Sunday, November 30, 2008
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Win
Go Tigers. Beat Alabama. Win, Auburn.
Please. Win.
Win, because for my grandfather and so many other grandfathers who have been Auburn men for a lifetime, men who endured the heartbreak of the Bear years and came out the other side still clutching their orange-and-blue sweatshirts and Auburn caps with flat bills, watching Auburn defeat Alabama for a seventh consecutive year will seem like a movie reel come true--a movie from back when they made them like they used to.
Win, because even all things dream of being something more than they are, even toilet paper, dreaming its dreams of flight.
Win, because there are children six years old who have never watched Auburn lose the Iron Bowl, and their innocence is beautiful.
Win, because Tez Doolittle has fought for six years, fought like a Tiger against doubt and opponents bent on breaking him and bureaucracy and his own treacherous body to play Alabama as a senior, and because when I was little I thought the ending to Rocky wasn't good enough.
Win, because after you had torn Alabama to quivering pieces in 2005, the man with the crimson tie in my office told me with an utterly straight face that if the early second-half safety the officials could have called had been called, Alabama would have won the game; win because the Auburn fans still working in that office and in so many other offices should not be left to work alongside such willful, delirious ignorance given over to celebration.
Win, because while other mascots paw restless in cages and or lie fat on the ground or fail to exist, ours soars across the blue sky underneath the orange sun and reminds us all of what glory looks like, and that should be worth something, damn it.
Win, because their head coach is a villain, either a ticking machine built for wins and nothing else or a man who would like be thought of as a ticking machine built for wins and nothing else, and their worship of him belongs to other false idols.
Win, because when Brad Lester and Jason Bosley and Chris Evans and Merrill Johnson Robert Dunn and Tyronne Green and Robert Shiver and Rodgereqis freaking Smith leave the field in Auburn jerseys and Auburn helmets for the final time, they deserve to leave winners, leave without ever knowing the worst defeat, leave with a clean table in the restaurant's corner and a free cold beer on top of it waiting for them forever.
Win, because whatever Tommy Tuberville's failings, Tommy Tuberville will not deserve what will be said about him and written about him should he lose.
Win, because Kodi Burns will have to build a season next fall and he could have no more stable cornerstone.
Win, because our side has won 33 times; their side has won 38 times; and another victory means our side is five wins from telling their side all their trophies and all their rankings and all their bygone glories are mere pleasant consolation prizes to being the second-best college football team in their own great state.
Win, because when the game is finished my mother will hug me regardless, and at the end of this cold season a hug of sympathy rather than of victory seems like almost more than we can bear.
Win, because we are all so head-over-heels in love with this game we'll believe any fool thing, even that you're the Good Guys, even in the old stories where the Good Guys always win in the end no matter how much they suffer along the way.
Win, because we want to keep believing in those stories.
Win for those who have come to Tuscaloosa because they cannot bear to cheer you from afar.
Win for the countless elsewhere whose hearts go with you regardless.
Win for Auburn, power of Dixieland.
Win. Please. Win.
Go Auburn. Beat Alabama. Win the Iron Bowl.
WIN.
War Eagle.
Please. Win.
Win, because for my grandfather and so many other grandfathers who have been Auburn men for a lifetime, men who endured the heartbreak of the Bear years and came out the other side still clutching their orange-and-blue sweatshirts and Auburn caps with flat bills, watching Auburn defeat Alabama for a seventh consecutive year will seem like a movie reel come true--a movie from back when they made them like they used to.
Win, because even all things dream of being something more than they are, even toilet paper, dreaming its dreams of flight.
Win, because there are children six years old who have never watched Auburn lose the Iron Bowl, and their innocence is beautiful.
Win, because Tez Doolittle has fought for six years, fought like a Tiger against doubt and opponents bent on breaking him and bureaucracy and his own treacherous body to play Alabama as a senior, and because when I was little I thought the ending to Rocky wasn't good enough.
Win, because after you had torn Alabama to quivering pieces in 2005, the man with the crimson tie in my office told me with an utterly straight face that if the early second-half safety the officials could have called had been called, Alabama would have won the game; win because the Auburn fans still working in that office and in so many other offices should not be left to work alongside such willful, delirious ignorance given over to celebration.
Win, because while other mascots paw restless in cages and or lie fat on the ground or fail to exist, ours soars across the blue sky underneath the orange sun and reminds us all of what glory looks like, and that should be worth something, damn it.
Win, because their head coach is a villain, either a ticking machine built for wins and nothing else or a man who would like be thought of as a ticking machine built for wins and nothing else, and their worship of him belongs to other false idols.
Win, because when Brad Lester and Jason Bosley and Chris Evans and Merrill Johnson Robert Dunn and Tyronne Green and Robert Shiver and Rodgereqis freaking Smith leave the field in Auburn jerseys and Auburn helmets for the final time, they deserve to leave winners, leave without ever knowing the worst defeat, leave with a clean table in the restaurant's corner and a free cold beer on top of it waiting for them forever.
Win, because whatever Tommy Tuberville's failings, Tommy Tuberville will not deserve what will be said about him and written about him should he lose.
Win, because Kodi Burns will have to build a season next fall and he could have no more stable cornerstone.
Win, because our side has won 33 times; their side has won 38 times; and another victory means our side is five wins from telling their side all their trophies and all their rankings and all their bygone glories are mere pleasant consolation prizes to being the second-best college football team in their own great state.
Win, because when the game is finished my mother will hug me regardless, and at the end of this cold season a hug of sympathy rather than of victory seems like almost more than we can bear.
Win, because we are all so head-over-heels in love with this game we'll believe any fool thing, even that you're the Good Guys, even in the old stories where the Good Guys always win in the end no matter how much they suffer along the way.
Win, because we want to keep believing in those stories.
Win for those who have come to Tuscaloosa because they cannot bear to cheer you from afar.
Win for the countless elsewhere whose hearts go with you regardless.
Win for Auburn, power of Dixieland.
Win. Please. Win.
Go Auburn. Beat Alabama. Win the Iron Bowl.
WIN.
War Eagle.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Hope, again
This is the last post for today. Check in tomorrow a.m. for an update on last year's "Win" post, and check below for thoughts on the Coachbot, thoughts on the attitudes that shape the rivalry, and a look at what other Auburn bloggers are saying. See you then.
In an unfortunate number of ways, the song for this week's game remains the same as the one we sang two weeks ago: there's precious little honest, rational reason to expect anything but a loss. Alabama has the better team. The better team wins this rivalry substantially more often than it loses it. That's about all there is to it. From that standpoint.
But there is another standpoint: the standpoint that Tommy Tuberville is too proud, too good a coach, too Tommy Tuberville to fail to win this sort of game once again. This is, again, the same standpoint we took two weeks ago. And Auburn did improve. Auburn did give Georgia a better game than Auburn on-paper was supposed to. But they didn't win.
What's changed? Why this Saturday instead of two Saturdays ago? Two reasons:
1. A loss tomorrow would mean an entire season without Auburn having played the complete game, an entire season without one of Tubby's trademark rabbits-out-of-the-hat.In his nine complete seasons with Auburn, Tubby has never failed to give us one of these. 9-for-9. He has only one chance left. He will take it.
2. The Story. The narrative of Auburn's disastrous early season, ho-hum midseason, and slow grind back to unexpected triumph in the late season can only have one climax. The plucky underdogs never win the sorta-big game against the mild-mannered, easygoing head coach. They win the biggest game of the year against the borderline-evil head coach. That's how these things work.
Of this I have little doubt: Auburn is going to go to Tuscaloosa and play their best game of the year. They have to. Otherwise their best game of the year will be one of two four- or five-point losses at home to the two biggest non-Alabama rivals on the schedule, and ... what? What kind of season is that?
No. Auburn will play well. They will play like men, like Tubby's men, like Tigers. Logic tells us it won't be enough, and if that's the case, there won't be any need for forgiveness because they'll be no injury.
But something beyond logic--let's go ahead and call it faith--tells us it may very well be enough. The presence of Tommy Tuberville--even now, at the end of the long and treacherous road this season has become--tells me it will be.
Until the final whistle blows tomorrow, I'll listen. I'll believe. It will happen. War Eagle.
In an unfortunate number of ways, the song for this week's game remains the same as the one we sang two weeks ago: there's precious little honest, rational reason to expect anything but a loss. Alabama has the better team. The better team wins this rivalry substantially more often than it loses it. That's about all there is to it. From that standpoint.
But there is another standpoint: the standpoint that Tommy Tuberville is too proud, too good a coach, too Tommy Tuberville to fail to win this sort of game once again. This is, again, the same standpoint we took two weeks ago. And Auburn did improve. Auburn did give Georgia a better game than Auburn on-paper was supposed to. But they didn't win.
What's changed? Why this Saturday instead of two Saturdays ago? Two reasons:
1. A loss tomorrow would mean an entire season without Auburn having played the complete game, an entire season without one of Tubby's trademark rabbits-out-of-the-hat.In his nine complete seasons with Auburn, Tubby has never failed to give us one of these. 9-for-9. He has only one chance left. He will take it.
2. The Story. The narrative of Auburn's disastrous early season, ho-hum midseason, and slow grind back to unexpected triumph in the late season can only have one climax. The plucky underdogs never win the sorta-big game against the mild-mannered, easygoing head coach. They win the biggest game of the year against the borderline-evil head coach. That's how these things work.
Of this I have little doubt: Auburn is going to go to Tuscaloosa and play their best game of the year. They have to. Otherwise their best game of the year will be one of two four- or five-point losses at home to the two biggest non-Alabama rivals on the schedule, and ... what? What kind of season is that?
No. Auburn will play well. They will play like men, like Tubby's men, like Tigers. Logic tells us it won't be enough, and if that's the case, there won't be any need for forgiveness because they'll be no injury.
But something beyond logic--let's go ahead and call it faith--tells us it may very well be enough. The presence of Tommy Tuberville--even now, at the end of the long and treacherous road this season has become--tells me it will be.
Until the final whistle blows tomorrow, I'll listen. I'll believe. It will happen. War Eagle.
Further required reading / counter-admission
I've not going to relay the news to you: it's easy enough to find at this stage. But in the extremely unlikely event you haven't been paying attention to the blAUgosphere over the past week, you're missing some incredible stuff:
--I linked up Grotus's Iron Bowl piece de resistance in the last post and immediately felt bad I didn't find a good spot to quote Jeremy's equally kick-ass call-to-arms at TWER. A sampling:
--Wire Road and Shug has been rocking the Iron Bowl YouTubery all week long. My personal favorite:
I know the biggest play of that game was the fourth-down TD pass from a cold Nix to Sanders (which you can also watch here), but the game wasn't won then. The game was won when Bostic took off, and that's when myself and my brothers (Mom and Dad were at the game) who were huddled around the radio, Great Depression-style, went nuts.
--War Eagle Atlanta's done some yeoman's work in arguing that the Iron Bowl is the country's greatest rivalry, which he sums up here along with some perspective on Auburn's relative success in it:
--All right, the following picture is 89 different ways of wrong and I think it's an unnecessarily pessimistic portrayal of what ought to be a tightly-contested ball game, but A) what do you expect from a blog named A Lifetime of Defeats? B) I'll be damned if I didn't LOL:
--On the other side of the aisle, pregame takes are varying from "All week long I’ve tried to generate hate for this game. To find even an ounce of smug satisfaction in what seems nigh upon inevitable on Saturday. But I can’t" to "I've tried to brew up a gumbo pot of not very nice feelings for Auburn, but I can't do it. The best I can come up with is a weak broth of those guys don't interest me very much ... All and all Auburn, at least this season, is just another brink [sic, because it's Hate Week] in that wall." Contrast that with the Auburn preparations above: who do you think wants this game more? If the players are adopting the mood of the respective fanbases at all, Auburn will come in with a huge advantage.
RollBamaRoll at least seems to take the game seriously, with OTS providing a full preview and Todd breaking out an Embarrassing Admission he's claiming he'd planned on saving for the SEC championship game.
But in an effort to give Auburn whatever advantage I can, I'm going to make my own counter-admission. And while it's not exactly fair in that Todd's divulged two full seasons of admissions while this is my first, I think it's fair to say the football gods' favor is going to be pretty substantially curried in our favor after this. To wit ...
(OK, deep breath, I can do this ... it's just the Internet ... forever ...)
Behold! the first album (on cassette tape) I ever bought with my own money:
I had just started fifth grade at the time. So I'm not sure this one really counts as a "first album I ever bought"; I hadn't even started listening to popular music and that would be my only music purchase for more than two years. Eventually I did start listening to the radio and watching music videos, though, and when I did I saved up my allowance and went out and proudly bought this:
Sigh. Seriously, you guys, if Auburn doesn't pull this out I'm going to regret the hell out of this, aren't I?
--I linked up Grotus's Iron Bowl piece de resistance in the last post and immediately felt bad I didn't find a good spot to quote Jeremy's equally kick-ass call-to-arms at TWER. A sampling:
Dude, with all due respect to the several fine Alabama bloggers out there, if this game was going to be decided by "quality and intensity of prose," Auburn would win in a walk.
For over the course of the past six years, I have realized that the dynamic forged in the ’60s and ’70s - the wilderness of our fathers, a wilderness which our young hearts have never known, but that bore in them the hate on which we were nursed - provides them no alternative to the disgusting arrogance they’re known for.
That is who they are.
When the streak stretches to 10 … to 10 x 10 … they will bark and they will howl and they will return to their vomit. But they will never be able to tap the spirit of the underdog. It is a sixth sense kept from them by the facts of the world and by their sin.
Meanwhile, it is Auburn’s birthright. And that is why we will win the last Iron Bowl ever played, just like we won the first.
--Wire Road and Shug has been rocking the Iron Bowl YouTubery all week long. My personal favorite:
I know the biggest play of that game was the fourth-down TD pass from a cold Nix to Sanders (which you can also watch here), but the game wasn't won then. The game was won when Bostic took off, and that's when myself and my brothers (Mom and Dad were at the game) who were huddled around the radio, Great Depression-style, went nuts.
--War Eagle Atlanta's done some yeoman's work in arguing that the Iron Bowl is the country's greatest rivalry, which he sums up here along with some perspective on Auburn's relative success in it:
(P)robably our greatest claim to fame is that despite constantly being measured against one of the all-time great programs, we've never let that Goliath put us away in the head-to-head competition. We have an opportunity Saturday to pull within 4 games of tying Alabama in the all-time series. No other intrastate rivalry is as close. Most of them are blowouts in the all-time records. As I write this tonight, Texas is beating Texas A&M in their 115th game together. Texas will improve their record to 74-36-5 against the Aggies. That's a 38 game lead over their fiercest in-state rival--they have more than twice the number of wins. That, my friends, ain't even close. Yet, Auburn is only 5 games behind one of CFB's greatest teams. Bama has a winning record against every other team in the SEC, but no one in the conference plays them closer than us.Preach it, brother.
--All right, the following picture is 89 different ways of wrong and I think it's an unnecessarily pessimistic portrayal of what ought to be a tightly-contested ball game, but A) what do you expect from a blog named A Lifetime of Defeats? B) I'll be damned if I didn't LOL:
--On the other side of the aisle, pregame takes are varying from "All week long I’ve tried to generate hate for this game. To find even an ounce of smug satisfaction in what seems nigh upon inevitable on Saturday. But I can’t" to "I've tried to brew up a gumbo pot of not very nice feelings for Auburn, but I can't do it. The best I can come up with is a weak broth of those guys don't interest me very much ... All and all Auburn, at least this season, is just another brink [sic, because it's Hate Week] in that wall." Contrast that with the Auburn preparations above: who do you think wants this game more? If the players are adopting the mood of the respective fanbases at all, Auburn will come in with a huge advantage.
RollBamaRoll at least seems to take the game seriously, with OTS providing a full preview and Todd breaking out an Embarrassing Admission he's claiming he'd planned on saving for the SEC championship game.
But in an effort to give Auburn whatever advantage I can, I'm going to make my own counter-admission. And while it's not exactly fair in that Todd's divulged two full seasons of admissions while this is my first, I think it's fair to say the football gods' favor is going to be pretty substantially curried in our favor after this. To wit ...
(OK, deep breath, I can do this ... it's just the Internet ... forever ...)
Behold! the first album (on cassette tape) I ever bought with my own money:
I had just started fifth grade at the time. So I'm not sure this one really counts as a "first album I ever bought"; I hadn't even started listening to popular music and that would be my only music purchase for more than two years. Eventually I did start listening to the radio and watching music videos, though, and when I did I saved up my allowance and went out and proudly bought this:
Sigh. Seriously, you guys, if Auburn doesn't pull this out I'm going to regret the hell out of this, aren't I?
Hate Week: We are Auburn, they are Alabama
You may remember the Looney Tunes cartoons* in which a sheep dog named Sam and a wolf named Ralph wake up, say hello, clock in, spend their day in vicious competition over the fate of a herd of sheep, and then clock back out and walk home together at the end of the day:
This is a good illustration of why I never get too exercised about Alabama fans--even the smart ones--claiming that they don't care about Auburn, that it's just another game, that Auburn fans are pathetically obsessed with Alabama to the point of not caring about anything else, that Auburn will always be the second-best football team in the state no matter what the actual, you know, on-field results have to say about it. This is why Auburn fans have been more than entitled to wag their six fingers in any and all 'Bama fans' faces for the last 12 months, why we get to lord our victories over them in a way we would for no one else, why we should always always always laugh at them for believing A) "little brother's" success is some sort of short-lived, doesn't-really-count fluke when we've had the better of things for most of the last 25 years B) they don't care about us when their endless denials are the classic example of doth protesting too much.
These are our jobs. They are Alabama fans. They are supposed to be arrogant, dismissive, hopelessly entitled, and oftentimes outright delusional. We are Auburn fans. We are supposed to be insufferable about the Streak, derisive about the Tide's mouldering claims of superiortiy, and yes, we are most certainly supposed to be obsessed with Alabama. When we sign up on one side or the other in this state, we clock in. And then we go to work.
I would say fans on both sides of the Iron Bowl should stop holding our jobs against each other and realize this is just how this business works--and there are times, certainly, when they should be held with much less stridency--but then again, holding them against each other is also part of the job.
----------------------------
I say that as preface to this: I have no problem admitting I am more-or-less obsessed with Alabama and want Auburn to win tomorrow's game so badly it makes my teeth hurt.
I've never understood--other than the requirements of the job--why Tide fans would make fun of Auburn for their obsession. For a whole laundry list of reasons:
1. Doesn't the fact that we'd be obsessed with Alabama sort of imply that they're a program worth obsessing about? Isn't saying something along the lines of "Haha! You losers are losers for wanting to beat a team like us so bad!" an admittance that your team is also, well, a bunch of losers? Isn't "Well, they're obsessed with us, but that makes sense when you consider how awesome we are" a much more positive response? See, Tide fans can admit their team's failings, they just have to do it in a neurotic, roundabout fashion that makes sure they can bring us down with them.
2. Maybe, just maybe, said obsession and the full-time devotion to it has something to do with the fact that outside of the efforts of one particular museum-inspiring coach, Auburn has been the far superior team? We win because we care, yo.
3. I think I've written this before on this site, but it doesn't make sense to put your national cart before your in-state horse. You can't win a national title if you don't win the SEC, you don't win the SEC if you don't win the West, you don't win the West if you don't win your own damn state. If you're second-best at home, you can't be first-best anywhere else. Why wouldn't beating Alabama always be Auburn's No. 1 goal? Again: maybe trying to run to national glory before walking past Auburn is why the Tide has tripped and fallen on its face so often, hm?
