Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Pat Dye Field => War Damn Eagle => Topic started by: Kaos on November 30, 2009, 06:31:33 PM

Title: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on November 30, 2009, 06:31:33 PM
Of the three?  I'd rank Chizik last based on first-year performance even though he did beat both. 

Tennessee got appreciably better as the season wore on.  Beat one of their two biggest rivals soundly.  Pushed another to the absolute bullshit brink. 

Mississippi State got appreciably better as the season wore on.  The Bulldogs were a stupid coaching decision from wrecking LSU. Whipped the dogshit out of Ole Miss in a rivalry game. 

Both those guys get a solid B for their overall body of work.

Chizik?  Right about where he was expected to be.  Got a quality win over a mediocre West Virginia team.  Came up zeroes (moral victories don't count) against Auburn's two biggest rivals.  Got pantsed by Arkansas.  At no point could you really say the team was improving week to week.  You'd think it was and then it would shit the bed (kentucky).

About the best you can give him is a C. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: The Prowler on November 30, 2009, 06:36:43 PM
I give him a B+ for what he had to work with.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: AUChizad on November 30, 2009, 06:48:07 PM
The Bulldogs were a stupid coaching decision from wrecking LSU.
And this is a feather in Mullen's cap as why he's a better coach than Chizik?

 :blink:

Ok...
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: ibelonginprison on November 30, 2009, 06:48:11 PM
I'd give them all a B-.  Mullen and Chizel were playing with players recruited for a different scheme than how they ran their teams.  Tennessee had "decent players," but they just didn't mesh well.  It didn't work out for Kiffen.

We were inconsistent, but showed moments of greatness.  Somewhere I think there is a balance of players and coaching.

Kiffen ran his mouth but his players never backed him up on it with their performance.  His daddy saved his ass with some sick defensive coaching IMO.

Mullen... he just never had any talent to work with.  I'll be interested to see what he recruits and what he does with it.  Recruiting for MSU has to just be plain tough.  Who the hell wants to go to Starkville.  0_o

Chizel did alright.  Like you said, he beat both Mullen and Kiffen.  AU had a strong showing against UA, but just got tired.  We played well against UT, UA had a much worse time with UT than we did.  Inconsistency is where Chizel's score should just drop.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: chinook on November 30, 2009, 06:49:20 PM
in kindergarten, i had the 64 crayola crayon set, a metal ruler and left handed scissors.  a friend of mine had the 8 crayola crayon set...perhaps missing a color..., a wooden ruler with notches along the sides and a pair of left handed scissors (he was a righty).

he had a lot less to work with but always got an A in art.  

 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: The Prowler on November 30, 2009, 06:52:05 PM
in kindergarten, i had the 64 crayola crayon set, a metal ruler and left handed scissors.  a friend of mine had the 8 crayola crayon set...perhaps missing a color..., a wooden ruler with notches along the sides and a pair of left handed scissors (he was a righty).

he had a lot less to work with but always got an A in art.  

 
Are you still pissed that I would always get As in art class?  I couldn't help it that you sat at your desk eating glue while everyone else worked on their projects.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: boartitz on November 30, 2009, 06:55:06 PM
I still get out of line.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: AUsweetheart on November 30, 2009, 08:40:49 PM
Just out of curiosity...what grade would you have given Saban his first year at uat?

Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Snaggletiger on November 30, 2009, 09:45:12 PM
Chizik beat the hell out of Kiffin and Mullen.  I don't care when it happened.  Neither Kiffin or Mullen played Georgia on the road and an 11-0 Bama team to close out the season.

Chizik

Kiffin

Mullen
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: boartitz on November 30, 2009, 10:26:14 PM
Just out of curiosity...what grade would you have given Saban his first year at uat?


Or Petrino his first year? D, C-?
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Greaseyweasel on November 30, 2009, 10:26:42 PM
Mullen, one hell of a fine showing with nothing to work with.

Kiffy, actually got better as the year wore on.

chizik, came out of the chute crying that he had no talent, then congratualetd himself on his wins and blamed his losses on the same no talent players that got him his win. Adored by prowler and other faggots everywhere.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Greaseyweasel on November 30, 2009, 10:28:23 PM
Or Petrino his first year? D, C-?

