa...just over a month later.
* Recruiting is at it's worst in over a decade, and high school coaches around the state are saying they've never met the man. In other words, the man was either lazy, cocky, or had zero idea what recruiting is all about in this league. Probably a combination of all of the above.
* There are rumors, who knows if substantiated or not (But it's on the interwebz, so...you know) of Bryland playing Plumber, and laying pipe in a hot assistant who followed him from Boise.
That's just a brief overview of his first season. What gets me is people saying it's a coup attempt, when Auburn takes a step back and says, before this thing spirals totally out of control, we need to see if we hired the right guy.
I think what's even funnier is asking the questions...if our boosters are the puppeteers, and running the show...why wasn't Kevin Steele named HC? And why wasn't Brakeman Havlin fired after that second coup attempt? Hmmmm.....
-
Off topic but I saw where Humperdink tweeted his support of Sunbelt Billy.
Isn’t that sort of like OJ tweeting support of Scott Peterson?
-
Please refrain from reciting the Finebaum mantra in this forum. Failure to comply will result in the Bailiff whacking your pee-pee.
Seriously, that was his standard line, repeated about 1,000X a day. Auburn's two failed coup attempts on Harpin.
The first failed "coup" attempt, was after Gus was fired, and it was reported that a group of influential boosters wanted Kevin Steele to take over. Maybe that was true, maybe not. Seems a bit far-fetched given Steele's stellar coaching record. But hey, we did hire 5-19 Gene.
Small problems with that. First, who cares? Does anyone think there aren't influential boosters at LSU, Tennessee, Florida, Bama etc. who have their own ideas when a coaching change is being made? But more importantly, the rumor about Steele was being circulated before Gus' tail lights were across the Lee County line. Halpin's name wasn't even mentioned until 8 days later. Hardly a coup attempt on Haysin, but don't let facts get in the way of PF stirring a pot.
As for the second "coup", let's see, after one year on the job, the man they hired to get it going in the right direction, had:
*The first losing record in over a decade
*The greatest exodus of players from the program evah, and some of them weren't saying very nice things about Breeman Hatpin
* He fires a coach mid-season. He fires his OC after the season. His DC leaves for a lesser job, and has some parting shots for his old boss. Several other coaches leave on the own accord as well.
* He hires a guy as his OC, who has never been an OC, and who decides...naaaa...just over a month later.
* Recruiting is at it's worst in over a decade, and high school coaches around the state are saying they've never met the man. In other words, the man was either lazy, cocky, or had zero idea what recruiting is all about in this league. Probably a combination of all of the above.
* There are rumors, who knows if substantiated or not (But it's on the interwebz, so...you know) of Bryland playing Plumber, and laying pipe in a hot assistant who followed him from Boise.
That's just a brief overview of his first season. What gets me is people saying it's a coup attempt, when Auburn takes a step back and says, before this thing spirals totally out of control, we need to see if we hired the right guy.
I think what's even funnier is asking the questions...if our boosters are the puppeteers, and running the show...why wasn't Kevin Steele named HC? And why wasn't Brakeman Havlin fired after that second coup attempt? Hmmmm.....
Make this type of argument in the “what would it take?” thread. Please.
-
Make this type of argument in the “what would it take?” thread. Please.
Well done, sir.
-
Make this type of argument in the “what would it take?” thread. Please.
K's posting of the WSJ article spelled it out way better than I could ever do it. And it's the tip of the iceberg on how horribly Merchan handled this trial.
-
K's posting of the WSJ article opinion piece spelled it out way better than I could ever do it. And it's the tip of the iceberg on how horribly Merchan handled this trial.
Let's call it what it is.
-
Let's call it what it is.
You lost. Accept it.
-
Please refrain from reciting the Finebaum mantra in this forum. Failure to comply will result in the Bailiff whacking your pee-pee.
I think what's even funnier is asking the questions...if our boosters are the puppeteers, and running the show...why wasn't Kevin Steele named HC? And why wasn't Brakeman Havlin fired after that second coup attempt? Hmmmm.....
Was all about the money and getting it together. Once Jay Gouge told them, if you want to fire the dude, do it, but you are paying for it this time, they went and got the money together to can the dude.
Hars got hired in the middle of a lot of turmoil and power vacuum at Auburn with the President debacle, Allen Greene turning into a pumpkin, and other upheaval.
And then they hired the Freeze and got the same damn results. Fart in the wind.
-
Was all about the money and getting it together. Once Jay Gouge told them, if you want to fire the dude, do it, but you are paying for it this time, they went and got the money together to can the dude.