4. This one is important.
------------------------------
Hate and rivalry are not in the blood of college football. Hate and rivalry are the blood of college football. Its first game: in-state rivals in search of a gentlemanly way of tearing the limbs off of the representatives of the other school. Get past the ginormous television contracts and multimillion dollar bowl purses and crystal footballs and Tim Tebow discussing circumcision on ESPN College Gameday built by the Home Depot and this--the competition, the hate, the blood--are still what the game is about. Untether it from those things, and it's just minor-league NFL, Arenaball played outside.
To deny rivalry is to deny that your team is even playing college football. Of course, many Tide fans (though not all) will admit to having a rivalry with Tennessee, or that Auburn is a rivalry game--just not an especially important one. Again: this is their job. This is who they are.
This is, nonetheless, another reason they are wrong and hopeless and forever hated Alabama. Whether they like it or not--or rather, in part, because their obnoxious asses don't like it--this is the greatest rivalry in college football. It is**. And they willingly forsake it just to try and prove a point about their imagined superiority.
They must be punished for it. They are hypocrites, blithely claiming the current outcome of the Iron Bowl irrelevant until such time as they win it again, at which point the outcome will be, of course, of tremendous importance. In response to the same WBGV post by Todd I linked above, Grotus (in his own tour de force post) writes the following:
They are Alabama. We are Auburn. We are the obsessed, because we see things as they are. We are the disrespected, because we dare to respect the sport and its blood. We hate, because their screaming arrogance deserves hatred. We are Auburn: the underdogs, the Davids, the storybook heroes. This is why we clock in. This is why we take the job.
This is why War Eagle. War Damn Eagle, forever.
*I embed Looney Tunes as metaphors a lot, I know. But can you come up with anything more awesome in our shared cultural currency I could use instead? Of course not.
**Army and Navy aren't just two sides of the same coin, it's the same face on both sides, too similar to share a hate outside of the context of their 60 minutes of football. Michigan and Ohio St. hate each other, but they don't share a geography and college football just isn't the end-all-be-all of sporting passion in the Midwest the way it is in Alabama***. Texas-Oklahoma perhaps comes closest--certainly (as with UM-OSU) the national stakes are much higher than they are in the Iron Bowl. But the undercurrents of Tide arrogance vs. Tiger grievance aren't there and again, very few Longhorns have to go into the office and face the victorious Sooners on Monday. And what else is there? USC-Notre Dame? Florida-Georgia? Kansas-Missouri? No. Your mileage my vary, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
***Confidential to my friends in Ann Arbor: Sorry. But true.
This is a good illustration of why I never get too exercised about Alabama fans--even the smart ones--claiming that they don't care about Auburn, that it's just another game, that Auburn fans are pathetically obsessed with Alabama to the point of not caring about anything else, that Auburn will always be the second-best football team in the state no matter what the actual, you know, on-field results have to say about it. This is why Auburn fans have been more than entitled to wag their six fingers in any and all 'Bama fans' faces for the last 12 months, why we get to lord our victories over them in a way we would for no one else, why we should always always always laugh at them for believing A) "little brother's" success is some sort of short-lived, doesn't-really-count fluke when we've had the better of things for most of the last 25 years B) they don't care about us when their endless denials are the classic example of doth protesting too much.
These are our jobs. They are Alabama fans. They are supposed to be arrogant, dismissive, hopelessly entitled, and oftentimes outright delusional. We are Auburn fans. We are supposed to be insufferable about the Streak, derisive about the Tide's mouldering claims of superiortiy, and yes, we are most certainly supposed to be obsessed with Alabama. When we sign up on one side or the other in this state, we clock in. And then we go to work.
I would say fans on both sides of the Iron Bowl should stop holding our jobs against each other and realize this is just how this business works--and there are times, certainly, when they should be held with much less stridency--but then again, holding them against each other is also part of the job.
----------------------------
I say that as preface to this: I have no problem admitting I am more-or-less obsessed with Alabama and want Auburn to win tomorrow's game so badly it makes my teeth hurt.
I've never understood--other than the requirements of the job--why Tide fans would make fun of Auburn for their obsession. For a whole laundry list of reasons:
1. Doesn't the fact that we'd be obsessed with Alabama sort of imply that they're a program worth obsessing about? Isn't saying something along the lines of "Haha! You losers are losers for wanting to beat a team like us so bad!" an admittance that your team is also, well, a bunch of losers? Isn't "Well, they're obsessed with us, but that makes sense when you consider how awesome we are" a much more positive response? See, Tide fans can admit their team's failings, they just have to do it in a neurotic, roundabout fashion that makes sure they can bring us down with them.
2. Maybe, just maybe, said obsession and the full-time devotion to it has something to do with the fact that outside of the efforts of one particular museum-inspiring coach, Auburn has been the far superior team? We win because we care, yo.
3. I think I've written this before on this site, but it doesn't make sense to put your national cart before your in-state horse. You can't win a national title if you don't win the SEC, you don't win the SEC if you don't win the West, you don't win the West if you don't win your own damn state. If you're second-best at home, you can't be first-best anywhere else. Why wouldn't beating Alabama always be Auburn's No. 1 goal? Again: maybe trying to run to national glory before walking past Auburn is why the Tide has tripped and fallen on its face so often, hm?
4. This one is important.
------------------------------
Hate and rivalry are not in the blood of college football. Hate and rivalry are the blood of college football. Its first game: in-state rivals in search of a gentlemanly way of tearing the limbs off of the representatives of the other school. Get past the ginormous television contracts and multimillion dollar bowl purses and crystal footballs and Tim Tebow discussing circumcision on ESPN College Gameday built by the Home Depot and this--the competition, the hate, the blood--are still what the game is about. Untether it from those things, and it's just minor-league NFL, Arenaball played outside.
To deny rivalry is to deny that your team is even playing college football. Of course, many Tide fans (though not all) will admit to having a rivalry with Tennessee, or that Auburn is a rivalry game--just not an especially important one. Again: this is their job. This is who they are.
This is, nonetheless, another reason they are wrong and hopeless and forever hated Alabama. Whether they like it or not--or rather, in part, because their obnoxious asses don't like it--this is the greatest rivalry in college football. It is**. And they willingly forsake it just to try and prove a point about their imagined superiority.
They must be punished for it. They are hypocrites, blithely claiming the current outcome of the Iron Bowl irrelevant until such time as they win it again, at which point the outcome will be, of course, of tremendous importance. In response to the same WBGV post by Todd I linked above, Grotus (in his own tour de force post) writes the following:
What's most interesting is the simultaneous embracing and rejection of Tide history that distinguishes the new Bama fan. On one hand, he's obviously denying more than a century of vicious, gladiatorial combat in the form of football. As I need not mention, this is a war fought long by our fathers and grandfathers - and in my case, great-great-grandfathers. To claim that the Iron Bowl holds no significance is to completely ignore the bitter feud that has shaped our two institutions. All while simultaneously proclaiming the resurrection of the Tide, return to the glories of the Alabama past, the days of a new Bear - this itself is an appeal to history, to trudishun, to legacy. Mmm, crimson cake to be eaten and to be had!If they won't respect the Iron Bowl, they don't deserve to win it. And: for six years going on seven, they don't.
They are Alabama. We are Auburn. We are the obsessed, because we see things as they are. We are the disrespected, because we dare to respect the sport and its blood. We hate, because their screaming arrogance deserves hatred. We are Auburn: the underdogs, the Davids, the storybook heroes. This is why we clock in. This is why we take the job.
This is why War Eagle. War Damn Eagle, forever.
*I embed Looney Tunes as metaphors a lot, I know. But can you come up with anything more awesome in our shared cultural currency I could use instead? Of course not.
**Army and Navy aren't just two sides of the same coin, it's the same face on both sides, too similar to share a hate outside of the context of their 60 minutes of football. Michigan and Ohio St. hate each other, but they don't share a geography and college football just isn't the end-all-be-all of sporting passion in the Midwest the way it is in Alabama***. Texas-Oklahoma perhaps comes closest--certainly (as with UM-OSU) the national stakes are much higher than they are in the Iron Bowl. But the undercurrents of Tide arrogance vs. Tiger grievance aren't there and again, very few Longhorns have to go into the office and face the victorious Sooners on Monday. And what else is there? USC-Notre Dame? Florida-Georgia? Kansas-Missouri? No. Your mileage my vary, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
***Confidential to my friends in Ann Arbor: Sorry. But true.
Hate Week: Coachbot
I'm not going to pretend this post is some kind of rational evaluation of Nick Saban. I can't do rational with Saban. There are certain teams and certain figures in college football that every college football fan who takes college football seriously hates is ways they can't fully explain. Saban is that figure for me. Besides, I'm choosing to believe Auburn is going to travel to Tuscaloosa tomorrow and write a capital-S Story. So we need a capital-V Villain.
And for better, for worse, tomorrow Auburn will face down the capitalest of them all. Nick Saban is the walking embodiment of every opposing coach from every big game in every children's sports movie you've ever seen: angry at the world for no reason other than he seems to be mad of anger, willing to win at whatever costs winning seems to ask of him, a man who--if I may be so bold--has probably not seriously considered the possibility his team of colossi could lose to the ragtag bunch they'll face tomorrow.
No, the 2008 Iron Bowl might not be a movie. But is there any doubt that if it was, Nick Saban would be on the sidelines, telling his charges to Sweep the Leg?
----------------------------
Not long ago, Orspencerson Shwallindle wrote the following:
Really, though, you'd have to think "wins," right? What he wants more than anything, what drives him to his peculiar brand of madness, is wins. And this is where the Ahab comparison breaks down. Ahab wants something he is doomed to never, ever possess and his rage and desire become tragic, hopeless. Saban wants something he receives all the time that doesn't satisfy him anyway. His rage and desire are that of a drug addict, lashing out because his otherwise perfect world can't give him a fix yet. Complex, maybe, but I don't find his anger terrifying. It's first machine-like--angry because his hardwiring programs to be angry--and, frankly, pathetic. Ahab never would have stooped to being angry at the piddling likes of Ian Rapaport.
------------------------
When Jimmy Johns got arrested, Will Collier wrote that his "pharmaceutical operation was not exactly a state secret--there has been chatter about it on message boards for quite a while now." If the Internet knew that Johns was dealing, I think it's fair to put the odds on Saban remaining blissfully unaware of Johns's situation at 0.00000000001 percent. He knew.
When the final bits of roster attrition had come to pass and Alabama's scholarship crunch was no longer an immediate issue--and yes, the crunch existed, whatever you think of its actual ramifications the facts are that no other school in the country oversigned the way Alabama did--Tide fans by-and-large took this knowledge as a positive. He knew there were risks on his roster and acted accordingly, went the argument.
I'm not going to claim that had he not chosen to tie his hands with his incoming class, Saban could have done anything to help Jimmy Johns turn his life around; logically, Johns was already past the point of saving and for all we know Saban maybe tried to get Johns's head on straight. I'm not going to claim that Tarence Farmer and the other benchwarmers who scattered from the Tide roster as fall practice approached had their scholarships janked; logically, Saban most likely made it clear Farmer would never see a down for the Tide under his staff and that if he wanted to actually play college football, he'd need to go somewhere else. File Johns under "lost cause." File Farmer and the like under "brutal honesty" and "the cost of doing business."
But also file the entire mess under "gray areas." Because what if Farmer really enjoyed Tuscaloosa and wanted to stay on the team without his coaches thinking of him as a problem to be solved? What if the immediate, full intervention of his head coach and the staff could have convinced Johns that maybe dealing wasn't such a great idea? Again, both of these hypotheticals are exceedingly, extraordinarily unlikely. But they're out there. They're possibilities. They envelop Alabama and its coach in gray.
That the Tide's fans are so blindingly willing to follow their coach out of the light and into the gray should tell you something about this program's desperation, their shared willingness to participate in the blood-lettings if it means the demons of mediocrity can be exorcised. (When even FreeDarko notices from their vantage point a thousand miles away that Saban belongs in T-town, that's saying something.) Alabama has gotten the coachbot they deserve, the gray clouds they begged for.
--------------------------
The coachbot they deserve is one more reason why they deserve to lose tomorrow. Screw Alabama. Screw Nick Saban. Deny them their fix, Auburn.
Beat them. Win.
And for better, for worse, tomorrow Auburn will face down the capitalest of them all. Nick Saban is the walking embodiment of every opposing coach from every big game in every children's sports movie you've ever seen: angry at the world for no reason other than he seems to be mad of anger, willing to win at whatever costs winning seems to ask of him, a man who--if I may be so bold--has probably not seriously considered the possibility his team of colossi could lose to the ragtag bunch they'll face tomorrow.
No, the 2008 Iron Bowl might not be a movie. But is there any doubt that if it was, Nick Saban would be on the sidelines, telling his charges to Sweep the Leg?
----------------------------
Not long ago, Orspencerson Shwallindle wrote the following:
Nick Saban is Ahab. He is bottomless in his complexity and terrifying in his anger, and capable of speaking whatever language needs to be spoken to get his point across. In another age, he’d be holding onto the harpoon five hundred feet below the surface of the ocean. His ears would bleed in another hundred feet as the whale with the harpoon embedded in its hide dove deeper and deeper; the rope would bloody his already shredded hands. Soon, he’d turn inside out from the pressure. But he’d die with that f***ing rope in his hands.On some level I agree with Orson: Saban's anger is certainly Ahabesque in its all-consuming intensity, in its perpetual tenacity. But what is Saban's white whale? A crystal football? The unyielding adoration of a fanbase he didn't seem to find at LSU? Cash? Respect?
Really, though, you'd have to think "wins," right? What he wants more than anything, what drives him to his peculiar brand of madness, is wins. And this is where the Ahab comparison breaks down. Ahab wants something he is doomed to never, ever possess and his rage and desire become tragic, hopeless. Saban wants something he receives all the time that doesn't satisfy him anyway. His rage and desire are that of a drug addict, lashing out because his otherwise perfect world can't give him a fix yet. Complex, maybe, but I don't find his anger terrifying. It's first machine-like--angry because his hardwiring programs to be angry--and, frankly, pathetic. Ahab never would have stooped to being angry at the piddling likes of Ian Rapaport.
------------------------
When Jimmy Johns got arrested, Will Collier wrote that his "pharmaceutical operation was not exactly a state secret--there has been chatter about it on message boards for quite a while now." If the Internet knew that Johns was dealing, I think it's fair to put the odds on Saban remaining blissfully unaware of Johns's situation at 0.00000000001 percent. He knew.
When the final bits of roster attrition had come to pass and Alabama's scholarship crunch was no longer an immediate issue--and yes, the crunch existed, whatever you think of its actual ramifications the facts are that no other school in the country oversigned the way Alabama did--Tide fans by-and-large took this knowledge as a positive. He knew there were risks on his roster and acted accordingly, went the argument.
I'm not going to claim that had he not chosen to tie his hands with his incoming class, Saban could have done anything to help Jimmy Johns turn his life around; logically, Johns was already past the point of saving and for all we know Saban maybe tried to get Johns's head on straight. I'm not going to claim that Tarence Farmer and the other benchwarmers who scattered from the Tide roster as fall practice approached had their scholarships janked; logically, Saban most likely made it clear Farmer would never see a down for the Tide under his staff and that if he wanted to actually play college football, he'd need to go somewhere else. File Johns under "lost cause." File Farmer and the like under "brutal honesty" and "the cost of doing business."
But also file the entire mess under "gray areas." Because what if Farmer really enjoyed Tuscaloosa and wanted to stay on the team without his coaches thinking of him as a problem to be solved? What if the immediate, full intervention of his head coach and the staff could have convinced Johns that maybe dealing wasn't such a great idea? Again, both of these hypotheticals are exceedingly, extraordinarily unlikely. But they're out there. They're possibilities. They envelop Alabama and its coach in gray.
That the Tide's fans are so blindingly willing to follow their coach out of the light and into the gray should tell you something about this program's desperation, their shared willingness to participate in the blood-lettings if it means the demons of mediocrity can be exorcised. (When even FreeDarko notices from their vantage point a thousand miles away that Saban belongs in T-town, that's saying something.) Alabama has gotten the coachbot they deserve, the gray clouds they begged for.
--------------------------
The coachbot they deserve is one more reason why they deserve to lose tomorrow. Screw Alabama. Screw Nick Saban. Deny them their fix, Auburn.
Beat them. Win.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
FYI x2
1. I took part in the RBR Gay-O-Rama call-in thing-a-ma-bob last night. Click over and you can listen to the gilded tones of yours truly going over some of the points of yesterday's preview, as well as diversions into a potential choice for OC, blog names, and eventually my most favorite/least favorite Iron Bowl memories. If you've got the time.
2. The JCCW and the Mrs. JCCW are playing host to the Official Parents and one Official Brother of the JCCW for the holiday. I'd hoped to have something substantial up sometime today, but ... eh. It might happen, it might not. Apologies.
If it does happen, great, if not, have an awesome holiday and the JCCW will do its best to rock your Bama-hatin' face off on Friday and into Saturday morning.
Happy Thanksgiving, God bless, War Eagle.
2. The JCCW and the Mrs. JCCW are playing host to the Official Parents and one Official Brother of the JCCW for the holiday. I'd hoped to have something substantial up sometime today, but ... eh. It might happen, it might not. Apologies.
If it does happen, great, if not, have an awesome holiday and the JCCW will do its best to rock your Bama-hatin' face off on Friday and into Saturday morning.
Happy Thanksgiving, God bless, War Eagle.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Midweek preview: Alabama, the nuts-and-bolts
Aaarggghh Real Life delay sorry.
It rests on his shoulders. And his hair. It definitely also partially rests on his hair.
Previewin' usually waits 'til Friday, I know, but with the holiday and a bushel of other columnesque stuff to write about this rivalry, I thought I'd get the nuts and bolts stuff out of the way early.
When Alabama has the ball: it comes down to two people. Well, one group of people, and one person.
The first is the Auburn linebackers. I don't think it's much of a secret what the Tide want to do on offense: they're going to try and pulverize the Auburn defensive front on the ground and then find Jones either over the top on on some intermediate route when in need of a first down. Houston Nutt and/or Les Miles-style trickeration is not going to be in the cards this week.
Unfortunately, the Tide are very, very good at the first part of that equation. They're second in the SEC (behind only the Gators and their ridiculous 6.12 mark) and 28th in the country in yards-per-carry. They rank ahead of the same Ole Miss and LSU teams that gashed Auburn for 5.68 and 4.68 yards-a-carry, respectively. This is less than encouraging.
However: 'Bama hasn't exactly been an unstoppable force, either. Tulane, Ole Miss, Georgia, and LSU have all held the Tide to less than 4 a carry, so there's some hope. Unfortunately, how much remains debatable when you realize that the Tulane game sort of looks like a fluke and that the Rebels, Dawgs, and Tigers are all the the top 15 in the country in rush defense while Auburn ranks 45th. In other words, Alabama is better on the ground than teams Auburn hasn't stopped and Auburn isn't as good as the team that have stopped Alabama. Not good.
So that first "group of people" on which Auburn's success rests is the Auburn linebackers. Stevens, Johnson, Bynes, Evans, maybe Pybus for a play or two--they have to play out of their minds. None of the indecision that plagued them against West Virginia, none of the missed tackles that led to big gains against Ole Miss or Georgia. There was improvement against the Dawgs. There will need to be a lot more against the Tide. If there is, the better health of the defensive line means Auburn should be able to keep the Tide under 4 a carry and their offense largely in check.