Petrino followed _______, he did a fine job, of course he didn't have the talent to squander like coach _____ did before him. He might actually make them a legit challenger.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on November 30, 2009, 10:40:44 PM
Just out of curiosity...what grade would you have given Saban his first year at uat?



Low B or a C.

But you could feel it starting to build. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: wesfau2 on November 30, 2009, 10:59:13 PM
Tennessee got appreciably better as the season wore on.  Beat one of their two biggest rivals soundly.  Pushed another to the absolute bullshit brink. 

Sounds like the Iron Bowl.  Unless I'm missing what you mean by the highlighted portion.

Quote
Mississippi State got appreciably better as the season wore on.  The Bulldogs were a stupid coaching decision from wrecking LSU. Whipped the dogshit out of Ole Miss in a rivalry game. 

Auburn whipped the dogshit out of that team as well.

Quote
Both those guys get a solid B for their overall body of work.

Then you're just being selective.....admit it.

Quote
Chizik?  Right about where he was expected to be.  Got a quality win over a mediocre West Virginia team.  Came up zeroes (moral victories don't count) against Auburn's two biggest rivals.  Got pantsed by Arkansas.  At no point could you really say the team was improving week to week.  You'd think it was and then it would shit the bed (kentucky).

About the best you can give him is a C. 

What grade would you honestly give Tuberville at the end of last year?
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: AUsweetheart on November 30, 2009, 11:04:33 PM
Low B or a C.

But you could feel it starting to build. 

A low B? After starting 6-2 then dropping the next FOUR? Including the loss to La Monroe?
Boolsheet.

There is also an argument to be made that it's starting to build at Auburn, too, you know.

Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: boartitz on November 30, 2009, 11:09:57 PM
Petrino followed _______, he did a fine job, of course he didn't have the talent to squander like coach _____ did before him. He might actually make them a legit challenger.
Naw
We're talking report cards here.
5-7 first year, 7-5 second year.
Bobby Petrino is a worldbeater. Eh?
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: AUChizad on November 30, 2009, 11:24:27 PM
A low B? After starting 6-2 then dropping the next FOUR? Including the loss to La Monroe?
Boolsheet.

There is also an argument to be made that it's starting to build at Auburn, too, you know.


He made up his mind 11 months ago. Everything he posts is working backwards from there to support what is set in stone in his mind.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Buzz Killington on December 01, 2009, 12:03:36 AM
Of the three?  I'd rank Chizik last based on first-year performance even though he did beat both. 

Tennessee got appreciably better as the season wore on.  Beat one of their two biggest rivals soundly.  Pushed another to the absolute bullshit brink. 

Mississippi State got appreciably better as the season wore on.  The Bulldogs were a stupid coaching decision from wrecking LSU. Whipped the dogshit out of Ole Miss in a rivalry game. 

Both those guys get a solid B for their overall body of work.

Chizik?  Right about where he was expected to be.  Got a quality win over a mediocre West Virginia team.  Came up zeroes (moral victories don't count) against Auburn's two biggest rivals.  Got pantsed by Arkansas.  At no point could you really say the team was improving week to week.  You'd think it was and then it would shit the bed (kentucky).

About the best you can give him is a C. 

Are you referring to the same West Virginia team that took Cincinnati to the brink, and just finished an upset of then #8 Pittsburgh?  That West Virginia?

I don't see how in the world you can put Mullen ahead of Chizik in any way, form or fashion.  They played over their heads and won their rivalry game.  That is it.

As much as it pains me to say it, I do agree on Kiffin though.  They started slow, but seemed to get better as the season wore on.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Greaseyweasel on December 01, 2009, 06:08:38 AM
Naw
We're talking report cards here.
5-7 first year, 7-5 second year.
Bobby Petrino is a worldbeater. Eh?
Never said he was a world beater. Arky does not get those. I said he is doing better. Go back and actually read what I posted instead of reading into it. I'm a very straight up, straight to the point kind of guy.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 08:16:57 AM
He made up his mind 11 months ago. Everything he posts is working backwards from there to support what is set in stone in his mind.

If that were true, he'd get whatever is below an F. 

You bore me.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 08:27:39 AM
Are you referring to the same West Virginia team that took Cincinnati to the brink, and just finished an upset of then #8 Pittsburgh?  That West Virginia?