Hars got hired in the middle of a lot of turmoil and power vacuum at Auburn with the President debacle, Allen Greene turning into a pumpkin, and other upheaval.
And then they hired the Freeze and got the same damn results. Fart in the wind.
How so? As I've said before, I think U Free did the smart thing and took a step back to concentrate on the ONLY thing that matters at this point, which is figuring out how to get enough top shelf talent to compete in this league. If you don't have it, everything else is a mute.......moot point.
And it's working. He's getting commitments from quality athletes, the likes we haven't seen in a loooong time. And we're getting elite guys on campus that are putting us at the top of their lists, which almost never happens. It's a neato-keen time.
If he keeps this up, and all indications are that he will, the key will be the staff he puts around him. I have no idea about that. Right now, I couldn't name all his assistants if I had to.
-
I know nothing of the buyout but the difference in recruiting is due to the top notch staff that Freeze brought in. They are the one's putting the pitch on these prospects, not some half a mind to be involved, year one doesn't matter head coach.
Do you just check out until you do get the talent? HELL NO! When you get a job like Auburn the last thought in your mind is to start tanking as a head coach. You just replaced a total loser.
-
I know nothing of the buyout but the difference in recruiting is due to the top notch staff that Freeze brought in. They are the one's putting the pitch on these prospects, not some half a mind to be involved, year one doesn't matter head coach.
Do you just check out until you do get the talent? HELL NO! When you get a job like Auburn the last thought in your mind is to start tanking as a head coach. You just replaced a total loser.
A few points here. Some quid pro quo.
Yes, the coaching staff that Freeze brought in. Huge part of every single coach's responsibilities. Only as good as those around you. Isn't that why they called Saban the best recruiter in the nation for about 15 years?
Never said he "checked out". But, it's my opinion, and mine alone, that he installed his offense and let his OC take care of the minutiae, while he focused more, not totally, on the only things that matter right now, recruiting, NIL, the portal, and total roster turnover. He never had to deal with that before, so either figure it out, or take your buyout. Maybe coaches like Billy Napier should have been doing the same, instead of causing the major clusterfuck they have now.
As for "tanking", no way. That's not what I'm saying. But, when just about every single expert and analyst in the business says, you suck, and you'll be lucky to get out of the cellar in the West, you'd better take care of ^^^ first and foremost. BTW, they were all right, and for a reason.
I have no idea if any of that is what Freeze actually did. Just what it looked like to me. The man may have been up til 3:00 a.m. every night studying film.
-
I would think if you have a bright enough QB and you're gashing the other team on the ground you just keep pounding.
As for scheme I'm not sure what scheme aside of hearing the term "RPO" that we are presently. Multiple? Whatever, It seemed to work for Malik Willis at Liberty.
-
I would think if you have a bright enough QB and you're gashing the other team on the ground you just keep pounding.
As for scheme I'm not sure what scheme aside of hearing the term "RPO" that we are presently. Multiple? Whatever, It seemed to work for Malik Willis at Liberty.
You can’t say “gash” and “pound” in the same sentence.
Foul on the post! 15 yard penalty. Ejection. You may not pass go, you may not collect $200. Death.
-
Was referring to Hars second year with tanking. I have no doubt Rev. Hue is giving it the ole college try hard for sure. Not sure it's gonna amount to much because I fear his scheme isn't an equalizer anymore. If he's relying on amassing talent and having them figure it out on the field, better hope one of Cam's kids comes of age quick so there can be the guy that leads the light brigade. History says strap in, lower your expectations, crack open a few Mic Ultras, and enjoy the ride.
-
And then they hired the Freeze and got the same damn results. Fart in the wind.
Dudester, I am all about people having their opinions. Even if they are wrong.
I am on record as being against Trump in the 2016 primaries. I was completely wrong and he turned out to be the best president in modern history.
I was very antifreeze. I kept hoping for someone else to emerge.
But, how anyone can say that he’s got the same results? That’s just not the case, at all.
If you are talking wins and losses, ok. But why would you even talk that after one season? I believe that you certainly have enough experience with SEC football to know better.
Recruiting is at an all time high and people can preach results but it’s fucking ridiculous to not recognize the correlation between the two.
Hating the guy is fine/ I’ve changed my opinion and I truly like him. The coaches, players and recruits seem to really respect and like him.
I have no idea if he will win but right now, if I were forced to bet my house, I bet the over on him being at AU for 10 years.
-
If you are talking wins and losses, ok.