Because the matchup in the air favors Auburn. For all of the secondary's youth and, essentially, limb-loss, Auburn ranks 26th in the country in pass defense. Neither Ole Miss not Georgia were able to complete a pass longer than 25 yards or so to a wide receiver. Bottom line is that they're a good unit that playing very well and should be even better with Jerraud Powers having been given another week off to heal his hamstring.
On the other side lies the country's 100th-rated passing offense. Don't pay too much attention to that, though: the Tide rank 51st in average per attempt and if you watched their Georgia game (in which 'Bama finished 13-of-16 for 205 yards), you know how deadly John Parker Wilson can be when he's on. But there's no guarantee he will be: if you watched the LSU game, where Wilson finished 15-of-31 for 215 yards and a pick without a TD, you know how inefficient even the 2008 version of John Parker Wilson can be when he's off.
He's the second person on which the fate of this side of the ball will hinge. Auburn is going to almost certainly adopt the same defensive philosophy they adopted against the Dawgs and Rebels: lots of run blitzes and an extra safety pushed up into the box to stop the ground game, paired with plenty of cushion for the receivers to prevent Jones and Co. from getting loose deep. Wilson's shown good touch on the deep balls this year but hasn't always been as consistent underneath--Auburn will most likely give him those throws and if he does find that consistency, well, Alabama will score points and win the game. If he does that and the linebackers aren't up to snuff, Alabama will win in a rout.
When Auburn has the ball: they will use the spread.
There just doesn't seem like there's much of a point in lining up in the I or ace and trying to bang straight-ahead. Alabama has the fifth-best rush D per carry in the nation. It's fair to say Arkansas and Georgia have better rushing attacks than Auburn does, and 'Bama shut them down to the tune of a combined average of 3.02 yards a rush. It's fair to say that Ole Miss and 'Bama are pretty similar in ability to shut down the run; you'll recall how Auburn (save the one big Tate run) got precisely nothing accomplished running right at the Rebels.
So expect a heavy dose of the spread and a lot of Burns trying to find Billings and Smith on outs and slants, with a few shots downfield with Slaughter, possibly. I wish I had good news to tell you about the chances of this strategy working, but, uh ... Alabama holds opponents to fewer yards-per-pass than all but three other teams in the country.
I still think this is Auburn's best chance, though, because it's not like the Tide has faced a murderer's row of talented passers: Jonathan Crompton, Tyson Lee, Cullen Harper, etc. have a way of making the stats look good. Stafford and Snead didn't have great success but they got some things done, and even Jarrett and Lee and--most damningly--Kentucky's Mike Hartline had days that might qualify as "acceptable." Where Wilson can at least assume that the Tide run game will go somewhere, Burns has no luxury: Auburn will not be able to run without him, will not be able to move much at all without him completing passes whenever available. He will need to be superhuman or Auburn will not break the 10-point mark on offense.
When special teams are on the field: Auburn does have one thing going for it: Dust and the coverage units have Auburn 16th in the country in net punting, 2nd in the SEC. Obviously we're long past the stage where we could expect Dunn or the punt return unit to provide anything, but at least Dust should (emphasis on "should") be able to at least limit Arenas's effectiveness here.
Kickoff returns are kind of a coinflip, since the returners (Davis, Arenas) are dangerous on both sides. Arenas does seem to prefer punts--he has yet to bring one of these back for a TD and the 22.6 average isn't terrifying. (He will score Saturday to spite me.) The placekicking edge goes to the Tide; Tiffin's 9-of-14 between 30 and 50 isn't exactly stellar, but it's of course a damn sight better than what Byrum's done and that's before Foot Lauderdale came down with an "inflamed knee." Auburn seems unlikely to try any field goal longer than 40 yards--and thus very likely to get stopped on downs a time or two inbetween 'Bama's 30 and 20.
So all told, special teams should be a net plus for the Tide. Auburn, of course, cannot afford a net plus for the Tide in special teams and will need their best performance of the season here to have any shot at a victory.
Your bottom line: My response to a rational, even-handed evaluation of each team's strengths is this: AAAARRGGGHHH THE PAIN MY EYES IT BURNS IT BURNS MAKE IT STOP WHAT'S HAPPENING.
I think it's fair to expect Auburn to keep the Tide from the same kind of rampage they went on in Athens and Fayetteville. The Tide are going to get their yards on the ground, but as well as Auburn's secondary has played of late the big play through the air--even with Jones freaking around like the freak he is--should be a rarity if not absent completely. It'll take a long, slow, methodical drive and if the Tide are plenty capable of those when Wilson's on, they're not if he's not.
But the special teams has to be seen as a Tide advantage--what quality team has Auburn outplayed on special teams? None--and it's awful hard to see how Auburn's going to get much accomplished on offense. Won't be able to run. Maaaaaaybe will find ways to pass. Burns is going to have to play out of his mind, both running and throwing the ball, and Ensminger's going to have to find ways of getting Fannin the ball in ways that aren't "sweep left." And the cherry on top is that Byrum's injury makes it even more likely that red zone possessions will end in demoralizing nothing.
And, of course, it goes without saying that turnovers of any kind are death sentences.
It will take, in other words, Auburn's best and first complete performance of the season.
Here is the good news: Auburn is still due for its first complete performance of the season. The offense, in particular, is improving and does seem to be ramping up to the point where it turns the yards it's scraping together into points. And yes, I could see that performance leading to the following things: 10-14 points of some variety from the offense; 3-7 points via a huge defensive or special teams (i.e. kickoff return) play; and 14-17 points allowed by the defense. This puts us in the neighborhood of 17-14, 21-17, 20-20 and the random heartache of overtime.
Do I think Auburn has to play near-perfectly to win? Yes. Do I think the odds of that happening are against them? Yes. Am I convinced they're not going to pull it off? Not in the slightest.
It rests on his shoulders. And his hair. It definitely also partially rests on his hair.
Previewin' usually waits 'til Friday, I know, but with the holiday and a bushel of other columnesque stuff to write about this rivalry, I thought I'd get the nuts and bolts stuff out of the way early.
When Alabama has the ball: it comes down to two people. Well, one group of people, and one person.
The first is the Auburn linebackers. I don't think it's much of a secret what the Tide want to do on offense: they're going to try and pulverize the Auburn defensive front on the ground and then find Jones either over the top on on some intermediate route when in need of a first down. Houston Nutt and/or Les Miles-style trickeration is not going to be in the cards this week.
Unfortunately, the Tide are very, very good at the first part of that equation. They're second in the SEC (behind only the Gators and their ridiculous 6.12 mark) and 28th in the country in yards-per-carry. They rank ahead of the same Ole Miss and LSU teams that gashed Auburn for 5.68 and 4.68 yards-a-carry, respectively. This is less than encouraging.
However: 'Bama hasn't exactly been an unstoppable force, either. Tulane, Ole Miss, Georgia, and LSU have all held the Tide to less than 4 a carry, so there's some hope. Unfortunately, how much remains debatable when you realize that the Tulane game sort of looks like a fluke and that the Rebels, Dawgs, and Tigers are all the the top 15 in the country in rush defense while Auburn ranks 45th. In other words, Alabama is better on the ground than teams Auburn hasn't stopped and Auburn isn't as good as the team that have stopped Alabama. Not good.
So that first "group of people" on which Auburn's success rests is the Auburn linebackers. Stevens, Johnson, Bynes, Evans, maybe Pybus for a play or two--they have to play out of their minds. None of the indecision that plagued them against West Virginia, none of the missed tackles that led to big gains against Ole Miss or Georgia. There was improvement against the Dawgs. There will need to be a lot more against the Tide. If there is, the better health of the defensive line means Auburn should be able to keep the Tide under 4 a carry and their offense largely in check.
Because the matchup in the air favors Auburn. For all of the secondary's youth and, essentially, limb-loss, Auburn ranks 26th in the country in pass defense. Neither Ole Miss not Georgia were able to complete a pass longer than 25 yards or so to a wide receiver. Bottom line is that they're a good unit that playing very well and should be even better with Jerraud Powers having been given another week off to heal his hamstring.
On the other side lies the country's 100th-rated passing offense. Don't pay too much attention to that, though: the Tide rank 51st in average per attempt and if you watched their Georgia game (in which 'Bama finished 13-of-16 for 205 yards), you know how deadly John Parker Wilson can be when he's on. But there's no guarantee he will be: if you watched the LSU game, where Wilson finished 15-of-31 for 215 yards and a pick without a TD, you know how inefficient even the 2008 version of John Parker Wilson can be when he's off.
He's the second person on which the fate of this side of the ball will hinge. Auburn is going to almost certainly adopt the same defensive philosophy they adopted against the Dawgs and Rebels: lots of run blitzes and an extra safety pushed up into the box to stop the ground game, paired with plenty of cushion for the receivers to prevent Jones and Co. from getting loose deep. Wilson's shown good touch on the deep balls this year but hasn't always been as consistent underneath--Auburn will most likely give him those throws and if he does find that consistency, well, Alabama will score points and win the game. If he does that and the linebackers aren't up to snuff, Alabama will win in a rout.
When Auburn has the ball: they will use the spread.
There just doesn't seem like there's much of a point in lining up in the I or ace and trying to bang straight-ahead. Alabama has the fifth-best rush D per carry in the nation. It's fair to say Arkansas and Georgia have better rushing attacks than Auburn does, and 'Bama shut them down to the tune of a combined average of 3.02 yards a rush. It's fair to say that Ole Miss and 'Bama are pretty similar in ability to shut down the run; you'll recall how Auburn (save the one big Tate run) got precisely nothing accomplished running right at the Rebels.
So expect a heavy dose of the spread and a lot of Burns trying to find Billings and Smith on outs and slants, with a few shots downfield with Slaughter, possibly. I wish I had good news to tell you about the chances of this strategy working, but, uh ... Alabama holds opponents to fewer yards-per-pass than all but three other teams in the country.
I still think this is Auburn's best chance, though, because it's not like the Tide has faced a murderer's row of talented passers: Jonathan Crompton, Tyson Lee, Cullen Harper, etc. have a way of making the stats look good. Stafford and Snead didn't have great success but they got some things done, and even Jarrett and Lee and--most damningly--Kentucky's Mike Hartline had days that might qualify as "acceptable." Where Wilson can at least assume that the Tide run game will go somewhere, Burns has no luxury: Auburn will not be able to run without him, will not be able to move much at all without him completing passes whenever available. He will need to be superhuman or Auburn will not break the 10-point mark on offense.
When special teams are on the field: Auburn does have one thing going for it: Dust and the coverage units have Auburn 16th in the country in net punting, 2nd in the SEC. Obviously we're long past the stage where we could expect Dunn or the punt return unit to provide anything, but at least Dust should (emphasis on "should") be able to at least limit Arenas's effectiveness here.
Kickoff returns are kind of a coinflip, since the returners (Davis, Arenas) are dangerous on both sides. Arenas does seem to prefer punts--he has yet to bring one of these back for a TD and the 22.6 average isn't terrifying. (He will score Saturday to spite me.) The placekicking edge goes to the Tide; Tiffin's 9-of-14 between 30 and 50 isn't exactly stellar, but it's of course a damn sight better than what Byrum's done and that's before Foot Lauderdale came down with an "inflamed knee." Auburn seems unlikely to try any field goal longer than 40 yards--and thus very likely to get stopped on downs a time or two inbetween 'Bama's 30 and 20.
So all told, special teams should be a net plus for the Tide. Auburn, of course, cannot afford a net plus for the Tide in special teams and will need their best performance of the season here to have any shot at a victory.
Your bottom line: My response to a rational, even-handed evaluation of each team's strengths is this: AAAARRGGGHHH THE PAIN MY EYES IT BURNS IT BURNS MAKE IT STOP WHAT'S HAPPENING.
I think it's fair to expect Auburn to keep the Tide from the same kind of rampage they went on in Athens and Fayetteville. The Tide are going to get their yards on the ground, but as well as Auburn's secondary has played of late the big play through the air--even with Jones freaking around like the freak he is--should be a rarity if not absent completely. It'll take a long, slow, methodical drive and if the Tide are plenty capable of those when Wilson's on, they're not if he's not.
But the special teams has to be seen as a Tide advantage--what quality team has Auburn outplayed on special teams? None--and it's awful hard to see how Auburn's going to get much accomplished on offense. Won't be able to run. Maaaaaaybe will find ways to pass. Burns is going to have to play out of his mind, both running and throwing the ball, and Ensminger's going to have to find ways of getting Fannin the ball in ways that aren't "sweep left." And the cherry on top is that Byrum's injury makes it even more likely that red zone possessions will end in demoralizing nothing.
And, of course, it goes without saying that turnovers of any kind are death sentences.
It will take, in other words, Auburn's best and first complete performance of the season.
Here is the good news: Auburn is still due for its first complete performance of the season. The offense, in particular, is improving and does seem to be ramping up to the point where it turns the yards it's scraping together into points. And yes, I could see that performance leading to the following things: 10-14 points of some variety from the offense; 3-7 points via a huge defensive or special teams (i.e. kickoff return) play; and 14-17 points allowed by the defense. This puts us in the neighborhood of 17-14, 21-17, 20-20 and the random heartache of overtime.
Do I think Auburn has to play near-perfectly to win? Yes. Do I think the odds of that happening are against them? Yes. Am I convinced they're not going to pull it off? Not in the slightest.
A numbered series of true stories from an Auburn road trip, part 2: that Game, this Game
Preamble
Remember the LSU game? Remember how it was the game that would define the SEC West's collective season, between two top-10 teams that have more-or-less parted the division between them this decade (with only the accursed interlopers from Arkansas throwing spanners into the works)? Remember how Gameday showed up, how cautiously optimistic we all were despite the 3-2 quagmire in Starkville, how the Auburn defense was going to rise up and drag us to greatness like some hulking Icelander hauling a bus behind him on late-night ESPN2?
Football seasons always seem to last longer than they are, but I swear, that game must have taken place a decade ago, if it took place at all. The two teams we thought were coming out of the tunnel that night never showed up--not that week, not any week since. I was there, it was the only Auburn game I've been to in person in three seasons, and it still feels like a backlit mirage.
Which is why, after writing the first part of a planned two-part opus, I never got more than halfway through the second part despite sitting down to complete it more than once. Writing about the experience of the LSU game meant tapping into what the LSU game felt like it meant at the time--and as soon as the final seconds ticked off of Auburn's mindblowingly frustrating Tennessee escape, the LSU game's meaning-at-the-time was fraudulent. I'd planned on ending the post by sounding a note of optimism, but it's impossible to do that without it sounding hollow after, well, any result that Auburn's given us since then.
Until the Georgia game. That glimmer of hope would be excuse enough. But if there was ever any time to sound a note of optimism, however potentially deranged, the week a 5-6 Auburn team heads to Tuscaloosa to face a top-ranked and undefeated Alabama team is the time, right?
So I am, finally, looking back at that LSU game and the difficulties myself and three of my Michigan-rootin' buddies had in returning from it. Again, part 1 is here.
Game
1. We make our way up the our seats in the upper deck--dead on the 50, thank you Will--and if there's one feeling that will never, ever, ever get old no matter how times I experience it, it's clambering out of the tunnel after the long walk of concrete, steel, and lemonade carts and seeing a football field spread out beneath you in all its impossibly green glory. And if that field is in Jordan-Hare Stadium, well, forgive me if I think its green glory is even more impossible than most.
2. The student section erupts as the chorus to Livin' on a Prayer comes over the PA, and naturally my inner Rock Band frontman is rocking along, to the point that my outer Rock Band frontman might have whispered a few lyrics aloud. Oops. Will and I get to discussing the artistic merits of Bon Jovi; I'm essentially pro, he's firmly con. Without getting too deep into it, it's my opinion that if it's a good thing that there aren't too many areas of life where it's sensible (or even encouraged) to scream Take my hand, we'll make it I swear! Whoa-ohhh! Livin' on a prayer! out loud, it's also a good thing that there are a few areas where it is. College football is one of these. (That Auburn is now only a few days away from a game in which their chances will quite literally live on a prayer and nothing else hasn't exactly changed my mind. We'll give it a shot, at least.)
3. Over the course of planning our trip, I probably hadn't built any part of the Auburn experience up to my friends so much as the Waaaaaaaar Eagle! flight. With reason: whatever traditions and spectacle the rest of the country's football teams might be able to offer, only Auburn has this one, and as traditions and spectacles go we all know it's a hell of a show. And if they've never seen it, I haven't seen it in three seasons, so when it's eagle time I'm about as pumped as I've ever been for anything football-related that's not actual football. So, um, as ungrateful as it feels to admit, I'm a little let-down by the actual flight. Nova sort of half-circled once and then made an immediate swoop for midfield. It's the shortest flight I can remember seeing at Jordan-Hare and ... and ... I don't know, just not as spectacular as it ought to be. Worse, I'm in that mode by this point where every single thing from the volume of the crowd in "Two Bits" to the rate of the sun's setting to whether my shoes are tied with appropriate tightness is some kind of omen on Auburn's chances tonight. As freaking sweet as watching Nova devour a handful of mice at midfield on the Jumbotron was, I don't think her aborted flight was the good kind of omen.
4. Other assorted pregame reactions: Speaking of Two Bits, if you have two good legs and don't stand up and holler, what's wrong with you?; I didn't realize they even made hype videos for the band, much less hype videos that had me genuinely fired up for Auburn's marching band, at least until it stopped and I woke up out of the trance with the vague lingering feeling I should have learned to play the trumpet; and tonight we don't only get the Fog of Intimidation, we get the Fireworks of Your Impending Doom. Tremble before Auburn, ye mere smokeless mortals!
6. And now Auburn comes out of the tunnel, and there is a roar, and win or lose, the thousand miles we have driven to get here have been worth it, every single one. It always will be. War Eagle. War Eagle Forever.
7. Kickoff, finally. After a quick first down, LSU is tackled for loss. 2nd-and-long. Sack. 3rd-and-even-longer. Even in the upper deck, the noise is substantial. There is no chance they make this first down. None. And they don't.
8. The pregame consensus that the defenses would more-or-less own the offenses and that special teams would play a critical role plays out over the course of the first quarter, as both teams exchange a series of punts and the eventual swing in field position from LSU's superior punting nets them a long field goal try after only a couple of first downs. It's good. Damn.
9. Damn damn: Auburn punts from midfield, Holliday fumbles the punt onto his own freaking goal line almost, Auburn has to have it--they have to have it, they were right there!--but they don't. Holliday gets back on it. Auburn has gotten no bounces to this point of the season. You can look it up: opponents fumble, they recover, Auburn fumbles, the opponent recovers.
10. Tony Franklin's offense has, to put it politely, not won over the Auburn loyalists in the upper deck. There's a former frat guy standing in the tunnel and talking to someone a few rows above us, making clear that he feels Auburn needs to line up and "knock someone on their ass" Even more entertaining is an elderly gentleman a few rows down and to our left. Every time the offense sets and then unsets to get the new call from the sideline, he throws up his hands and gestures angrily at the field in the universal signal for "Consarn this crazy contraption! It's never going to work!" It's a gesture that works whether directed at Auburn's new offense or his new universal remote control. Long way to go in winning the PR battle, Tony.