I don't see how in the world you can put Mullen ahead of Chizik in any way, form or fashion.  They played over their heads and won their rivalry game.  That is it.

As much as it pains me to say it, I do agree on Kiffin though.  They started slow, but seemed to get better as the season wore on.

Mississippi State:

Went 3-3 over the last six games, beat Kentucky and Ole Miss during that span.  Scored 31 on Kentucky on the road. 

Considering where that team started, getting to five wins is a major achievement. Drubbing their biggest rival is also worthy of accolades.

They also had more moral victories than Auburn. Pushed Florida and had LSU beat but couldn't finish. 

If you say before the season that Chizik is going to go 7-5 and lose to LSU, Alabama and Georgia everybody goes "meh... about what's expected."

You say  MSU is going 5-7 but will beat Ole Miss and you're buying Mullen a cigar. 

Not saying MSU is a better team (or even Tennessee for that matter) but that Mullen did a better job with what he had.  He didn't have a Kentucky fart away game.

I'd hate to play either of them right now, though. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 08:38:21 AM
You say  MSU is going 5-7 but will beat Ole Miss and you're buying Mullen a cigar. 

If you are a MSU fan you might be but that's the only way.

I know what evil lurks in the Grove and there is no way that fucktard was going to produce anything close to the expectations that were upon him this year.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 08:43:41 AM
If you are a MSU fan you might be but that's the only way.

I know what evil lurks in the Grove and there is no way that phuktard was going to produce anything close to the expectations that were upon him this year.

Irrelevant.  Even a 6-5 Ole Miss would have been favored over a MSU team that was expected to win three games.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 09:03:09 AM
We were expected to win 5-6 and lose to ole miss.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Pell City Tiger on December 01, 2009, 09:07:09 AM
We were expected to win 5-6 and lose to ole miss.
Some prognosticators on this board had us at 3-4 wins max.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Mr. Sensible on December 01, 2009, 09:07:28 AM
We were expected to win 5-6 and lose to ole miss.

Yeah, but Kentucky was ours.

Just stop.

Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Buzz Killington on December 01, 2009, 09:12:31 AM
Yeah, but Kentucky was ours.

Just stop.



So now, we're basing the entire season and the balance of Chizik's career on one game?  Mmmmmmkay.

Georgia was ours too...right there for the taking.  Alabama was ours too, for a little more than three and a half quarters.

I was just as pissed as anybody else walking out of Jordan Hare after the Kentucky game, and momentarily had some of the same thoughts.  However, what I have seen out of the team and coaching staff as a whole since the LSU debacle has been nothing but positive. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 09:23:11 AM
Yeah, but Kentucky was ours.

Just stop.



Just stop what?  I am no sunshine pumper but I am not preaching doom and gloom yet either.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 09:23:54 AM
Some prognosticators on this board had us at 3-4 wins max.

Most people with any credibility had Auburn winning seven games at minimum.  Many thought eight or nine.  
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Mr. Sensible on December 01, 2009, 10:19:36 AM
Chizik won games he was supposed to, lost one he wasn't supposed to, and pulled one upset.

How's that any different than Tubs other than the offense was different and the defense was horrendous?
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 10:25:04 AM
Chizik won games he was supposed to, lost one he wasn't supposed to, and pulled one upset.

How's that any different than Tubs other than the offense was different and the defense was horrendous?

Nobody ever loses ones they are supposed to win.
signed,
Alabama '08
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Mr. Sensible on December 01, 2009, 10:25:50 AM
Nobody ever loses ones they are supposed to win.
signed,
Alabama '08

Sugar Bowl reference?
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 10:27:50 AM
Sugar Bowl reference?

Yeah but I guess that should have been '09.

Fail
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: AUChizad on December 01, 2009, 11:19:11 AM
Yeah but I guess that should have been '09.

Fail

Or ULM in 07.

Most people with any credibility had Auburn winning seven games at minimum.  Many thought eight or nine. 
I'm sorry, but everyone on this board knows this to be bullshit. You're going to make me waste a day digging for a preseason prediction thread.

You gave people down the road for being sunshine pumpers and Chizdick sucking loons for predictions like that early last offseason.

You, in the very least, insinuated that Chizik's record would be similar to that at Iowa State (5-19 over two years).