In sports, that's all that matters. Wins and losses. The scoreboard. The rest of it are factors that influence, but it's about Ws and Ls. And we've been eating Ls like Jameis on some crab legs.
-
A few points here. Some quid pro quo.
Yes, the coaching staff that Freeze brought in. Huge part of every single coach's responsibilities. Only as good as those around you. Isn't that why they called Saban the best recruiter in the nation for about 15 years?
Never said he "checked out". But, it's my opinion, and mine alone, that he installed his offense and let his OC take care of the minutiae, while he focused more, not totally, on the only things that matter right now, recruiting, NIL, the portal, and total roster turnover. He never had to deal with that before, so either figure it out, or take your buyout. Maybe coaches like Billy Napier should have been doing the same, instead of causing the major clusterfuck they have now.
As for "tanking", no way. That's not what I'm saying. But, when just about every single expert and analyst in the business says, you suck, and you'll be lucky to get out of the cellar in the West, you'd better take care of ^^^ first and foremost. BTW, they were all right, and for a reason.
I have no idea if any of that is what Freeze actually did. Just what it looked like to me. The man may have been up til 3:00 a.m. every night studying film.
I tend to think this is correct. I'm no Freeze fan, but he hit the trails and solidified relationships and it is paying off. You can be the brightest motherfucker around, but if your talent is shit, then you're gonna produce shit in the SEC. We are getting back to having that talent and we're in play for the big dogs now.
I expect wins to follow.
-
In sports, that's all that matters. Wins and losses. The scoreboard. The rest of it are factors that influence, but it's about Ws and Ls. And we've been eating Ls like Jameis on some crab legs.
Agreed, to a point.
No one would have told Freeze he had to come in and win "X" amount of games in 2023 (shit, I dunno, he probably heard "you better win more than that potato bitch), because he was dealing with destruction. So, yes, wins matters over the long haul...it is the evaluation metric. But there are nuances and exceptions.
-
In sports, that's all that matters. Wins and losses. The scoreboard. The rest of it are factors that influence, but it's about Ws and Ls. And we've been eating Ls like Jameis on some crab legs.
You would be wrong that it’s all that matters. If this were the case, they would not require the players to go to class, they wouldn’t have coaches speaking to QB clubs or care about discipline issues. It is the most important but certainly far from the only thing that matters.
Sorry to have to tell you…well, not really. I don’t give a fuck either way but you’re simply wrong about that.
And you are also wrong about Freeze being the same even if you only look at wins and losses (which is very dumb to only look at, btw). Harsin has the lowest win percentage since 1950 at AU football. Again, Harsin. Not Freeze. And he started his last season at 3-5 iirc. Something close to that.
And if you don’t think that the arguably best (not really that arguable) WR class in Auburn football history, complete 180 in O line talent and depth due to the portal and flipping players from Alabama/Georgia/TAMU etc. matters, then you are definitely not as knowledgeable as I thought.
-
You would be wrong that it’s all that matters. If this were the case, they would not require the players to go to class, they wouldn’t have coaches speaking to QB clubs or care about discipline issues. It is the most important but certainly far from the only thing that matters.
Sorry to have to tell you…well, not really. I don’t give a fuck either way but you’re simply wrong about that.
And you are also wrong about Freeze being the same even if you only look at wins and losses (which is very dumb to only look at, btw). Harsin has the lowest win percentage since 1950 at AU football. Again, Harsin. Not Freeze. And he started his last season at 3-5 iirc. Something close to that.
And if you don’t think that the arguably best (not really that arguable) WR class in Auburn football history, complete 180 in O line talent and depth due to the portal and flipping players from Alabama/Georgia/TAMU etc. matters, then you are definitely not as knowledgeable as I thought.
Salty
-
Salty
Seemed more along the lines of Mrs. Dash after she's sat in the cupboard for nine months but our friend WT has his moments.
-
Seemed more along the lines of Mrs. Dash after she's sat in the cupboard for nine months but our friend WT has his moments.
I like 6 but it’s my duty to police the board. I’m considered very charming and charismatic but I can be passionate, at times. I apologize for overreacting to 6 but for anything that I may have said to Token, Wes or Snags, I do not give one little fuck about. Whether it was an overreaction or not, all kidding aside, I don’t give a fuck. None.
-
I like 6 but it’s my duty to police the board. I’m considered very charming and charismatic but I can be passionate, at times. I apologize for overreacting to 6 but for anything that I may have said to Token, Wes or Snags, I do not give one little fuck about. Whether it was an overreaction or not, all kidding aside, I don’t give a fuck. None.
No offense taken. Healthy discourse and disagree once built a verdant world.