11. Is this a drive? That will help. A long pass to Hawthorne, wide open downfield. A long run by Tate around the right end. A pass interference call on Trott in the end zone. Tate up the middle to the goal line! Tate, TOUCHDOWN! 7-3! Who knows, maybe that's all the scoring we'll need?
12. Todd throws the interception we all knew was coming at some point tonight. He just looks too much like Cox for the spirit of Evil Brandon to not inhabit him from time-to-time. Not to mention that seeing him live, it's obvious his arm really is wholly inadequate. I know Franklin's system doesn't require a lot of zip, but Todd has no zip at all. He has less than no zip. He has antizip. Someone should teach him how to throw a knuckleball, 'cause otherwise, he's never going to make it in the big leagues.
13. The defense forces a three-and-out after the pick. Truly, they are the unending chain of demons Grotus warned us about. A couple of punts later, LSU takes over for their final drive of the half. Auburn is unsettled--a player runs onto the field at the last second. LSU seems to notice this and take advantage, snapping quickly. A flag flies. But Auburn is in position anyway--Jarrett Lee pumps once on the screen, maybe he pumps again, floats it out in that direction anyway ... McKenzie's got it! McKenzie's going to score! My friend* has seen the flag and is convinced it's for a 12th man, an oasis of calm in a storm of celebration. He explains hurriedly to me it's not a touchdown. I explain hurriedly back I don't think LSU was set and it is. Here comes the signal ... TOUCHDOWN! 14-3 at the half! Maybe it's a good thing we stuck a tight end at defensive end! We're going to win the game!
14. I mean, we are, right? The offense, sad as it is, can put three points on the board. No way the D allows two TDs for the tie. No ... way. Not today. Not when we're here. Not in front of this crowd. Like that very first third-and-long: it's not happening.
15. Auburn takes the opening kickoff of the second half. Todd runs for a first. Lester is in and looks a substantial improvement on Tate, slashing through holes. They drive inside the 20. Maybe they're going to get that three points quickly, huh? No. Huge sack. Horrific punt. LSU begins their ensuing drive further upfield than Auburn's deepest penetration. Essentially a turnover.
16. Powers slobberknocks Andrew Hatch. He is out of the game. The guy who handed McKenzie six points is in. The turnover hurt, but perhaps now our teams are even even in this half?
17. Not far past midfield, Auburn blitzes. Lee is about to be crushed. Instead he floats a pass deep. I breath a sigh of relief. The pass is a duck. It will not come down near anyone. Except maybe that guy. That guy running underneath it. How could it float this long? Caught. Touchdown, LSU 14-10. What just happened?
18. Onsides kick. Successful. Ostensibly a second turnover. Auburn's D rises to a three-and-out. But I am shaken. I think the crowd is shaken.
19. Another seeing-eye deep ball from Todd somehow flutters past two sets of LSU arms into Dunn's hands for a big gain. It kickstarts another drive. Auburn moves across midfield. 4th-and-1. Play-action. There are sea urchins and earthworms and men in the luxury box who aren't even watching the game and most importantly LSU defenders who are not fooled. At all. Prayer to Trott, picked. Three third quarter turnovers, two precious Auburn drives wasted.
20. Only three plays from inside their 20 and LSU is deep into Auburn territory. They run the little counter flip. The flippee pulls up to throw. He throws towards the endzone. Touchdown. Meltdown. 17-14.
21. Auburn continues to try to run the ball. LSU continues to grind these runs into dust. Punt. Meanwhile, LSU rushes up the middle several consecutive plays and rushes through massive holes on all of the them. What is happening? What game is this?
23. Through what seems like sheer random luck at this point, LSU is stalled and kicks a field goal. Do we have a chance? Auburn takes over. Todd drops back. He throws downfield ... Hawthorne has it! Hawthorne is loose! Go! Go go go! 1st down inside the 20. There is a chance. Holy hell.
24. Well, maybe not. 3rd-and-long. Todd back. He throws--another duck. Like the one Lee threw in the third quarter ... a duck falling ... Dunn is there ... Touchdown. TOUCHDOWN! Touchdown! Byrum with the extra point ... good! 21-20, Auburn!
25. This was where we were last year. The exact same place. A late touchdown. A tiny lead. That loss began with a piss-poor kickoff. Auburn's defense this year begins with ... a decent kickoff. Then a rush that goes nowhere. Then ... incomplete. 3rd-and-long. They will not convert this. They cannot. And they don't. They punt.
26. Auburn needs only a first down to win the game, but I don't expect them to do it. For starters, they would have to run to pull it off, and they haven't been able to run all game. More importantly, the defense will be the ones to finish the game. They will have to be on the field ends as a competitive contest if Auburn's going to win. So it doesn't surprise me in the least when Auburn goes three-and-out.
27. Last year's kickoff has just been replaced by this year's 25-yard punt. LSU will start just on their side of midfield. Now is the time, defense. Now's the time, Auburn. Do this.
28. I stand up to cheer for our defense. My friend stands up. We scream. LSU begins by running up the middle for good yardage. We realize we are almost the only ones standing. What is going on? Stand up, Auburn fans. We stand up for 2nd-and-4. No one else does. We look around sheepishly. No one is standing with us. 2nd-4 on the final drive of the game and Auburn's defense is on the field. But we're not jerks. We sit back down. I can't believe it. One thing is for sure: I will never, ever be able to give my friends sh*t about Michigan's fans again. I am bewildered.
29. LSU drives down the field and scores a touchdown without having been held to so much as a third down. For the second straight year, Auburn's special teams and defense have been given a chance to win the game. For the second straight year, they have failed to do so. It hurts. I figure Tubby must have been as stunned as any of us--he forgot to use his remaining timeouts.
30. After the touchdown, Auburn fans begin leaving our section and, as I look across the stadium, many other sections. Not in droves. The majority of fans are staying. But LSU quite honestly scored too quickly--with Tubby standing around doing nothing they could have bled the clock completely dry. Auburn has time for a miracle, a miracle that Auburn's alleged fans will not see. Why the hell are you people leaving?
31. Auburn picks up a personal foul flag and moves to midfield. Then LSU's end torches Ziemba, sacks, and it's basically over. Todd will not be able to convert 2nd-and-25, or 3rd-and-25, or 4th-and-25. He does not. Auburn loses.
32. There are longer walks out there, for certain, but I have led a stunningly fortunate life and the longest one I know is the silent, miserable one out of the upper deck, down the ramps, and into the sweaty nausea of night after an Auburn loss. It doesn't matter how closely you park to the stadium. Your car is never close enough.
Epilogue
This is the week of the Iron Bowl. This week, there is no walking out. There is no sitting down. You are an Auburn fan, or you aren't.
I'm not going to pretend that exhorting the Auburn fanbase into "being positive and getting behind our guys!!!!" will make any difference. Maybe, maybe, getting behind the guys would matter if the game was on the Plains. In Tuscaloosa, not so much. I don't think Auburn fans should realize that Auburn will head west with a real--if slim--shot at winning this thing and stop, for one week at least, the incessant nattering about Tubby's job security and offensive incompetence and disappointing defense because it'll help Auburn. I think they should stop because that's what Auburn fans ought to do.
Yes, the LSU game hurt. Yes, this entire season has hurt like a wound. For this week, for God's sake, suffer in silence. This is the Iron Bowl. Stand up, damn it. Cheer yourself hoarse, even if it's in your living room. Watch until one team or the other is kneeling on the ball. This is your Auburn football team. They deserve nothing less.
The road back
The trip back to Ann Arbor is almost a much, much more eventful one than we planned on. It's Sunday, and so with no Chick-Fil-A (sigh) we stop by a barbecue joint in Nashville for lunch. Ribs are the other thing I had to eat while traveling back home, and the ones we get live up to expectations, so this appears to be a good decision. I even get a photo snapped out back beside the pile of ash with the "Free Hickory Ash" sign stuck in it to commemorate the occasion.
What we didn't was that we'd arrived in Nashville smack in the midst of its gasoline panic while in pretty substantial need of gas. The first three (maybe four?) stations we find: all out, nothing there but yellow plastic bags on the handles and the numbers stripped off the signs. Oh, and clerks who tell us they don't have any idea where there might be more gas. By the time we hit the third one we're in serious danger of having to get out and push.
Fortunately one of my buddies, unlike the JCCW, has a cell phone that was designed after the millennium. He Internets up the numbers for the stations in the area, starts dialing, and finds one that says they have gas--for the time being. We get there to find two stations on either side of a highway not far from the Interstate, every pump at either station backed up three, four cars deep. (Apparently this wasn't so bad as lines in the Nashville gas panic went, though by the time we'd gotten the tank filled we and everyone around us clearly felt like this about it.)
Any normal person on any normal weekend wouldn't draw parallels between a gasoline crisis and their football team's recent defeat. But I couldn't help it: when we arrived at my friend's place late that night, and I thought back on how pumping gas felt like victory and escaping the Nashville city limits felt like triumph, I realized that perhaps--perhaps--the LSU loss would lead to better things. The Florida win in 2007 felt as good as it did because of the Mississippi St. loss. Upending Georgia in 2001 felt as good as it did because we'd just gotten our tails handed to us by Arkansas. Hell, all of 2004 felt the way it did because of all of 2003.
Of course, I didn't think at the time there would be so much pain followed by so little balm. But the comparison still holds. After this Season of DEATH and the Tide's season of rebirth, Auburn now has the opportunity to win what would likely be the single sweetest victory of Tuberville's tenure. To win bowl eligibility would be one thing. To win bowl eligibility against Alabama in a seventh-straight Iron Bowl victory would be another. To win bowl eligibility against top-ranked, undefeated Alabama in Tuscaloosa for a seventh-straight Iron Bowl victory would be little short of mindblowing. When it's seemed like you might not get home, just pulling into your driveway can be a hell of a rush.
So on the final few miles from my buddy's to my place, I rewound the CD I'd listened to on the way over:
Whoa-a-ho-ho! Whoa-a-ho-ho! We gotta stay positive!
Whoa-a-ho-ho! Whoa-a-ho-ho! We gotta stay positive!
We gotta stay positive, Auburn fans. We might be all right after all.
*Said friend has a blog. You can read his thoughts on his Auburn experience here.
Monday, November 24, 2008
The Works, trappings of the holiday-style
Quickie analysis of how Auburn can win this Saturday: they'll have to GO CRAZY.
Awwwwwww yeah.
Just like a picture print by Currier and Ives. In case you were wondering how Auburn was going to balance the holiday with their preparations for the Tide ...
Also in that same notebook:
Joy. One of these things is not like the other:
Really? Was anyone else's mind kind of blown when they saw this little statistical nugget in the AU-fficial site preview:
Here's your confirmation, Tide fans. Via TWER comes this column from Rheta Grimsley-Johnson--who Jeremy correctly dubs the "Bo Jackson of Auburn journalism"--which I'm sure Tide fans will be all too happy to seize on as proof of our fanbase's pathetic obsession blah blah care more about Alabama than our own blah team blah blah:
And oh, speaking of TWER, this ...
... is awesome.
Here's your confirmation, Auburn fans. It won't surprise any Auburn fans who are paying attention that we've played an awful lot of close games over the past few years and generally done pretty well in those games (until the Season of DEATH, anyway), but it's still kind of cool to see Braves and Birds put it in black-and-white like so:
And lastly ... If you're looking for reasons to be optimistic about Auburn's men's hoops team, you could do worse than "Waller and Sullivan go a combined 9-of-20 from 3 in comeback from 15-point halftime deficit."
Awwwwwww yeah.
Just like a picture print by Currier and Ives. In case you were wondering how Auburn was going to balance the holiday with their preparations for the Tide ...
On Thursday morning, players who aren't on the travel roster will be sent home for Thanksgiving. Auburn will have two more practices or walk-throughs with the traveling players on Thursday and Friday. The players will get a turkey dinner at Sewell Hall but no other trappings of the holiday.... they aren't. Auburn football players don't get a Thanksgiving. Try to remember that as you curse their sorry, no-account hides should things go badly Saturday, please.
Also in that same notebook:
Some fans were critical of Auburn coaches when Fannin didn't play in the two final series of last week's loss to Georgia. Tuberville said Ben Tate played instead because the team was in a passing situation and coaches were more comfortable with his ability to understand and execute blocks.So, the idiot coach who left Fannin on the sidelines against the Dawgs who has no idea what he's doing and shouldn't ever draw a paycheck again is ... Eddie Gran, the one guy we basically all agree should stick around if at all possible after the new OC hire.
"Coach Gran goes with whoever he thinks is best during that series and who he trusts during that series," Ensminger said. "I really don't tell him. We have a plan on when we do want (Fannin) in the ballgame and we have a plan on certain things that we don't want him involved in."
Joy. One of these things is not like the other:
Ensminger, of course, had the bigger grin because he won’t be lining up across from the 6-foot-5, 365-pound Alabama nose guard Saturday in the Iron Bowl.Emphasis mine, through the tears and gnashing of teeth.
“He ain’t bothered me a lick,” Ensminger said.
Bosley, though, will be the one trading licks with Cody, a projected first-round pick in the 2009 NFL Draft if he opts to forego his upcoming senior season.
Bosley, a senior who is listed at 6-foot-4 and 273 pounds, gives up plenty of weight on Cody and will likely need help from one of Auburn’s guards to prevent Cody from squashing Auburn’s tailbacks or quarterback Kodi Burns.
Really? Was anyone else's mind kind of blown when they saw this little statistical nugget in the AU-fficial site preview:
Junior Ben Tate needs just 53 yards rushing to become the 13th player in Auburn history with 2,000 career rushing yards.It's not that it's hard for me to believe Tate is about to pass 2,000 yards--he's a solid, reliable back who's been plugging away since he was a freshman. But after 100+ years of Auburn football--almost all of it spent picking up four- and five-yard chunks on the ground as the first, second, and third offensive plan--only 12 tailbacks have passed over the 2,000-yard hurdle? I know freshmen didn't used to play, but still. Surprising.
Here's your confirmation, Tide fans. Via TWER comes this column from Rheta Grimsley-Johnson--who Jeremy correctly dubs the "Bo Jackson of Auburn journalism"--which I'm sure Tide fans will be all too happy to seize on as proof of our fanbase's pathetic obsession blah blah care more about Alabama than our own blah team blah blah:
Ive always pulled for Auburn and against Alabama. But this year, for the first time, I have to admit I enjoy the latter more.To be perfectly honest, yeah, it strikes me as a little on the extreme side to skip out on the end of, say, Auburn's perfectly workmanlike win over Southern Miss while suffering through the end of Alabama-Mississippi St. But hey, if there was ever a year to adopt this approach, this is the year. Auburn hasn't been this forgettable for a while, and the Tide have basically never been more hatable than they are this year. Rheta doesn't speak for us all, but I'm fine with knowing that particular brand of Auburn fandom is out there. That this version of the Tide deserves more hate than Auburn deserves love ... it's not a particularly constructive worldview, but it's a logical one.
I watch Auburn games whenever I can, and will stick with it to the bitter end, especially if the game is close. But if we are winning in a lopsided fashion, I might take a walk outside at the half, or wash the supper dishes during a time out, or - don't tell anyone - miss the ending. If we lose, unless it's to Alabama, I can accept that without much trouble.
But if it's Alabama playing, winning or losing, I am there until the Fat Lady - the Crimson Tide's homecoming queen - sings. Even when they run up the score, I imagine that the other team might somehow pull off a miracle in the last seconds, same as Auburn did in 1972 ...
Hating Alabama is a worthy passion. It is part of my life, like longing for a white Christmas, or taking in stray dogs.
And oh, speaking of TWER, this ...
... is awesome.
Here's your confirmation, Auburn fans. It won't surprise any Auburn fans who are paying attention that we've played an awful lot of close games over the past few years and generally done pretty well in those games (until the Season of DEATH, anyway), but it's still kind of cool to see Braves and Birds put it in black-and-white like so:
In honor of Nigel Tufnel, I decided to look at the top 11 BCS Conference teams (as measured by winning percentage) since Richt's first season in Athens and rank them by the number of games decided by one score in which they played. To the numbers we go!The biggest upshot to take from this, if you ask me, is that the Pythagorean notion that close wins even out for a given team over time is at least a little flawed--Auburn, Georgia, Texas, and LSU all seem to be able to win tight ones as a "repeatable skill." It doesn't mean that the ridiculous 17-3 stretch in close games Auburn had from '04 through '06 was going to continue, but it's worth noting that one year's good record in close games might not automatically preclude a similar record the following year.
1. Michigan - 43 games - 23-20 - 43% of all games
2. Auburn - 40 games - 27-13 - 40% of all games
3. Georgia - 40 games - 26-14 - 39% of all games
4. Miami - 35 games - 20-15 - 36% of all games
5. Florida - 36 games - 19-17 - 36% of all games
6. Ohio State - 33 games - 22-11 - 33% of all games
7. LSU - 33 games - 24-9 - 32% of all games
8. USC - 31 games - 17-14 - 31% of all games
9. Virginia Tech - 29 games - 12-17 - 28% of all games
10. Texas - 28 games - 20-8 - 28 % of all games
11. Oklahoma - 23 games - 14-9 - 22% of all games
And lastly ... If you're looking for reasons to be optimistic about Auburn's men's hoops team, you could do worse than "Waller and Sullivan go a combined 9-of-20 from 3 in comeback from 15-point halftime deficit."
Hate Week: Saban's Theme
I'd never heard of the band Covenant, much less the following song, until it popped up in my Pandora one day and well-nigh screamed Hey, I'm about Nick Saban! Dig the icy electronic bleeps and bloops, computer-cold visuals, lyrics about emotional isolation and the speaker's desperate insistence to self that he is, in fact, a "happy man" ... this is the soundtrack for a coachbot if I've ever heard one. Enjoy.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Sunday blogpollery, Week 13
It goes like this:
1-4: Alabama = obvs. As for the Oklahoma-Texas-Texas Tech round robin, I'm essentially standing by my thoughts from last week on this subject--that between the Longhorns having played .5 home games in the round robin to the Sooners' 1.5 and Missouri, they deserve to edge ahead of Oklahoma despite the Sooners' nonconference efforts. Only for now, though--if the Sooners go and the road and rout the same Oklahoma St. team that the 'Horns had so much trouble with at home, they'll flip-flop. Both teams are well out in front of Florida, whose loss is worse and who has nothing like "win over otherwise undefeated Oklahoma/Texas Tech" on their resume.
5-8: By adding another top-25 scalp in decisive fashion and seeing the Oregon St. demolition grow in value with each successive week, Penn St. takes a couple of steps forward. Tech can only fall so far when they have the nation's only win over Texas and the Oklahoma St. beatdown--and certainly not behind USC, who still has just the Ohio St. win and not much else to justify moving them any higher. I think an argument can be made that by winning the Oregon St. comparison and an undefeated championship in a league that's owned the Pac-10 this year, perhaps Utah should leapfrog the Trojans as well. But this is where common sense I think has to come in; USC didn't beat Oregon St. the way the Utes did, but I'm fairly sure the Trojans would have put more than three points between themselves and New Mexico, too.
9-17: Not much to see here, aside from Michigan St. and Cincinnati exchanging places and Georgia slipping a spot. With LSU's demise the Dawgs basically don't have a marquee win to their name. Neither does Missouri, but the Tigers have been much more decisive in dispatching the rabble.