Revise history all you want, as I've seen you do numerous times, but you didn't start with the "anything below 7 is failure, anything above is success" stance until the season was underway. And even then, you did so because you thought he'd fail your "standards test", and you could use that to point and say "See, he underperformed by my standards I set at the beginning of the season". It didn't work out, and by your own bar you intentionally set too high to begin with, you should be satisfied.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: GH2001 on December 01, 2009, 11:44:40 AM
Or ULM in 07.
I'm sorry, but everyone on this board knows this to be bullpoop. You're going to make me waste a day digging for a preseason prediction thread.

You gave people down the road for being sunshine pumpers and Chiztool sucking loons for predictions like that early last offseason.

You, in the very least, insinuated that Chizik's record would be similar to that at Iowa State (5-19 over two years).

Revise history all you want, as I've seen you do numerous times, but you didn't start with the "anything below 7 is failure, anything above is success" stance until the season was underway. And even then, you did so because you thought he'd fail your "standards test", and you could use that to point and say "See, he underperformed by my standards I set at the beginning of the season". It didn't work out, and by your own bar you intentionally set too high to begin with, you should be satisfied.

Damn....
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: jadennis on December 01, 2009, 12:19:30 PM
I'm not sure where everyone is getting that Tennessee got "progressively" better as the year went on.

Crompton sucked less for a few random games, that's it.  That's the only difference.

Look at their schedule.

Western Kentucky    W 63-7   1-0 (0-0)
UCLA                     L 19-15   1-1 (0-0)
at No. 1 Florida             L 23-13   1-2 (0-1)
Ohio                            W 34-23   2-2 (0-1)
Auburn                     L 26-22   2-3 (0-2)
Georgia                    W 45-19   3-3 (1-2)
at No. 2 Alabama    L 12-10   3-4 (1-3)
South Carolina            W 31-13   4-4 (2-3)
Memphis                    W 56-28   5-4 (2-3)
at Mississippi            L 42-17   5-5 (2-4)
Vanderbilt                    W 31-16   6-5 (3-4)
at Kentucky            W 30-24   7-5 (4-4)

I see a close loss to Florida in game #3.  A loss to Auburn in game #5.  A win at home against struggling UGA in game #6.  A close loss to Alabama in game #7.  A win against SC (3-5 in the SEC) in game #8.  But then a blowout loss in game #10 to Ole Miss.  Expected wins against Memphis and Vandy, and a not-very-impressive OT win against Kentucky (who they haven't lost to since 1984) in game #12.

Where exactly is the "trend" upward that people are speaking of?  

So the last few games were...blowout loss to Ole Miss, wins against 2-10 Memphis (1-7 in C-USA), 2-10 Vandy (0-8 in the SEC) and an OT win against Kentucky.  

Again, I don't see the "upward" trend...not at all.  It's been the same all year....Crompton plays well, they can beat anyone.  He doesn't, they are mediocre.  

Game #3 was a loss to Florida.  
Game #5 was a loss to Auburn.  
Game #6 was a win against Georgia.
Game #7 was a loss to Alabama.
Game #8 was a win against SC.
Game #10 was a loss to Ole Miss.
Game #12 was an OT win against Kentucky.

To me, that's loss, loss, win, loss, win, loss, win.  I would even venture to say that Georgia, Alabama, and SC were their best games, right in the middle of the season.  Ole Miss to Kentucky was not impressive at all.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 12:21:53 PM
you didn't start with the "anything below 7 is failure, anything above is success" stance until the season was underway.

You're full of shit. 

Dig away.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: jadennis on December 01, 2009, 12:31:18 PM
I also think Mullen did a good job, but not anything award winning.

This Mississippi State team wasn't completely devoid of talent.  Last year they were 2-6 in the SEC.  This year they were 3-5, one game better.  Last year they were 4-8 overall, this year 5-7.  That's one game better. Not to mention that they won 8 games just two years ago.  Their defense has been pretty good in recent years, and they are running a first round NFL back out of the backfield.

Again, Mullen did a good job, but look at what the team did from last year to this year.  If we're not handing out moral victories to Auburn, then why hand them to Mullen for losing to LSU, Florida, etc.  Sure, they just beat Ole Miss, which was predictable (go back and look at my post from two weeks ago, I said "Nutt will probably beat LSU and then lose to Mississippi State).  But don't forget MSU just got destroyed 42-21 the week before by Arkansas (which you used against Auburn, but not against MSU?), and was destroyed the week before that by Alabama, a team Chizik's team had a lead on into the last minute and half of the game.