18-25: Ole Miss is a pretty easy pick at 18 with wins in Gainesville and Baton Rouge; no one else in the remainder of the poll has anything like a road win over the Florida. The closest contender is Iowa with the Penn St. upset, but even with that I couldn't put them ahead of a Michigan St. team that has fewer losses, better losses, and beat the Hawkeyes head-to-head.
From there the candidates are the ACC contingent of the week, Cal and Oregon, Pitt, and a Northwestern team with an ugly loss to Indiana but also a 9-3 record that includes wins over Iowa and Minnesota (for what the latter's worth). I decided Cal's Michigan St. and Oregon wins were enough to overcome their four losses, and followed them with Georgia Tech-BC-Florida St. in head-to-head order. Pitt (with good wins but ugly losses) and Oregon (with understandable losses but no big wins) will re-enter the poll next week if they can take down West Virginia and Oregon St., respectively, but until then I think Northwestern's done enough for the final spot.
Waitlist: The only other team I looked at even halfway seriously was Western Michigan, but the Broncos' 10-point loss at merely okey-dokey Central Michigan cancels out whatever they might have gained by beating a seriously overrated Illinois team.
 | ||
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alabama |  1 |
| 2 | Texas | 1 |
| 3 | Oklahoma | 2 |
| 4 | Florida | -- |
| 5 | Penn State | 2 |
| 6 | Texas Tech |  5 |
| 7 | Southern Cal | 1 |
| 8 | Utah | -- |
| 9 | Oklahoma State | -- |
| 10 | Ohio State | -- |
| 11 | Missouri | 1 |
| 12 | Georgia | 1 |
| 13 | Oregon State | -- |
| 14 | Boise State | -- |
| 15 | TCU | 1 |
| 16 | Cincinnati | 3 |
| 17 | Ball State | -- |
| 18 | Mississippi | 7 |
| 19 | Michigan State | 4 |
| 20 | Iowa | 6 |
| 21 | California | 5 |
| 22 | Georgia Tech | 4 |
| 23 | Boston College | 3 |
| 24 | Florida State | 2 |
| 25 | Northwestern | 1 |
Dropped Out: Pittsburgh (#18), Brigham Young (#20), Maryland (#21), North Carolina (#22), Miami (Florida) (#23), LSU (#24).
1-4: Alabama = obvs. As for the Oklahoma-Texas-Texas Tech round robin, I'm essentially standing by my thoughts from last week on this subject--that between the Longhorns having played .5 home games in the round robin to the Sooners' 1.5 and Missouri, they deserve to edge ahead of Oklahoma despite the Sooners' nonconference efforts. Only for now, though--if the Sooners go and the road and rout the same Oklahoma St. team that the 'Horns had so much trouble with at home, they'll flip-flop. Both teams are well out in front of Florida, whose loss is worse and who has nothing like "win over otherwise undefeated Oklahoma/Texas Tech" on their resume.
5-8: By adding another top-25 scalp in decisive fashion and seeing the Oregon St. demolition grow in value with each successive week, Penn St. takes a couple of steps forward. Tech can only fall so far when they have the nation's only win over Texas and the Oklahoma St. beatdown--and certainly not behind USC, who still has just the Ohio St. win and not much else to justify moving them any higher. I think an argument can be made that by winning the Oregon St. comparison and an undefeated championship in a league that's owned the Pac-10 this year, perhaps Utah should leapfrog the Trojans as well. But this is where common sense I think has to come in; USC didn't beat Oregon St. the way the Utes did, but I'm fairly sure the Trojans would have put more than three points between themselves and New Mexico, too.
9-17: Not much to see here, aside from Michigan St. and Cincinnati exchanging places and Georgia slipping a spot. With LSU's demise the Dawgs basically don't have a marquee win to their name. Neither does Missouri, but the Tigers have been much more decisive in dispatching the rabble.
18-25: Ole Miss is a pretty easy pick at 18 with wins in Gainesville and Baton Rouge; no one else in the remainder of the poll has anything like a road win over the Florida. The closest contender is Iowa with the Penn St. upset, but even with that I couldn't put them ahead of a Michigan St. team that has fewer losses, better losses, and beat the Hawkeyes head-to-head.
From there the candidates are the ACC contingent of the week, Cal and Oregon, Pitt, and a Northwestern team with an ugly loss to Indiana but also a 9-3 record that includes wins over Iowa and Minnesota (for what the latter's worth). I decided Cal's Michigan St. and Oregon wins were enough to overcome their four losses, and followed them with Georgia Tech-BC-Florida St. in head-to-head order. Pitt (with good wins but ugly losses) and Oregon (with understandable losses but no big wins) will re-enter the poll next week if they can take down West Virginia and Oregon St., respectively, but until then I think Northwestern's done enough for the final spot.
Waitlist: The only other team I looked at even halfway seriously was Western Michigan, but the Broncos' 10-point loss at merely okey-dokey Central Michigan cancels out whatever they might have gained by beating a seriously overrated Illinois team.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Making it up
Yesterday I advanced a theory: Tide fans are less concerned with the Iron Bowl than the SEC championship game; ergo the Tide itself is less concerned with the Iron Bowl than the SEC championship game; thus Auburn's odds of victory in the Iron Bowl are greater than are perhaps widely believed.
I would not expect Tide fans to give this theory much credence, and sure enough, TideFanInTN at Third Saturday in Blogtober took issue with this argument in a post titled "Auburn: when reason fails, just make it up." The response in a nutshell:
First, well, I'm not exactly "down to" this one. I've got other arguments, but also a whole 'nother week to get through them, so for now, we're talking about this one. And while there's some hemming and hawing from TideFaninTN about whether Tide fans are actually looking past the Iron Bowl and how the Tide's players have unequivocally stated they're not taking Auburn for granted--what else are they going to tell the press?--it basically boils down to he-said-he-said. I believe the Tide won't be completely focused and I offered my reasoning; TFiTN believes otherwise and offered his. We even have dueling interpretations of the David and Goliath story, and while I happen to think the one that places the 5-6 team in the David role rather than the undefeated one hews a little closer to the spirit of the thing, I'm biased as hell and there's no doubt TFiTN's is awful clever. We find out who's right Nov. 29.
There is one thing, however, TFiTN is undoubtedly correct about: when looking for reasons to believe Auburn will win this year's Iron Bowl, reason itself doesn't help a whole lot. The Tide has better players. The Tide will be at home. The Tide has won 11 games in frequently dominant fashion, often over good teams, while Auburn has struggled mightily to win five games over a I-AA team, two mid-major also-rans, and Tennessee and Mississippi St. The Tide are the better team. Reason does, for the most part, fail.
But of course, with Auburn's coach, reason only plays so big a role. Many times, reason has failed to give Tommy Tuberville what he needed to explain an Auburn win. So he's made it up. He made this up:
and made this up:
and, in one of my favorites, he made this up (well, he made up the stuff that starts at the 2:45 mark):
So Tubby and Auburn and fans like me have to make things up. I'm OK with that. Maybe next week we all end up OK with that.
I would not expect Tide fans to give this theory much credence, and sure enough, TideFanInTN at Third Saturday in Blogtober took issue with this argument in a post titled "Auburn: when reason fails, just make it up." The response in a nutshell:
Were I an Auburn fan, I would also be looking for any possible reason to believe the Feathered Tigers could beat the Tide. Unfortunately–for you–you are down to “they are overlooking us” and that holds no water either.
First, well, I'm not exactly "down to" this one. I've got other arguments, but also a whole 'nother week to get through them, so for now, we're talking about this one. And while there's some hemming and hawing from TideFaninTN about whether Tide fans are actually looking past the Iron Bowl and how the Tide's players have unequivocally stated they're not taking Auburn for granted--what else are they going to tell the press?--it basically boils down to he-said-he-said. I believe the Tide won't be completely focused and I offered my reasoning; TFiTN believes otherwise and offered his. We even have dueling interpretations of the David and Goliath story, and while I happen to think the one that places the 5-6 team in the David role rather than the undefeated one hews a little closer to the spirit of the thing, I'm biased as hell and there's no doubt TFiTN's is awful clever. We find out who's right Nov. 29.
There is one thing, however, TFiTN is undoubtedly correct about: when looking for reasons to believe Auburn will win this year's Iron Bowl, reason itself doesn't help a whole lot. The Tide has better players. The Tide will be at home. The Tide has won 11 games in frequently dominant fashion, often over good teams, while Auburn has struggled mightily to win five games over a I-AA team, two mid-major also-rans, and Tennessee and Mississippi St. The Tide are the better team. Reason does, for the most part, fail.
But of course, with Auburn's coach, reason only plays so big a role. Many times, reason has failed to give Tommy Tuberville what he needed to explain an Auburn win. So he's made it up. He made this up:
and made this up:
and, in one of my favorites, he made this up (well, he made up the stuff that starts at the 2:45 mark):
So Tubby and Auburn and fans like me have to make things up. I'm OK with that. Maybe next week we all end up OK with that.
The Works, bumper sticker-style
Hate Week doesn't officially kick off until Sunday, and it's not like everyone with an interest hasn't seen the images on the following video a thousand times. But dammit, it's Friday, and sometimes you need that extra push to get through Friday, and I swear, I could watch the following clip every day of the remainder of my life and on that final day--stand back, nurse!--I'll still feel like running myself through a wall:
That is the good stuff, ladies and gents.
Enough. Jay G. Tate recently wrote a blog post in which he quoted Tubby thusly:
So why the faux confusion and mockery, Jay G. Tate? Why lead off your news article on the subject in the same cynical, sarcastic fashion--
Speaking to the enemy of my enemy who's also our enemy. Cool little gimmick for a notebook bit from the Press-Register's Mike Herndon this week--he speaks to the five SEC head coaches that have faced both the Tide and Tigers already this season for a brief scouting report of the Iron Bowl. There's nothing terribly juicy there (big surprise ... maybe Herndon should have tried to get an anonymous breakdown?) but reading between the lines, it seems like Nutt and Miles maybe give Auburn a little more of a chance than Fulmer or Croom and Petrino's probably as blunt as any of them:
NEWS! Not really. Other than the occasional injury update, the big development during the bye week seesm to have been that Auburn picked up a commitment from the nation's top-ranked kicker in the class of 2010. I predict he goes 15-of-17 with an overtime game-winner as a freshman, then develops turf toe in his first game as a sophomore and retires the following week to become a Zen monk as a method of dealing with the pain.
In other non-news, Coleman said he hasn't thought about his possible draft future. I guess that's good; woulda been better if he'd said he wasn't interested, of course, but oh well.
Correlation. Auburn bloggers are finding it between Auburn and all sorts of interesting places. The Auburner, for example, finds it in the world's declining stock markets. J.M. at TWER sees it in the Coen Brothers' classic The Big Lebowski. (By the by, the Bear wore panties.) And the Pigskin Pathos does that literary thing they do so well, finding in the works of various stoic philosophers ways to deal with that aggravating Tide fan you know:
Tommy Hicks provides you your weekly dose of poll hatred. My favorite Harris poll voter has an admission to make:
No one asked, but ... I'm less than thrilled that Tennessee is apparently seriously considering Brian Kelly. The dude has three important stops on his head-coaching resume: 1. turning Grand Valley St. into an unstoppable D-II powerhouse 2. turning Central Michigan into the class of the MAC overnight 3. turning Cincinnati into a serious Big East contender--and quite possibly Big East champion--in two years with a revolving door at QB to rival Oregon's or UCLA's. The track record may not quite be Meyeresque, but it's not far off, either. I don't want him in the SEC.
That is the good stuff, ladies and gents.
Enough. Jay G. Tate recently wrote a blog post in which he quoted Tubby thusly:
"(Fannin) made two very good plays, but I think those other guys could have done the same thing being in that situation," Tuberville said. "There's not a lot of difference in any of those guys."Tate followed this with the following comment:
I have no idea why he said that or even what that means.Really, Jay G. Tate? Because I feel like I have a pretty good idea of both why he said that and what it means. What it means is that just because Fannin made the two huge plays against the Dawgs doesn't mean he's automatically better than Tate or maybe even Lester, any more than Tate's big run against Ole Miss made him better than Fannin. The reason he said it is because that's exactly what nearly everyone (in particular the Jay G. Tates of the world) said after the game anyway, with the conjoining question as to why the better tailback wasn't on the field on those final two drives. Tubby feels like his coaching is in question. So he's responding. It's not that tough to figure out and frankly, I'd be stunned if Tubby reacted in any other way. Saying "Oh, well, now that we've gone back and looked at it, everyone was right, Mario should have been in there and Tate's sorry ass is going to be glued to the bench against Alabama" isn't an option.
So why the faux confusion and mockery, Jay G. Tate? Why lead off your news article on the subject in the same cynical, sarcastic fashion--
Mario Fannin's two touchdowns against Georgia did little to intrigue his head coach.--when there's actually some very good arguments for why Fannin was riding the pine late in that game? It's one thing to have a healthy dose of skepticism; Tate's bluntness was always a necessary counterpoint to Phillip Marshall's unyielding positivism back in Marshall's blogging days for the Huntsville Times, and the HABOTN continues to be a go-to source for information. But it's one thing for a beat reporter to make honest assessments of Auburn's coaching staff and players, and another to descend to the level of a common message board poster by pretending that Tubby's speaking nonsense or writing "Estimated number of fade-route passes Kodi Burns can complete out of 100: 0." That's not analysis; that's mockery. And it makes it harder and harder to take Tate seriously as a rational journalist when it seems more and more the only thing separating him from the boo bird rabble in his comment section is his press pass.
The sophomore moved Auburn ahead during the fourth quarter last week with a 35-yard score, breaking two tackles along the way and simply running away from other defenders. He looked like the kind of playmaker that could galvanize the Tigers' offense.
Then he disappeared.
Speaking to the enemy of my enemy who's also our enemy. Cool little gimmick for a notebook bit from the Press-Register's Mike Herndon this week--he speaks to the five SEC head coaches that have faced both the Tide and Tigers already this season for a brief scouting report of the Iron Bowl. There's nothing terribly juicy there (big surprise ... maybe Herndon should have tried to get an anonymous breakdown?) but reading between the lines, it seems like Nutt and Miles maybe give Auburn a little more of a chance than Fulmer or Croom and Petrino's probably as blunt as any of them:
"Alabama's a great football team. They've been playing in a lot of close, hard-fought games. They play very good defense, can run the ball as well as anybody and have a quarterback who can throw the ball down the field, so they've probably just got to play their game.""Just got to play their game," eh, Bobby? I should be a bigger man than this, but whatever, it's the Iron Bowl we're talking about: Screw you, buddy.
NEWS! Not really. Other than the occasional injury update, the big development during the bye week seesm to have been that Auburn picked up a commitment from the nation's top-ranked kicker in the class of 2010. I predict he goes 15-of-17 with an overtime game-winner as a freshman, then develops turf toe in his first game as a sophomore and retires the following week to become a Zen monk as a method of dealing with the pain.
In other non-news, Coleman said he hasn't thought about his possible draft future. I guess that's good; woulda been better if he'd said he wasn't interested, of course, but oh well.
Correlation. Auburn bloggers are finding it between Auburn and all sorts of interesting places. The Auburner, for example, finds it in the world's declining stock markets. J.M. at TWER sees it in the Coen Brothers' classic The Big Lebowski. (By the by, the Bear wore panties.) And the Pigskin Pathos does that literary thing they do so well, finding in the works of various stoic philosophers ways to deal with that aggravating Tide fan you know:
From Meditations by Marcus Aurelius:Sounds about right.
When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: The people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous, and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood or birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him.
--Book 2.1
Tommy Hicks provides you your weekly dose of poll hatred. My favorite Harris poll voter has an admission to make:
Last week's games didn't produce any changes on my ballot among the top 18 picks, with the exception of an oversight that I corrected. Based on Texas' win over Oklahoma earlier this season on a neutral field I have flip-flopped those two teams on my ballot.You've voted three times since then and you're just now figuring this out? Despite the fact that the Oklahoma-Texas game was the Game of the Century of the Year the week it was played? How can you ... why do you .... aaaaarrrrrrgggGGGGGGHHHHH *head explodes*
No one asked, but ... I'm less than thrilled that Tennessee is apparently seriously considering Brian Kelly. The dude has three important stops on his head-coaching resume: 1. turning Grand Valley St. into an unstoppable D-II powerhouse 2. turning Central Michigan into the class of the MAC overnight 3. turning Cincinnati into a serious Big East contender--and quite possibly Big East champion--in two years with a revolving door at QB to rival Oregon's or UCLA's. The track record may not quite be Meyeresque, but it's not far off, either. I don't want him in the SEC.
Um ... not so much
The recent run of optimistic posts will resume shortly. But this one needs the Smiths. Rename it "Football Program in a Coma" and it fits perfectly ... well, except for the murdering part.
A large part of Tubby's job these days is selling fans, players, recruits, admin, etc. on his continued tenure, so I don't blame him for taking the following tack on why 2008 has been so infected with DEATH ...
Tuberville nodded in agreement that Auburn is just a handful of plays away from having a lot better record. He added, "it's the same season we had last year. There's really no difference, other than we made a few plays at the end of the game. This year we didn't make any. We just didn't get it done; didn't finish. We had a couple of balls in the end zone, extra points missed, field goals. There's really not a lot of difference, other than last year we made a few more plays."... but yeah, it's not quite the case. Auburn has, in fact, made a few plays at the end of games this year. But they came on defense against Mississippi St. and Tennessee, so it's hard to blame Tubby for forgetting them (willfully or accidentally).
Nonetheless, Auburn in (regular season) single-possession games in 2007: 3-3. Auburn in single-possession games in 2008 thus far: 2-4. So Auburn's maybe gotten a little less lucky, had one game's worth more of end-game failure, but it's not like the 2007 team was crazy clutch and 2008's is a bunch of chokers.
More damningly, of course, is that however Tubby might see it, Auburn's just not as good as they were last year. The 2007 team lost only one game by more than a score, for instance, while 2008's lost two. The hardest evidence of the decline comes in Auburn's yardage totals: in 2007, Auburn gained 4.8 yards a play while giving up 4.5 for a net yard-per-play of +.3; in 2008, that number has slipped to -.2.
Chillingly, this isn't exactly a new trend:
2004: +1.8 (6.4/4.8)
2005: +1.0 (6.0/5.0)
2006: +0.6 (5.5/4.9)
2007: +0.3 (4.8/4.5)
2008: -0.2 (4.6/4.8)
There's some statistical noise in the varying quality of the schedule each year--that this year's squad allows less per-play than the 2006 version is directly attributable, I suspect, to the sucktacular qualities of the offenses at Mississippi St., Tennessee, and Vandy--but accounting for those kinds of variable only changes the picture so much. It's not just a few plays here and there. This is the direction Auburn's football program has taken over the past four years, laid out as starkly as it can be.
I fully support another year at the helm for Tubby regardless of what happens at the Iron Bowl. But let's not kid ourselves about to the amount of work that has to be done, to the depth of the turnaround that has to take place. It won't just be about rebounding from 2008. It's about reversing a marked decline that's spanned four seasons now. And while I suspect that in private Tubby doesn't really believe the Season of DEATH is a fluke just waiting for a handful of fourth quarter plays to be completely undone, if he does believe that, Auburn is in trouble.
As Morrissey sings in the video above: I know, I know, it's serious. Forgive me, but there are times even I have to ask: Do you really think
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Georgia recap, quarter the fourth and verdicts
Picking up where we left off, with 15 minutes left to go ...
1. When we last saw our Auburn Tigers, they had just started a drive at their own 10 and picked up a first down on a "daring" half-yard QB sneak on fourth down. (Scare quotes for "daring" since punting back to Georgia from inside's one 20 down 4 on the final play of the third quarter is a far, far stupider decision than trying to sneak for six inches.) 1st-10 on the 20, Auburn in the I. Tate heads right, and what on earth is wrong with Tyronne Green today? The DT just blows past him and wraps up Tate by the ankle a nanosecond after he takes the handoff (line -). Loss of 4.
2. Ugh--Georgia with 293 total yards through three quarters to Auburn's 128 and somehow not only is Auburn still in the game, they're a random fumble and missed FG from the lead. Spread on 2nd-14. Line (+) this time gives Burns oodles of time and he finds Billings crossing underneath a very deep zone by the Dawgs. 9 yards.
3. Spread. Free play when the Dawgs jump--w00t. Burns (+) does even better than the 5 yards, though, stepping forward to avoid the rush and then drawing the linebacker covering Rod Smith on another crossing route with what looks like a scramble. He pulls short of the LOS and hits the newly uncovered Smith for 10.
4. 1st-10, Auburn 35. Ace. Burns drops back and Tate (+) does a fantastic job stoning a blitz off the corner. This and good work by the line (+) give Burns the time to find an open McKenzie downfield near the right sideline. Gain of 21. Burns now 4-4 on this drive for 44 yards and two first downs (three if you count his sneak).
5. Aw hell, it's that ace-shotgun formation I hate and which Ensminger seemed to have wisely scrapped for the first three quarters. Aw hell, it's an option left. Burns (-) pitches way too early and to a pitchman--Tate--who's already mostly covered by a guy Dunn is struggling to block. As he's done once before, though, Tate (+) is able to stop in his tracks and reverse field, picking up enough blocks and then knifing between an LB and a pursuing DT for 9 yards out of that disaster.
6. 2nd-1, on the Georgia 36 now. Two-TE ace. This time it's Berry who gets forced backwards and this DT who's been screwing things up all day--Case Weston-- basically gets a free shot on Tate (line -). He bounces off (+) and gets back to the LOS, preserving third-and-short.
7. 3rd-1. I, twins left. Georgia shifts their LBs to the weakside just a bit and blitz two guys--one a corner--to the strong side, where Fannin takes the handoff. McKenzie makes a phenomenal block, leaning left at the snap to let the blitzing LB try to penetrate on his right, then sealing him. Davis (+) pounds the blitzing corner, Ziemba gets out on the MLB, the rest of the line stands firm, and when the weakside LB can't get over in time Fannin has bolted between Davis and McKenzie's blocks into the secondary (line ++). Smith (+) and Quindarius Carr (+) both get outstanding downfield blocks to turn 10 yards into 20, and then Fannin (++) somehow eludes both Dawg safeties in one slick cut to turn into a TOUCHDOWN! Touchdown, Mario Fannin!
8. Hull is in for the extra point ... it's good! Auburn's up 13-10, their first lead in the fourth quarter (against a D-I team) since the Arkansas game and their first offensive fourth-quarter points against a D-I team--this is absolutely true--since they played LSU. (That's five straight without a single point in the fourth, by the way, save for Arkansas's charity safety.) Speaking of LSU ...
9. ... that was also the last time this team was in this fourth-quarter-TD-yields-small-lead-in-tight-game position, and in that game the slow fade to defeat started with a horrible kickoff. Hopefully Hull will give us something good here. The kick's up ... it goes out of bounds. IT GOES OUT OF BOUNDS. $%#@! $%#@ $%#@ $%#@! (Hull -)
10. Georgia in the I on their 40. Stafford tries to find MoMass on an out; Powers is in good position (cover +) and the pass is behind Stafford's receiver. A flag apparently comes in--neither the flag nor the official who throws it ever winds up in range of the camera--and Powers is assessed what is the single worst pass interference I can ever remember. Horrible, horrible call. Tubby picks up five for arguing, which I'd usually feel a little ambivalent about, but in this case? Scream away, Tubby.
11. 1st-5 at the Auburn 40. Why Powers is playing 15 yards off the line on 1st-5 I don't know, but it's another one of these simple pitch-and-catch outs for Stafford. The Dawgs pick up 10.
12. Stafford drops back again--the Dawgs are only down 3, why have they suddenly forgotten about Moreno? McFadden (+) is step for step with Green on the fly down the right sideline and Green doesn't really have a chance (cover +). The Auburn sideline goes nuts looking for an offensive PI flag, and while I wouldn't usually expect it to be called on a play like this, when it comes two plays after the call on Powers, yeah, I don't blame anyone in orange-and-blue for being steamed.
13. The Dawgs finally remember they have one of the best backs in the country on their team and Moreno follows Southerland through the same massive hole the Dawgs have plowed open every time they've run this lead draw. Coleman breaks loose from his guy and tackles Moreno from behind by his ankles, but not before the Dawgs get an easy 6 out of it.
14. 3rd-4, Auburn 25. The corners are all up at the LOS; no easy outs this time. Good coverage downfield (+), but Moreno comes open on a circle route in the middle of the field; Stafford squeezes it in, Bynes (-) sees it coming but can't get the angle right for a tackle, and by the time Johnson wraps up Moreno's got the first down. I can't believe we've gotta play this guy again next year.
15. 1st-10 on the Auburn 18. Counter to Moreno over the right side, and boy, give Auburn's linebackers some credit here: Bynes (+) stands up a guard and Evans (+) stuffs Southerland's block, meaning Moreno has to try and power his way through a roadblock to reach open space. He nearly manages it, but Etheridge is on hand just in time to hold on for dear life and get him to ground. Gain of 1.
16. Stafford drops back, fires over the middle ... and ah HELL it's a TD to Green. There's not really a thing I think Auburn can do about this: McNeil is right with Green and Powers has him bracketed in front. Stafford throws a rising fastball just high enough to get over Powers but with the kind of speed that McNeil can't react in time. Maybe a little bit quicker rush would have helped, but this isn't poor coverage so much as two future NFL stars making an NFL future stars play.
17. Kickoff ... out of bounds! Everybody sucks today.
18. Two-TE ace, Tate over the left side. Ziemba gets physically thrown to the turf (line -) and Tate unfortunately has one of his 2008 Tate runs where he sort of pauses for a moment to see if maybe something big will open up instead of just trying to plunge for a yard. McKenzie and Bosley are also mostly beaten, so nothing does; no gain.
19. Ziemba, perhaps still reeling from the manhandling he got on the last play, flas starts. (line -)
20. 2nd-15 on the Auburn 35. Spread. Good pocket (line +) and Burns (+) steps up and fires a stunningly accurate rope to a bracketed Billings on a corner-type route; after a brief juggling routine Billings hauls it in for 25 yards. Probably the best throw Burns has made all season.
21. Ace. Waggle; Burns (-) has loads of room in which to operate and McKenzie well open--he throws it behind him, incomplete. McKenzie's got a play on it and really ought to make the catch, but there's no excuse for Burns missing this badly on a six-yard route that uncovered.
22. Spread. Again Burns has time (line +) and chooses to fire deep to Smith down the left sideline; it's not close (Burns -) and Smith was blanketed anyway.
23. 3rd-10 on the Georgia 40. Spread. Tate picks up a blitzer and the line (+) holds, giving Burns (+) the chance to find a curiously open Billings just beyond the sticks on a deep out. This play looks like the sort of play competent offenses run. Who knew they had it in them?
24. 1st-10, Georgia 28. I. Handoff to Tate heading right; Pugh continues the festival of Dawg DTs shoving Auburn linemen all over the damn place by shoving Pugh all over the damn place. Tate has to swing well wide and it's only through two very good blocks from Davis and McKenzie on the edge that he makes the corner. Gain of 3.
25. Two-TE ace. Remember our old pal Vance "Not a Blocking Tight End, the Second" Smith from all those missed blocks in the WVU game? Well, he's back, he's lined up on the left side, and he's more than willing to blow another block, failing miserably to seal off the charging DE as Tate carries up the middle (line -). I'm not sure what Ziemba's doing here, either, as he seems to help Green double-team the guy Green already had well-blocked instead of going after the unblocked linebacker who's standing right in the hole. Full credit to Tate (+) here: he mostly runs through the DE's arm tackle and spins off of the LB's body blow, somehow turning this cruddy play into four yards.
25. 3rd-3. I. Georgia has eight guys in the box and both corners pulled up all the way at the LOS, but in the end this play--Tate going left for nothing--isn't about how many guys there are in the box, it's about Bosley getting his ass planted in the backfield (line -). Davis can't even get to the hole, much less block in it; he has to help Bosley to keep the guy from tackling for a loss. So Tate has to step past that mess and what's waiting for him but Ziemba getting his ass handed to him as well. Disaster.
26. So, 4th-and-3 on the 21. Hull comes out initially; Tubby then calls timeout and makes the (correct) decision to go for it. The odds of 1) your walk-on sophomore kicking his first-ever FG 2) holding Georgia 3) driving into range again 4) said walk-on connecting again are basically nil. Spread. Burns (-) wastes no time trying to find Billings on the fade; he's got half-a-step (maybe a quarter-step) but the pass is just a foot or two overthrown. Don't like Burns's read here; he doesn't even look at the short slant on the other side of the field (which is covered) or wait to see if Tate can slip uncovered out of the backfield (which he does). Also not sure about having the third wideout run another deep route when you just need three yards. For all of that, the biggest problem is the throw. It's not an easy one, but Burns had enough time to make it and if he puts it on the money, it's six points.
27. Georgia takes over. They run that same silly-looking lead draw where Stafford fakes to Moreno who then becomes the lead blocker; it never looks like a big gainer and Evans and Bynes tackle after a gain of 2.
28. Bad flashback to the way the game started: toss right, and a huge gap opens up between the blown-back Coleman (-) and Doolitte, with the FB and a pulling guard cleanly taking out Bynes and Evans. Moreno picks up 10 before anyone touches him.
29. 1st-10, 34. Auburn will have to use their timeouts soon. Dawgs run the exact same play; this time Bynes drifts outside and avoids the guard. He's not in great position to tackle but he can at least slow Moreno up enough so Stevens can arrive and the two of them can bring him down for a gain of 4.
30. 2nd-6 ... BALL BALL BALL! The Dawgs fumble the snap; Stafford barely recovers. Damn! All right!
31. 1:59 left, Auburn just burned their first of two remaining timeouts. If the Dawgs convert this 3rd-8, the game's over. Nifty play here--they fake the long handoff left before flipping a screen to Moreno going right. And for the first time all freaking game, I think Moreno makes a mistake; rather than wait for his several beefy blockers to arrive, he bolts out in front of them, tries to make a move on Thorpe, and falls down all of his own. Whew.
32. Georgia does a bunch of wacky, wild stuff on the punt team to try and draw Auburn off, but ends up committing a false start as Auburn sort of jumps. Scary. For maybe the first time all day, Dunn makes a decent play; he tracks down the ball as it plummets towards the sideline and fair catches. If it gets past him, it's trouble.
33. So, Auburn's at their own 20, no timeouts, 1:44 left, needing a touchdown. Spread from this point on unless otherwise noted. Burns (-) gets a tiny bit of heat on 1st down and fires well wide on a cross-field out.
34. 2nd-10. Billings on a little slip route over the middle; Burns finds him and Billings (+) does a good job to hang onto the ball after getting popped. Gain of 5.
35. 3rd-5. QB draw, and the line (+) and a thumping block from Tate (+) give Burns all kinds of room on the left side. Gain of 14.
36. 1st-10, Auburn 39. Georgia is still discussing their secondary alignment at the snap; it's a good thing, because on a three-man rush Bosley gets bull rushed smack into Burns's lap yet again (line -) and the throw to Billings on an out is both a bit wobbly and all the way across the field. But the confused Dawgs are in no position to do anything about it and Billings steps out after a quick-n-easy six-yard gain.
37. 57 seconds left. Burns makes a nice move, buying time by stepping through the line into acres of space. Too bad he follows it by throwing his 15-yard pass to a wide-slap-open Dunn directly into the dirt (-). Opportunity missed right there.
38. 3rd-4, Auburn 45. This is better from Burns (+) -- this time he steps up and just keeps trucking, picking up 17 yards down to the Georgia 38.
39. Burns spikes it, stopping the clock with 38 seconds left. But why? In the time it takes the chain gang to get re-set, Burns can't call a play of some kind? It makes sense when the clock is running willy-nilly after first or second down, but here it's just a waste of a down Auburn might need.
40. 2nd-10. Auburn has to rush to the line after not getting the play in for entirely too long; they never look comfortable and though the line (+) gives Burns the best pocket he's had yet on this drive, he can do nothing but throw it away.
41. 3rd-10. Come on, Auburn. Again, no pressure from the Dawgs (line +), Burns fires up the fade deep to Smith down the left sideline, and the Dawg corner gives him a one-handed shove for no reason whatsoever. 15 yards, first down, we'll take it thankyouverymuch.
42. 1st-10 on the 23. Burns drops back--but first, he and Tate run the least-convincing play-action fake in the history of play-action fakes. Then Burns (-) tries to fade to Smith yet again; covered, not close.
43. This time Burns rolls right, and Curran cuts through the line to blast him; just before he arrives Burns (+) fires a dart to Billings on the sideline comeback route. This is all arm and accurate nonetheless. Good play, 9 yards.
44. 3rd-1, Georgia 19. Smith runs a slant-and-go; he stumbles coming out of his route and the play never has a chance. Little bit of contact, but not really enough to flag. Don't think this one's on Burns, since the timing was so screwed up the Smith stumble.
45. 4th-1. This is it. We could really use a good pocket; Berry soils that hope by getting bull-rushed into Burns's face. Line -. Again. Burns (-) doesn't help matters by panicking a bit; the rusher still doesn't have a grasp on him and with no other rushers nearby, Burns should probably scramble a bit. Instead he arcs a prayer towards Tate, who's somehow drifting into the corner of the end zone, that falls harmlessly out of bounds. DAMMIT. No, seriously: damn it. There's no flag here, by the way--Tate's defender face guards, but face guarding is legal in college and I'm pretty sure this pass in uncatchable anyway.
46. Georgia kneels out the single remaining second. That makes four drives inside the Georgia 25 that combined to produce zero points. Bleccccch.
Plus-minus
Offense: Tate +8, Fannin +7, Smith +2, Burns +1, Carr +1, Billings +1, Hawthorne +1, Davis +1, Trott -1, "Line" -2.
Defense: "Cover" +6, McFadden +4, Marks +4, Doolittle +3, Goggans +3, Stevens +2, Blanc +1, Ricks +1, Evans +1, Coleman +1, Carter +1, Etheridge 0, Johnson -1, Thorpe -1, Bynes -1, McNeil -1, Powers -1, Clayton -2.
Special teams: Byrum -1, Hull -2, "ST" -5.
Final verdicts
Overall, definitely a step up from the Ole Miss game, particularly on the defensive side of the ball and in the Auburn backfield. Basically, what Auburn is is a team that's going to get the ball into the red zone on offense and probably allow the ball to get into the red zone on defense; right now the D is making the necessary red zone plays and the offense isn't. If the latter can improve--and given the relative lack of turnovers, they sort of did--while the former keeps it up, this just might work.
Breaking it down by position:
Running backs: I considered making this its own separate post, but instead I'll summarize here: I don't have a huge problem with Tate getting the lion's share of snaps in the fourth quarter. Do I think Fannin is the better, more explosive all-around back? Yes. Do I wish he'd become Auburn's de facto No. 1 back with all the carries that implies? Yes, yes I do.
But Tubby wasn't lying when he said Tate 1. was running well; despite his substantially lesser average than Fannin, he'd gotten much cruddier blocking and repeatedly made something out of nothing 2. is the better pass-blocker; Tate wasn't beaten by a blitzer all day while Fannin's miserable fluff on the same assignment helped lead to one of the two third quarter three-and-outs. Fannin's TD run was sensational, but it was set up in large part by Tate three times getting yards where his blockers hadn't given him any and making the block in pass-protection that resulted in the 21-yard throw to McKenzie. There was no point in having Fannin on the field for the final drive--Tate's pass-blocking skills make hi the clear choice there. Maybe he should have been on the field for the previous one, but that drive made the Georgia 21 and its ultimate failure wasn't Tate's--it was the line's, Burns's, and some less-than-imaginative play-calling. In short: the Internet rabble are right that Fannin's the better back. But not on pass plays and it's not some clearcut, obvious decision.
The real story here is that no matter who was in the backfield, the Auburn RBs made plays. They broke tackles, they gained extra yards, they blocked blitzers, they essentially looked like what Auburn RBs are supposed to look like for the first time in weeks and weeks.
Quarterback: Burns was basically what he was against Ole Miss, trading his competence on bombs for competence on the intermediate stuff, but minus the crippling interceptions. That's a pretty big honking minus if you ask me. If he can build on that by adding some pluses or two besides his running ability, we'll be getting somewhere.
Line: A little better day in run-blocking--thanks in no small part to the arrival of McKenzie, who I would call the best offensive lineman on the field for Auburn--but a big step back in pass protection despite the general lack of sacks. Against Ole Miss, the failings of the pass game belonged to Burns and the receivers alone; here they belonged to the line as well. The RBs and the Burns showed improvement. The line--particularly in that awful third quarter, where I listed them at -6 --did not.
Receivers: As usual, nothing special. A general +1 seems about right. On the one hand, I don't hand out pluses for routine grabs, so that hurts their rating; on the other, I don't hand out minuses when Burns has all day and no one breaks open, so I figure it evens out.
D-line: This grading system is very generous to d-lineman, who get pluses when they make a play but no minus when they just sort of get stood up. So I'd take these with a grain of salt: Marks started off gangbusters, for instance, but disappeared in the second half. The pass-rush was nonexistent. What I think we can say is this: the DTs still had a pretty good day overall, Goggans was more helpful in run support than expected, and Auburn's got to get more out of Coleman. +1 for a guy of his talent is not enough.
Linebackers: Not great, but better than I was expecting, to be honest with you. Stevens was substantially better all-around and Bynes was much more active than against either WVU or Ole Miss; several of the minuses in this group came from failed tackle attempts against Knowshon Moreno, and it's not like that's an easy thing to do. Between the DTs and the improvement here, there's some hope Auburn can slow down the Tide's running game.
Secondary: Terrific performance IMO. Consider: a team with Matt Stafford throwing to A.J. Green and Mohammed Massaqoi had as their longest pass play of the day a 35-yard screen to the running back. That guys like McNeil, Powers, and Thorpe played such a small role in this recap should tell you how well they had their guys blanketed, and it left Stafford to try and test McFadden, who responded brilliantly. With Powers only going to be more healthy against the Tide, the secondary, of all things, is probably the strength of this defense. Now if they can just straighten out the occasional "oops, we just gave them a free 10 yards" alignment problems, we're golden.
Coaching: Initially, I thought the fade to Billings on 4th-and-2 was a passable call; Burns had a shot at completing it, and that's an immediate six points, right? On review, though a) it wasn't as open as I'd thought and it's not like with a well-covered slant and another deep post the play was designed to have any shot at picking up the first b) even if it wasn't an awful call, the one before it to run a standard sweep on 3rd-and-3 into a stacked front? Ewwwwww. And those weren't the worst calls pf the game: when confronted with 3rd-and-1 inside the 15 on Auburn's final drive, why not let Burns take off? The only way this fails is if he's stopped short of the first down, and after he'd already rushed for 15-plus yards twice on this drive, what were the odds of that? And even past that: do you really think Burns's odds of sticking the ball in the end zone are better by air or on the ground? Exactly.