And if you go back to early in the year, you'll find Auburn's most complete win of the year...over Mississippi State.  Followed by a 15-3 victory over 0-8 in the SEC Vanderbilt.

Come on Kaos, I'm honestly not sure why you want to slant it so badly.  Moral victories to MSU and Tennessee, but not to Auburn.  Ignoring the head to head victories Chizik has over both coaches.  Using a loss to Kentucky as the staple bad game, yet Tennessee (during their upward swing) beats the same team in OT.

I'm not sure how you can't at least grade them all equally.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 01:30:26 PM
I also think Mullen did a good job, but not anything award winning.

This Mississippi State team wasn't completely devoid of talent.  Last year they were 2-6 in the SEC.  This year they were 3-5, one game better.  Last year they were 4-8 overall, this year 5-7.  That's one game better. Not to mention that they won 8 games just two years ago.  Their defense has been pretty good in recent years, and they are running a first round NFL back out of the backfield.

Again, Mullen did a good job, but look at what the team did from last year to this year.  If we're not handing out moral victories to Auburn, then why hand them to Mullen for losing to LSU, Florida, etc.  Sure, they just beat Ole Miss, which was predictable (go back and look at my post from two weeks ago, I said "Nutt will probably beat LSU and then lose to Mississippi State).  But don't forget MSU just got destroyed 42-21 the week before by Arkansas (which you used against Auburn, but not against MSU?), and was destroyed the week before that by Alabama, a team Chizik's team had a lead on into the last minute and half of the game.

And if you go back to early in the year, you'll find Auburn's most complete win of the year...over Mississippi State.  Followed by a 15-3 victory over 0-8 in the SEC Vanderbilt.

Come on Kaos, I'm honestly not sure why you want to slant it so badly.  Moral victories to MSU and Tennessee, but not to Auburn.  Ignoring the head to head victories Chizik has over both coaches.  Using a loss to Kentucky as the staple bad game, yet Tennessee (during their upward swing) beats the same team in OT.

I'm not sure how you can't at least grade them all equally.

State finished 3-3

Tennessee finished 4-2

Auburn finished 2-5. 

State beat its biggest rival.

Tennessee beat one of its two biggest rivals. 

Auburn?  Moral victory against Alabama.  Blown out at LSU. Blown out at Arkansas.  Unless Ole-Fucking-Miss is a main rival now we didn't get one.

B's for Mullen and Kiffin.  C for Chizik.  The book is closed.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Snaggletiger on December 01, 2009, 01:59:30 PM
Chizik

Kiffin

Mullen

Chizik beat em' both. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: jadennis on December 01, 2009, 02:31:20 PM
State finished 3-3

Tennessee finished 4-2

Auburn finished 2-5. 

State beat its biggest rival.

Tennessee beat one of its two biggest rivals. 

Auburn?  Moral victory against Alabama.  Blown out at LSU. Blown out at Arkansas.  Unless Ole-phuking-Miss is a main rival now we didn't get one.

B's for Mullen and Kiffin.  C for Chizik.  The book is closed.

Please tell me this is not what you've resorted to. 

Mississippi State finished 3-3....and the last three games they were 1-2, with the two losses by a combined score of 73-24.  Two mega blowouts. 

Tennessee finished 4-2.... with two of the wins against Memphis and Vanderbilt (combined 4-20 overall and 1-15 in their conferences).  Isn't one of the reasons they gained respect because of their moral victory against Alabama?  And their other loss?  A blowout loss to a team that both Auburn and Mississippi State manhandled.  And the main game shown as an embarrassment to Auburn, Kentucky, was an OT win for Tennessee. 

Auburn finished 2-4 (using 6 games as you did for the other two)...with two games lost within the last two minutes.  Another loss was to a team Tennessee just beat in OT.  One of the wins was against a team that just beat down Tennessee in an ugly way.  We led Alabama the entire game until the last drive.  That's a team that destroyed Mississippi State a couple weeks ago.  I know you don't want to see it, but after Auburn's hideous 3 game slump, and starting with Ole Miss, the Tigers played pretty damn good down the stretch of the last four games. 

Rattling off a few records of the last half of the season doesn't address anything in my previous posts.  You can't use different criteria when evaluating things. 

Tennessee did not finish on an upswing, regardless of the record...you can't ignore who they played.

You can't use Arkansas as an example of a bad loss for Auburn and not for Mississippi State. 

You can't say "Mississippi State beat their rival" as a good thing, and then use Auburn's win over the same team as meaningless.

You can't call that win over Ole Miss meaningless and then ignore that those same Rebels killed Tennessee.

You can't pump up close loss moral victories by MSU to LSU and UT to Alabama and then call close losses for Auburn worthless "moral victories".

Use the same criteria to evaluate and there is no way someone with your intelligence can come to an honest conclusion that Auburn was a step down in success to the other two programs. 

Especially when Auburn beat them both head to head. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: GH2001 on December 01, 2009, 02:38:30 PM
State finished 3-3

Tennessee finished 4-2

Auburn finished 2-5. 

State beat its biggest rival.

Tennessee beat one of its two biggest rivals. 

Auburn?  Moral victory against Alabama.  Blown out at LSU. Blown out at Arkansas.  Unless Ole-phuking-Miss is a main rival now we didn't get one.

B's for Mullen and Kiffin.  C for Chizik.  The book is closed.

That was a good fiction book. Kinda like New Moon. Onto another.....

Ever think the finishing up records had more to do with how the schedules were set up? The backside of our schedule was more loaded than the frontside.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: AUChizad on December 01, 2009, 02:41:35 PM
Please tell me this is not what you've resorted to. 

Mississippi State finished 3-3....and the last three games they were 1-2, with the two losses by a combined score of 73-24.  Two mega blowouts. 

Tennessee finished 4-2.... with two of the wins against Memphis and Vanderbilt (combined 4-20 overall and 1-15 in their conferences).  Isn't one of the reasons they gained respect because of their moral victory against Alabama?  And their other loss?  A blowout loss to a team that both Auburn and Mississippi State manhandled.  And the main game shown as an embarrassment to Auburn, Kentucky, was an OT win for Tennessee. 

Auburn finished 2-4 (using 6 games as you did for the other two)...with two games lost within the last two minutes.  Another loss was to a team Tennessee just beat in OT.  One of the wins was against a team that just beat down Tennessee in an ugly way.  We led Alabama the entire game until the last drive.  That's a team that destroyed Mississippi State a couple weeks ago.  I know you don't want to see it, but after Auburn's hideous 3 game slump, and starting with Ole Miss, the Tigers played pretty damn good down the stretch of the last four games. 

Rattling off a few records of the last half of the season doesn't address anything in my previous posts.  You can't use different criteria when evaluating things. 

Tennessee did not finish on an upswing, regardless of the record...you can't ignore who they played.

You can't use Arkansas as an example of a bad loss for Auburn and not for Mississippi State. 

You can't say "Mississippi State beat their rival" as a good thing, and then use Auburn's win over the same team as meaningless.

You can't call that win over Ole Miss meaningless and then ignore that those same Rebels killed Tennessee.

You can't pump up close loss moral victories by MSU to LSU and UT to Alabama and then call close losses for Auburn worthless "moral victories".

Use the same criteria to evaluate and there is no way someone with your intelligence can come to an honest conclusion that Auburn was a step down in success to the other two programs. 

Especially when Auburn beat them both head to head. 
(http://yepyep.gibbs12.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/man-on-fire.jpg)
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: GH2001 on December 01, 2009, 02:45:18 PM
Please tell me this is not what you've resorted to. 

Mississippi State finished 3-3....and the last three games they were 1-2, with the two losses by a combined score of 73-24.  Two mega blowouts. 

Tennessee finished 4-2.... with two of the wins against Memphis and Vanderbilt (combined 4-20 overall and 1-15 in their conferences).  Isn't one of the reasons they gained respect because of their moral victory against Alabama?  And their other loss?  A blowout loss to a team that both Auburn and Mississippi State manhandled.  And the main game shown as an embarrassment to Auburn, Kentucky, was an OT win for Tennessee. 