Here's to hoping that with a bye week that won't be spent installing half a new offense, Ensminger can put together some ... you know what? Nevermind. Let's just hope Auburn can execute.
1. When we last saw our Auburn Tigers, they had just started a drive at their own 10 and picked up a first down on a "daring" half-yard QB sneak on fourth down. (Scare quotes for "daring" since punting back to Georgia from inside's one 20 down 4 on the final play of the third quarter is a far, far stupider decision than trying to sneak for six inches.) 1st-10 on the 20, Auburn in the I. Tate heads right, and what on earth is wrong with Tyronne Green today? The DT just blows past him and wraps up Tate by the ankle a nanosecond after he takes the handoff (line -). Loss of 4.
2. Ugh--Georgia with 293 total yards through three quarters to Auburn's 128 and somehow not only is Auburn still in the game, they're a random fumble and missed FG from the lead. Spread on 2nd-14. Line (+) this time gives Burns oodles of time and he finds Billings crossing underneath a very deep zone by the Dawgs. 9 yards.
3. Spread. Free play when the Dawgs jump--w00t. Burns (+) does even better than the 5 yards, though, stepping forward to avoid the rush and then drawing the linebacker covering Rod Smith on another crossing route with what looks like a scramble. He pulls short of the LOS and hits the newly uncovered Smith for 10.
4. 1st-10, Auburn 35. Ace. Burns drops back and Tate (+) does a fantastic job stoning a blitz off the corner. This and good work by the line (+) give Burns the time to find an open McKenzie downfield near the right sideline. Gain of 21. Burns now 4-4 on this drive for 44 yards and two first downs (three if you count his sneak).
5. Aw hell, it's that ace-shotgun formation I hate and which Ensminger seemed to have wisely scrapped for the first three quarters. Aw hell, it's an option left. Burns (-) pitches way too early and to a pitchman--Tate--who's already mostly covered by a guy Dunn is struggling to block. As he's done once before, though, Tate (+) is able to stop in his tracks and reverse field, picking up enough blocks and then knifing between an LB and a pursuing DT for 9 yards out of that disaster.
6. 2nd-1, on the Georgia 36 now. Two-TE ace. This time it's Berry who gets forced backwards and this DT who's been screwing things up all day--Case Weston-- basically gets a free shot on Tate (line -). He bounces off (+) and gets back to the LOS, preserving third-and-short.
7. 3rd-1. I, twins left. Georgia shifts their LBs to the weakside just a bit and blitz two guys--one a corner--to the strong side, where Fannin takes the handoff. McKenzie makes a phenomenal block, leaning left at the snap to let the blitzing LB try to penetrate on his right, then sealing him. Davis (+) pounds the blitzing corner, Ziemba gets out on the MLB, the rest of the line stands firm, and when the weakside LB can't get over in time Fannin has bolted between Davis and McKenzie's blocks into the secondary (line ++). Smith (+) and Quindarius Carr (+) both get outstanding downfield blocks to turn 10 yards into 20, and then Fannin (++) somehow eludes both Dawg safeties in one slick cut to turn into a TOUCHDOWN! Touchdown, Mario Fannin!
8. Hull is in for the extra point ... it's good! Auburn's up 13-10, their first lead in the fourth quarter (against a D-I team) since the Arkansas game and their first offensive fourth-quarter points against a D-I team--this is absolutely true--since they played LSU. (That's five straight without a single point in the fourth, by the way, save for Arkansas's charity safety.) Speaking of LSU ...
9. ... that was also the last time this team was in this fourth-quarter-TD-yields-small-lead-in-tight-game position, and in that game the slow fade to defeat started with a horrible kickoff. Hopefully Hull will give us something good here. The kick's up ... it goes out of bounds. IT GOES OUT OF BOUNDS. $%#@! $%#@ $%#@ $%#@! (Hull -)
10. Georgia in the I on their 40. Stafford tries to find MoMass on an out; Powers is in good position (cover +) and the pass is behind Stafford's receiver. A flag apparently comes in--neither the flag nor the official who throws it ever winds up in range of the camera--and Powers is assessed what is the single worst pass interference I can ever remember. Horrible, horrible call. Tubby picks up five for arguing, which I'd usually feel a little ambivalent about, but in this case? Scream away, Tubby.
11. 1st-5 at the Auburn 40. Why Powers is playing 15 yards off the line on 1st-5 I don't know, but it's another one of these simple pitch-and-catch outs for Stafford. The Dawgs pick up 10.
12. Stafford drops back again--the Dawgs are only down 3, why have they suddenly forgotten about Moreno? McFadden (+) is step for step with Green on the fly down the right sideline and Green doesn't really have a chance (cover +). The Auburn sideline goes nuts looking for an offensive PI flag, and while I wouldn't usually expect it to be called on a play like this, when it comes two plays after the call on Powers, yeah, I don't blame anyone in orange-and-blue for being steamed.
13. The Dawgs finally remember they have one of the best backs in the country on their team and Moreno follows Southerland through the same massive hole the Dawgs have plowed open every time they've run this lead draw. Coleman breaks loose from his guy and tackles Moreno from behind by his ankles, but not before the Dawgs get an easy 6 out of it.
14. 3rd-4, Auburn 25. The corners are all up at the LOS; no easy outs this time. Good coverage downfield (+), but Moreno comes open on a circle route in the middle of the field; Stafford squeezes it in, Bynes (-) sees it coming but can't get the angle right for a tackle, and by the time Johnson wraps up Moreno's got the first down. I can't believe we've gotta play this guy again next year.
15. 1st-10 on the Auburn 18. Counter to Moreno over the right side, and boy, give Auburn's linebackers some credit here: Bynes (+) stands up a guard and Evans (+) stuffs Southerland's block, meaning Moreno has to try and power his way through a roadblock to reach open space. He nearly manages it, but Etheridge is on hand just in time to hold on for dear life and get him to ground. Gain of 1.
16. Stafford drops back, fires over the middle ... and ah HELL it's a TD to Green. There's not really a thing I think Auburn can do about this: McNeil is right with Green and Powers has him bracketed in front. Stafford throws a rising fastball just high enough to get over Powers but with the kind of speed that McNeil can't react in time. Maybe a little bit quicker rush would have helped, but this isn't poor coverage so much as two future NFL stars making an NFL future stars play.
17. Kickoff ... out of bounds! Everybody sucks today.
18. Two-TE ace, Tate over the left side. Ziemba gets physically thrown to the turf (line -) and Tate unfortunately has one of his 2008 Tate runs where he sort of pauses for a moment to see if maybe something big will open up instead of just trying to plunge for a yard. McKenzie and Bosley are also mostly beaten, so nothing does; no gain.
19. Ziemba, perhaps still reeling from the manhandling he got on the last play, flas starts. (line -)
20. 2nd-15 on the Auburn 35. Spread. Good pocket (line +) and Burns (+) steps up and fires a stunningly accurate rope to a bracketed Billings on a corner-type route; after a brief juggling routine Billings hauls it in for 25 yards. Probably the best throw Burns has made all season.
21. Ace. Waggle; Burns (-) has loads of room in which to operate and McKenzie well open--he throws it behind him, incomplete. McKenzie's got a play on it and really ought to make the catch, but there's no excuse for Burns missing this badly on a six-yard route that uncovered.
22. Spread. Again Burns has time (line +) and chooses to fire deep to Smith down the left sideline; it's not close (Burns -) and Smith was blanketed anyway.
23. 3rd-10 on the Georgia 40. Spread. Tate picks up a blitzer and the line (+) holds, giving Burns (+) the chance to find a curiously open Billings just beyond the sticks on a deep out. This play looks like the sort of play competent offenses run. Who knew they had it in them?
24. 1st-10, Georgia 28. I. Handoff to Tate heading right; Pugh continues the festival of Dawg DTs shoving Auburn linemen all over the damn place by shoving Pugh all over the damn place. Tate has to swing well wide and it's only through two very good blocks from Davis and McKenzie on the edge that he makes the corner. Gain of 3.
25. Two-TE ace. Remember our old pal Vance "Not a Blocking Tight End, the Second" Smith from all those missed blocks in the WVU game? Well, he's back, he's lined up on the left side, and he's more than willing to blow another block, failing miserably to seal off the charging DE as Tate carries up the middle (line -). I'm not sure what Ziemba's doing here, either, as he seems to help Green double-team the guy Green already had well-blocked instead of going after the unblocked linebacker who's standing right in the hole. Full credit to Tate (+) here: he mostly runs through the DE's arm tackle and spins off of the LB's body blow, somehow turning this cruddy play into four yards.
25. 3rd-3. I. Georgia has eight guys in the box and both corners pulled up all the way at the LOS, but in the end this play--Tate going left for nothing--isn't about how many guys there are in the box, it's about Bosley getting his ass planted in the backfield (line -). Davis can't even get to the hole, much less block in it; he has to help Bosley to keep the guy from tackling for a loss. So Tate has to step past that mess and what's waiting for him but Ziemba getting his ass handed to him as well. Disaster.
26. So, 4th-and-3 on the 21. Hull comes out initially; Tubby then calls timeout and makes the (correct) decision to go for it. The odds of 1) your walk-on sophomore kicking his first-ever FG 2) holding Georgia 3) driving into range again 4) said walk-on connecting again are basically nil. Spread. Burns (-) wastes no time trying to find Billings on the fade; he's got half-a-step (maybe a quarter-step) but the pass is just a foot or two overthrown. Don't like Burns's read here; he doesn't even look at the short slant on the other side of the field (which is covered) or wait to see if Tate can slip uncovered out of the backfield (which he does). Also not sure about having the third wideout run another deep route when you just need three yards. For all of that, the biggest problem is the throw. It's not an easy one, but Burns had enough time to make it and if he puts it on the money, it's six points.
27. Georgia takes over. They run that same silly-looking lead draw where Stafford fakes to Moreno who then becomes the lead blocker; it never looks like a big gainer and Evans and Bynes tackle after a gain of 2.
28. Bad flashback to the way the game started: toss right, and a huge gap opens up between the blown-back Coleman (-) and Doolitte, with the FB and a pulling guard cleanly taking out Bynes and Evans. Moreno picks up 10 before anyone touches him.
29. 1st-10, 34. Auburn will have to use their timeouts soon. Dawgs run the exact same play; this time Bynes drifts outside and avoids the guard. He's not in great position to tackle but he can at least slow Moreno up enough so Stevens can arrive and the two of them can bring him down for a gain of 4.
30. 2nd-6 ... BALL BALL BALL! The Dawgs fumble the snap; Stafford barely recovers. Damn! All right!
31. 1:59 left, Auburn just burned their first of two remaining timeouts. If the Dawgs convert this 3rd-8, the game's over. Nifty play here--they fake the long handoff left before flipping a screen to Moreno going right. And for the first time all freaking game, I think Moreno makes a mistake; rather than wait for his several beefy blockers to arrive, he bolts out in front of them, tries to make a move on Thorpe, and falls down all of his own. Whew.
32. Georgia does a bunch of wacky, wild stuff on the punt team to try and draw Auburn off, but ends up committing a false start as Auburn sort of jumps. Scary. For maybe the first time all day, Dunn makes a decent play; he tracks down the ball as it plummets towards the sideline and fair catches. If it gets past him, it's trouble.
33. So, Auburn's at their own 20, no timeouts, 1:44 left, needing a touchdown. Spread from this point on unless otherwise noted. Burns (-) gets a tiny bit of heat on 1st down and fires well wide on a cross-field out.
34. 2nd-10. Billings on a little slip route over the middle; Burns finds him and Billings (+) does a good job to hang onto the ball after getting popped. Gain of 5.
35. 3rd-5. QB draw, and the line (+) and a thumping block from Tate (+) give Burns all kinds of room on the left side. Gain of 14.
36. 1st-10, Auburn 39. Georgia is still discussing their secondary alignment at the snap; it's a good thing, because on a three-man rush Bosley gets bull rushed smack into Burns's lap yet again (line -) and the throw to Billings on an out is both a bit wobbly and all the way across the field. But the confused Dawgs are in no position to do anything about it and Billings steps out after a quick-n-easy six-yard gain.
37. 57 seconds left. Burns makes a nice move, buying time by stepping through the line into acres of space. Too bad he follows it by throwing his 15-yard pass to a wide-slap-open Dunn directly into the dirt (-). Opportunity missed right there.
38. 3rd-4, Auburn 45. This is better from Burns (+) -- this time he steps up and just keeps trucking, picking up 17 yards down to the Georgia 38.
39. Burns spikes it, stopping the clock with 38 seconds left. But why? In the time it takes the chain gang to get re-set, Burns can't call a play of some kind? It makes sense when the clock is running willy-nilly after first or second down, but here it's just a waste of a down Auburn might need.
40. 2nd-10. Auburn has to rush to the line after not getting the play in for entirely too long; they never look comfortable and though the line (+) gives Burns the best pocket he's had yet on this drive, he can do nothing but throw it away.
41. 3rd-10. Come on, Auburn. Again, no pressure from the Dawgs (line +), Burns fires up the fade deep to Smith down the left sideline, and the Dawg corner gives him a one-handed shove for no reason whatsoever. 15 yards, first down, we'll take it thankyouverymuch.
42. 1st-10 on the 23. Burns drops back--but first, he and Tate run the least-convincing play-action fake in the history of play-action fakes. Then Burns (-) tries to fade to Smith yet again; covered, not close.
43. This time Burns rolls right, and Curran cuts through the line to blast him; just before he arrives Burns (+) fires a dart to Billings on the sideline comeback route. This is all arm and accurate nonetheless. Good play, 9 yards.
44. 3rd-1, Georgia 19. Smith runs a slant-and-go; he stumbles coming out of his route and the play never has a chance. Little bit of contact, but not really enough to flag. Don't think this one's on Burns, since the timing was so screwed up the Smith stumble.
45. 4th-1. This is it. We could really use a good pocket; Berry soils that hope by getting bull-rushed into Burns's face. Line -. Again. Burns (-) doesn't help matters by panicking a bit; the rusher still doesn't have a grasp on him and with no other rushers nearby, Burns should probably scramble a bit. Instead he arcs a prayer towards Tate, who's somehow drifting into the corner of the end zone, that falls harmlessly out of bounds. DAMMIT. No, seriously: damn it. There's no flag here, by the way--Tate's defender face guards, but face guarding is legal in college and I'm pretty sure this pass in uncatchable anyway.
46. Georgia kneels out the single remaining second. That makes four drives inside the Georgia 25 that combined to produce zero points. Bleccccch.
Plus-minus
Offense: Tate +8, Fannin +7, Smith +2, Burns +1, Carr +1, Billings +1, Hawthorne +1, Davis +1, Trott -1, "Line" -2.
Defense: "Cover" +6, McFadden +4, Marks +4, Doolittle +3, Goggans +3, Stevens +2, Blanc +1, Ricks +1, Evans +1, Coleman +1, Carter +1, Etheridge 0, Johnson -1, Thorpe -1, Bynes -1, McNeil -1, Powers -1, Clayton -2.
Special teams: Byrum -1, Hull -2, "ST" -5.
Final verdicts
Overall, definitely a step up from the Ole Miss game, particularly on the defensive side of the ball and in the Auburn backfield. Basically, what Auburn is is a team that's going to get the ball into the red zone on offense and probably allow the ball to get into the red zone on defense; right now the D is making the necessary red zone plays and the offense isn't. If the latter can improve--and given the relative lack of turnovers, they sort of did--while the former keeps it up, this just might work.
Breaking it down by position:
Running backs: I considered making this its own separate post, but instead I'll summarize here: I don't have a huge problem with Tate getting the lion's share of snaps in the fourth quarter. Do I think Fannin is the better, more explosive all-around back? Yes. Do I wish he'd become Auburn's de facto No. 1 back with all the carries that implies? Yes, yes I do.
But Tubby wasn't lying when he said Tate 1. was running well; despite his substantially lesser average than Fannin, he'd gotten much cruddier blocking and repeatedly made something out of nothing 2. is the better pass-blocker; Tate wasn't beaten by a blitzer all day while Fannin's miserable fluff on the same assignment helped lead to one of the two third quarter three-and-outs. Fannin's TD run was sensational, but it was set up in large part by Tate three times getting yards where his blockers hadn't given him any and making the block in pass-protection that resulted in the 21-yard throw to McKenzie. There was no point in having Fannin on the field for the final drive--Tate's pass-blocking skills make hi the clear choice there. Maybe he should have been on the field for the previous one, but that drive made the Georgia 21 and its ultimate failure wasn't Tate's--it was the line's, Burns's, and some less-than-imaginative play-calling. In short: the Internet rabble are right that Fannin's the better back. But not on pass plays and it's not some clearcut, obvious decision.
The real story here is that no matter who was in the backfield, the Auburn RBs made plays. They broke tackles, they gained extra yards, they blocked blitzers, they essentially looked like what Auburn RBs are supposed to look like for the first time in weeks and weeks.
Quarterback: Burns was basically what he was against Ole Miss, trading his competence on bombs for competence on the intermediate stuff, but minus the crippling interceptions. That's a pretty big honking minus if you ask me. If he can build on that by adding some pluses or two besides his running ability, we'll be getting somewhere.
Line: A little better day in run-blocking--thanks in no small part to the arrival of McKenzie, who I would call the best offensive lineman on the field for Auburn--but a big step back in pass protection despite the general lack of sacks. Against Ole Miss, the failings of the pass game belonged to Burns and the receivers alone; here they belonged to the line as well. The RBs and the Burns showed improvement. The line--particularly in that awful third quarter, where I listed them at -6 --did not.
Receivers: As usual, nothing special. A general +1 seems about right. On the one hand, I don't hand out pluses for routine grabs, so that hurts their rating; on the other, I don't hand out minuses when Burns has all day and no one breaks open, so I figure it evens out.
D-line: This grading system is very generous to d-lineman, who get pluses when they make a play but no minus when they just sort of get stood up. So I'd take these with a grain of salt: Marks started off gangbusters, for instance, but disappeared in the second half. The pass-rush was nonexistent. What I think we can say is this: the DTs still had a pretty good day overall, Goggans was more helpful in run support than expected, and Auburn's got to get more out of Coleman. +1 for a guy of his talent is not enough.
Linebackers: Not great, but better than I was expecting, to be honest with you. Stevens was substantially better all-around and Bynes was much more active than against either WVU or Ole Miss; several of the minuses in this group came from failed tackle attempts against Knowshon Moreno, and it's not like that's an easy thing to do. Between the DTs and the improvement here, there's some hope Auburn can slow down the Tide's running game.
Secondary: Terrific performance IMO. Consider: a team with Matt Stafford throwing to A.J. Green and Mohammed Massaqoi had as their longest pass play of the day a 35-yard screen to the running back. That guys like McNeil, Powers, and Thorpe played such a small role in this recap should tell you how well they had their guys blanketed, and it left Stafford to try and test McFadden, who responded brilliantly. With Powers only going to be more healthy against the Tide, the secondary, of all things, is probably the strength of this defense. Now if they can just straighten out the occasional "oops, we just gave them a free 10 yards" alignment problems, we're golden.