Auburn finished 2-4 (using 6 games as you did for the other two)...with two games lost within the last two minutes.  Another loss was to a team Tennessee just beat in OT.  One of the wins was against a team that just beat down Tennessee in an ugly way.  We led Alabama the entire game until the last drive.  That's a team that destroyed Mississippi State a couple weeks ago.  I know you don't want to see it, but after Auburn's hideous 3 game slump, and starting with Ole Miss, the Tigers played pretty damn good down the stretch of the last four games. 

Rattling off a few records of the last half of the season doesn't address anything in my previous posts.  You can't use different criteria when evaluating things. 

Tennessee did not finish on an upswing, regardless of the record...you can't ignore who they played.

You can't use Arkansas as an example of a bad loss for Auburn and not for Mississippi State. 

You can't say "Mississippi State beat their rival" as a good thing, and then use Auburn's win over the same team as meaningless.

You can't call that win over Ole Miss meaningless and then ignore that those same Rebels killed Tennessee.

You can't pump up close loss moral victories by MSU to LSU and UT to Alabama and then call close losses for Auburn worthless "moral victories".

Use the same criteria to evaluate and there is no way someone with your intelligence can come to an honest conclusion that Auburn was a step down in success to the other two programs. 

Especially when Auburn beat them both head to head. 

I'm with you on this one JA.

For the record, please change your name to jatebow.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 03:01:08 PM
You can't say "Mississippi State beat their rival" as a good thing, and then use Auburn's win over the same team as meaningless.


Unless we are Mississippi State I certainly can.  And will.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 03:04:51 PM

State beat its biggest rival.


Big whoop. 
We beat their biggest rival as well.

Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 03:06:30 PM
Big whoop. 
We beat their biggest rival as well.



We would have beaten Frisco City's biggest rival, too.   Got to beat your own.  At least that's what she said. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: GH2001 on December 01, 2009, 03:08:01 PM
We would have beaten Frisco City's biggest rival, too.   Got to beat your own.  At least that's what she said. 

We're not comparing us to Frisco City. We're comparing us to Miss St.
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 03:09:09 PM
We're not comparing us to Frisco City. We're comparing us to Miss St.

Do you realize the sadness in this statement?   :puke:
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Saniflush on December 01, 2009, 03:11:30 PM
Do you realize the sadness in this statement?   :puke:

According to you it's not sad. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: GH2001 on December 01, 2009, 03:22:39 PM
Do you realize the sadness in this statement?   :puke:

Its not sad at all. We are being compared to Miss St. Their rival is a common opponent. What is wrong with finding the common ground if you are going to compare the two programs? I know - the Frisco City comment was tongue in cheek. Just answer the damned question General!  :s&m:
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 03:44:10 PM
Its not sad at all. We are being compared to Miss St. Their rival is a common opponent. What is wrong with finding the common ground if you are going to compare the two programs? I know - the Frisco City comment was tongue in cheek. Just answer the damned question General!  :s&m:


No, the Frisco City comment was to illustrate that who our opponent's biggest rival happens to be has no bearing on who ours is.  Who cares that Ole Miss is State's biggest rival.  That's good for them.  We get no credit for beating them.  We should beat our own rivals. 

Are we Miss State?  You people said that.  I never would. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: jadennis on December 01, 2009, 05:37:18 PM

No, the Frisco City comment was to illustrate that who our opponent's biggest rival happens to be has no bearing on who ours is.  Who cares that Ole Miss is State's biggest rival.  That's good for them.  We get no credit for beating them.  We should beat our own rivals. 

Are we Miss State?  You people said that.  I never would. 

This should actually make MSU's win over Ole Miss less impressive.  Teams often play their best game against their biggest rival (see Texas A&M, Georgia, MSU, Auburn, etc). 

Us beating Ole Miss when we were on a three game skid, to me, is more impressive than MSU beating them. 
Title: Re: Chizik, Kiffin and Mullen
Post by: Kaos on December 01, 2009, 05:41:11 PM
This should actually make MSU's win over Ole Miss less impressive.  Teams often play their best game against their biggest rival (see Texas A&M, Georgia, MSU, Auburn, etc). 

Us beating Ole Miss when we were on a three game skid, to me, is more impressive than MSU beating them. 

I'm sorry, but beating your biggest rival -- and beating them like little mewling bitches -- is far more impressive than moral victories. 

Us beating Ole Miss is just us beating Ole Miss -- something we do four out of five times historically.