Coaching: Initially, I thought the fade to Billings on 4th-and-2 was a passable call; Burns had a shot at completing it, and that's an immediate six points, right? On review, though a) it wasn't as open as I'd thought and it's not like with a well-covered slant and another deep post the play was designed to have any shot at picking up the first b) even if it wasn't an awful call, the one before it to run a standard sweep on 3rd-and-3 into a stacked front? Ewwwwww. And those weren't the worst calls pf the game: when confronted with 3rd-and-1 inside the 15 on Auburn's final drive, why not let Burns take off? The only way this fails is if he's stopped short of the first down, and after he'd already rushed for 15-plus yards twice on this drive, what were the odds of that? And even past that: do you really think Burns's odds of sticking the ball in the end zone are better by air or on the ground? Exactly.
Here's to hoping that with a bye week that won't be spent installing half a new offense, Ensminger can put together some ... you know what? Nevermind. Let's just hope Auburn can execute.
Tide fans that send things to media mailbag columnists are a good omen for the future
You've seen it before and a more accurate visual metaphor would be the cat only lifting one paw to try and swat away a small bird that's about to peck it to death, or something, but Auburn Blog requires eagle, no?I find myself linking to Stewart Mandel way too often these days, but I'm afraid I must do so again to point out the following gem of a question submitted to Fat Jared's mailbag column this week:
Let's go ahead and acknowledge that Florida is a great team. That being said, does it surprise you that so many people are chalking up a "W" for the Gators before they even play Alabama? When else have these two met in the SEC title game? Let's see ... there's 1992 (Alabama 28-21)) and 1999 (Alabama 34-7). Methinks the pundits should reserve judgment until AFTER the game.
-- Curtis, Leeds, Ala.
Picking on the logic employed by random e-mail writin' fans is unbecoming--fish, barrel, etc.--but the holy hell, dude, it takes some serious powers of selective memory to forget that Florida owns a 3-2 record against the Tide in the SEC title bout (a retort so obvious even Mandel was savvy enough to employ it). Quite honestly, if you want to draw an analogy between this year's impending meeting in Atlanta and games from the Tide's past (as both Curtis and follow-up Tide fan George are happy to do), clearly the closest and best analogy is the '94 championship game, which matched up 1. a Tide team that rode fundamentally sound quarterbacking, a punishing ground game, and a stout defense to a series of closely-contested wins and a perfect regular season record 2. a Florida team that had overcome an early-season upset to ring up a whole string of gaudy scores behind the Gators' Heisman candidate quarterback and the fresh-faced coach's explosive offensive scheming. (That result was 24-23 Florida, for what it's worth.)
But I'm not writing this post or offering you Curtis's complaint as a means of discussing the Tide's match-up with the Gators. I'm discussing the Tide's match-up with Auburn, and specifically, what Curtis's and George's questions have to say about it. It's pretty much the same thing Will in Pittsburgh had to say about it in the Chris Low mailbag I linked to earlier this week. Neither question mentions the Iron Bowl in any fashion (as don't, I'd imagine, the torrent of similar questions Low makes reference to and Mandel must have gotten to include a representative two). So what do they say about the Iron Bowl? Auburn's chances are better than generally believed.
Why? Because in Bamaland, they're not thinking about those chances at all. The hot topic, to judge from these e-mails and other broad surveys of the Tide landscape--even Todd seems to be spending more time analyzing Florida than the Iron Bowl--isn't the potential respect lost by blowing it at home against Auburn, but the current alleged disrespect shown the Tide by media-types who have Florida anointed the Next Big Thing. To the majority of (though obviously not all) Tide fans, Auburn apparently either doesn't matter, or is a foregone conclusion, or--most likely--some combination of the two.
There are, in my estimation, two reasonable questions to ask in response to this:
1. Uh, how else are Tide fans going to react when they've been feigning disinterest in an Iron Bowl all along that now has no impact on their chances of an SEC championship? Well, I wouldn't expect them to start taking Auburn more seriously, but it's still more-than-debatable if even a win over Florida would get the Tide back into the BCS title after a loss to the 5-6 likes of the Tigers. Looming even larger when you measure the stakes, however, would be the possibility of ending the season with the thud of the streak extended to 7 and the Gators running away with the SEC crown--making the 2008 Tide a kind of glorified version of all those Tennessee squads over the last decade who eked out a division title before losing in Atlanta and being generally forgotten outside of Knoxville.
Also: while there's plenty of time to weigh up Auburn's chances before next Saturday, you would think fans of a team that's already won three games by a touchdown or less (including one in overtime) and been outgained three times as well wouldn't take anyone for granted, much less an archrival that's shown steady improvement over the last month and may be playing for their coach's job. Then again, with Tide fans, you'd think wrong.
2. All this talk about fans. Who cares? What does this have to do with Alabama's actual team? I suppose this next point is debatable, but: it's my opinion that the attitudes of fans towards a particular game are generally reflective of the attitude of their team towards a particular game. If the fans are overconfident and distracted, it's a good bet the team is overconfident and distracted.
What evidence do I offer in support of this? First, a decade of watching Tommy Tuberville's Auburn teams, which routinely played like they expected to breeze past a given opponent as soon as they'd played well enough for the Auburn fanbase to expect them to breeze by an opponent.
Second, there's the simple fact that college football players surely doth pretest too much when they claim they don't pay attention to the press; if you were an 18-22 year-old playing for a team on the verge of a national title, don't you think you'd spend a decent chunk of time finding out what the world thought of your chances to win said title? If the first and foremost thought on the minds of Tide fans is the avalanche of love currently being showered on the Gators, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts it's awfully prominent in the minds of the Tide's players, too.
Third, in the way of hard evidence, there's the Blog Poll's CK Award, which I noted earlier this season has become the college football equivalent of the SI Cover jinx: whether you want to call it "karma" or the inevitable effect of a team's success leading to overconfidence and subsequent failure, teams whose fans have an inflated view of their abilities underperform. It's right there in black-and-white, week after week.
So do Tide fans have an inflated view of Alabama's abilities? Judging by how easily they've been roused into fast-forwarding to the SEC title game, what do you think? Auburn may or may not win, but it seems unlikely from here that the Tigers are going to get the Tide's full focus--or, most importantly, their best game.
Because I just have to point this out: Mandel goes on to actually describe a TV character as being in a "state of destitute." Not a state of destitution. A state of destitute. Apparently, neither the man nor his editors can even tell the difference between an adjective and a noun. Unbelievable.
at their Mercer
Well, at least Jeff Lebo has company in the "my SEC basketball team lost to a team coming off of a 6-10 season in the Atlantic Sun" Hall of Shame.
Of course, it would have been better if he'd never managed to join Mark Gottfried at all, but it's too late for that now that Mercer can claim to be the best college hoops team in the state of Alabama not actually in the state of Alabama after a 78-74 win at Beard-Eaves last night. It's not easy to lose a game when you commit fewer 12 fewer turnovers than your opponent and shoot a comparable percentage, but Auburn managed thanks to getting outrebounded by 25 (the JUCO surge is working!) and hitting 6-of-14 at the line. Frankie Sullivan didn't do much in his debut to calm my fears he might be overaggressive; he took nine shots in 23 minutes, or two more than Quantez Robertson and Lucas Hargrove put up combined in 59 minutes.
Why do I get the feeling I'm going to be profiling hoops head coaching candidates for Auburn before I do them for football? Anyways, big congrats nonetheless to Mercer, who can add another scalp to the collection that started with O.J. Mayo's USC bunch last year around this time. After not one but two SEC upsets in a week, it seems unlikely they won't be a factor in the A-Sun.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Georgia recap, quarter the third
Quarters first and second available here.
Third quarter
1. Auburn sure could use a huge kickoff return to start the half off right. Davis receives at the 10, takes it to the 29. Ho-hum.
2. I. Tate around right end, and this probably goes for 7 or 8 if Pugh doesn't get driven backwards so badly Davis has to make his lead block in the backfield rather than at the point-of-attack (line -). Then again, as Tate bounces outside Trott gets away with an obvious hold on the end, so things could be worse. Tate run out of bounds after a gain of 5.
3. I. Tate carries over the right (weak) side, and Berry somehow completely misses a seal block on the DT right next to him. (line -). Toss in a whiff on Curran by Pugh and the result is Tate buried by three dudes for a loss of 2. Oh, and he's hurt. Good play all around there, guys.
4. 3rd-7, spread. Bosley gets bull-rushed smack into Burns's lap, ruining what could have very likely been a completion on the slant to Billings and a first down. No official sacks to this point, but the pass protection is nonetheless a notch down from Ole Miss. (line -)
5. This time it's the Georgia returner's turn to fair catch with no one around. 42 yards and no return again isn't too shabby--but with the wind at Durst's back and a return possible, it ain't great, either.
6. 1st-10, Georgia 25. Dawgs run play-action off the lead draw and Johnson (-) bites, leaving the TE wide open on a crossing route. Gain of 15, easy.
7. Remember that play from the first quarter (No. 21) where Etheridge lined up as one of three LBs and Georgia threw into the space behind him for an easy first down? Well, this time they only pick up 9, at least.
8. Blanc (+) shrugs aside a guy and hauls down Moreno as he crosses the LOS, but it's enough for the first regardless. What is Coleman--who's unblocked near the point-of-attack but swings waaaaaay outside like he's trying to keep reverse contain or something--doing on this play?
9. Great play here by Ricks (+), standing up in the hole and slowing the play, and Goggans (+), who's on the opposite side of the play but pushes his guy back, disengages, catches Moreno around the ankles; between the two of them it's a tackle after a gain of 1.
10. Double-slant on the left side of Georgia's spread; Stafford hits Massaquoi and Thorpe immediately tackles to hold the gain to 7. Not a whole lot more you could ask out of that coverage scheme.
11. 3rd-2 on Auburn's 41. Not sure if I'm Georgia I take this opportunity to line up in the spread rather than plunge ahead with the arguably the best back n the country, but it doesn't matter--a little flip to Moreno sneaking out of the backfield gets the first, and when Johnson (-) overruns him (easy to do given Moreno's cutting ability, but still) the Dawgs get 6 or 7 more. Gain of 11, 1st-10 Auburn 30.
12. Extra down lineman in Carter on the stong side and the two LBs are shifted that way ... and Moreno still has a hole Charlie Weis could fit through when Clayton (-) is shoved four yards downfield and the LBs get picked up. Etheridge (+) makes a solid tackle on Moreno in the open field or this is 20 rather than 9.
13. False start. 2nd-1 now 2nd-6. LOLZ.
14. Samuel in for Moreno. He heads left and tries to squeeze in-between a blitzing Bynes (+) and a quick-reacting Stevens, who both stand up to their respective blocks very well, and there's nothing doing. Bynes tackles for a loss of 1.
15. 3rd-7 on the 26. Georgia in the ace and there's pretty clearly some confusion--Southernland is the H-back and goes in motion one way, then clumsily starts to go the other when the ball is snapped. Whoops. Not that it mattered, since this is a lead draw that Doolittle (+) blows to smithereens. He tackles for a loss of 2. On the one hand, why has Georgia repeatedly refused to put Stafford to use on third-and-long?
16. On the other, in this case, the reason is because they were planning on going for it on fourth down anyway. Which they do: 4th-9. Huge play. 3-man rush forces Stafford to step up in the pocket, but he's got time ... fires ... incomplete! McFadden (+) is blanketing Green down the right sideline (cover +). Go back to the tackle by Etheridge on first down here--2nd-1 becomes 2nd-6, Georgia goes nowhere on two plays, and all of a sudden Auburn's turned another long drive into nothing.
17. Auburn takes over on their own 30. Spread. Burns drops back, doesn't find anyone, drops back ... and under duress from yet another corner blitz that Fannin (-) has miserably failed to pick up, throws to no one in particular. Grounding, loss of 16. And just like that, this possession is already dead. I'm not going ot be too harsh on Burns here; it was either ground the ball or take a sack, and they amount to the same thing in the end.
18. Spread, 2nd-26. QB sweep left, and Ziemba and Green each try to block the same LB while allowing Curran a free shot at Burns (line -). No gain.
19. Time to call that special 3rd-26 play, right? Spread, screen to Fannin that's buried before it even begins moving forward when no one picks up a charging saefty (line -) -- and for all the screaming about the refs Auburn fans have done, note that Fannin gets an extremely quick forward progress whistle here before fumbling into the end zone. If play had been allowed to continue, that's six points for the Dawgs and Auburn would have no room to complain. Huge break.
20. Durst gets off a 52-yarder, but it's a line-drive along the hash, and in coverage Thorpe needlessly gives up the outside (ST -). Return winds up going for 13.
21. 1st-10 Dawgs at midfield. What on earth? Stafford fakes a draw to Moreno, then uses Moreno as a lead blocker as they both run up into the same hole. Why not just give it to the guy who can run? Moreno makes his block, but Stevens (+) avoids two would-be blockers and tackles after a gain of 4. That's the type of play I haven't seen at all from the linebackers since I started doing these breakdowns, FWIW.
22. This time it's an actual draw over the left side to Moreno; Blanc and Evans don't exactly explode past their blockers at the point-of-attack, but they don't get pushed around, either, and they collectively gum things up enough that they and Bynes can collectively haul Moreno down. Gain of 4.
23. 3rd-2, Dawgs go heavy with an H-back and a fullback. Handoff goes to the FB, but Marks (+) is the low man and trips him up with the help of a good push from Clayton that pretty much ruins the left side of the Georgia line. The ballcarrier is clearly down before the sticks, but they review it anyway, looking suspiciously like it's at Richt's request even though when the play is upheld Georgia's not charged with a timeout.
24. 4th-1 on Auburn's 40; big play. Any chance Dawgs run something other than the smart QB sneak? Nope. Stafford runs into the wad of bodies and gets the first. So it goes.
25. Auburn brings five rushers as Stafford runs play-action; Evans is almost there, but instead Stafford finds Massaquoi sitting in the middle of a diamond of four Auburn defenders for a 25-yard gain. Full credit to Dawgs for making a tough play, but someone's gotta be ready to step in front of this pass. (Cover -)
26. 1st-10 at the Auburn 13. BLEARRGGH--it's a bad snap and so the timing on Georgia's draw is off. The result is that first Goggans has an off-balance shot at Moreno for a 3-yard loss. No dice. Then Bynes (-) can bring him down for no gain; he whiffs. Gain of 3.
27. Good work by Auburn here--after play-action Stafford looks like he wants to hit his fullback in the right flat. But Goggans (+) is bearing down on him and Coleman (+) has snuck out into coverage. Stafford throws it well wide. Downfield coverage (+) looks good.
28. 3rd-7, two-back shotgun for the Dawgs. Auburn shows the big blitz ... Stafford audibles ... and, yep, Rhoads sends seven. There's got to be some miscommunication with the Dawgs here, since it's a three-man route and two of those men run to the same spot in the corner of the end zone. Stafford lobs it in their direction (the throw's too quick for the blitz to matter) but in the confusion and good coverage by Powers and McFadden (cover +) it's never close to being completed. Excellent.
29. This time Walsh gets it up and over. 10-6 Dawgs.
30. Davis catches at the 12 and returns to the 31 ... but hey, Terrell Zachery committed a really obvious block-in-the-back and instead Auburn will start at their 10 (ST -). Aside from Doolittle's block and Durst's adequate-to-decent punting, special teams have been a disaster.
31. Two-TE ace on 1st-10. Tate runs behind a good push from Ziemba and McKenzie on the left side (line +) and then leaps forward rather than accept a cutting tackle attempt by the Dawg corner; this nets him about 3-4 more yards (+) and Auburn a total of 6. If Smith had blocked the corner instead of uselessly following directly behind McKenzie, it might have been a first down.
32. Spread, with stacked twins to either side. It's just window-dressing though, since this is a QB draw. Green's guy makes a swim move right past him (line -); Burns has to stutter-step and with the timing totally ruined, he's brought down from behind after no gain. Come on, Green.
33. 3rd-4 on Auburn's 16. Givign the ball back to Georgia in great field position down four with the fourth quarter imminent is a bad idea; get a first here, Auburn. Spread. Oops--the line (-) utterly fails to pick up a blitzer on the left side of the line, leaving Ziemba standing still (he's literally standing in place in the exact spot where he was when the ball was snapped) as the Dawg defender bears down n Burns. Fortunately for Auburn, Burns (+) makes a quick read and hits Dunn on an out route right at the sticks. Forward progress gets him to ... uh ... an inch or two short. Will Tubby go?
34. Hells yeah he will when he's 5-5 and facing Georgia. A year's salary says this is Burns on the sneak ... and it is. And man, there's not a ton of push, but it's enough by the length of the football or so, I guess. (Am I surprised they didn't measure? A little.) Whew!
End third quarter
Fourth quarter and final verdicts tomorrow.
Third quarter
1. Auburn sure could use a huge kickoff return to start the half off right. Davis receives at the 10, takes it to the 29. Ho-hum.
2. I. Tate around right end, and this probably goes for 7 or 8 if Pugh doesn't get driven backwards so badly Davis has to make his lead block in the backfield rather than at the point-of-attack (line -). Then again, as Tate bounces outside Trott gets away with an obvious hold on the end, so things could be worse. Tate run out of bounds after a gain of 5.
3. I. Tate carries over the right (weak) side, and Berry somehow completely misses a seal block on the DT right next to him. (line -). Toss in a whiff on Curran by Pugh and the result is Tate buried by three dudes for a loss of 2. Oh, and he's hurt. Good play all around there, guys.
4. 3rd-7, spread. Bosley gets bull-rushed smack into Burns's lap, ruining what could have very likely been a completion on the slant to Billings and a first down. No official sacks to this point, but the pass protection is nonetheless a notch down from Ole Miss. (line -)
5. This time it's the Georgia returner's turn to fair catch with no one around. 42 yards and no return again isn't too shabby--but with the wind at Durst's back and a return possible, it ain't great, either.
6. 1st-10, Georgia 25. Dawgs run play-action off the lead draw and Johnson (-) bites, leaving the TE wide open on a crossing route. Gain of 15, easy.
7. Remember that play from the first quarter (No. 21) where Etheridge lined up as one of three LBs and Georgia threw into the space behind him for an easy first down? Well, this time they only pick up 9, at least.
8. Blanc (+) shrugs aside a guy and hauls down Moreno as he crosses the LOS, but it's enough for the first regardless. What is Coleman--who's unblocked near the point-of-attack but swings waaaaaay outside like he's trying to keep reverse contain or something--doing on this play?
9. Great play here by Ricks (+), standing up in the hole and slowing the play, and Goggans (+), who's on the opposite side of the play but pushes his guy back, disengages, catches Moreno around the ankles; between the two of them it's a tackle after a gain of 1.
10. Double-slant on the left side of Georgia's spread; Stafford hits Massaquoi and Thorpe immediately tackles to hold the gain to 7. Not a whole lot more you could ask out of that coverage scheme.
11. 3rd-2 on Auburn's 41. Not sure if I'm Georgia I take this opportunity to line up in the spread rather than plunge ahead with the arguably the best back n the country, but it doesn't matter--a little flip to Moreno sneaking out of the backfield gets the first, and when Johnson (-) overruns him (easy to do given Moreno's cutting ability, but still) the Dawgs get 6 or 7 more. Gain of 11, 1st-10 Auburn 30.
12. Extra down lineman in Carter on the stong side and the two LBs are shifted that way ... and Moreno still has a hole Charlie Weis could fit through when Clayton (-) is shoved four yards downfield and the LBs get picked up. Etheridge (+) makes a solid tackle on Moreno in the open field or this is 20 rather than 9.
13. False start. 2nd-1 now 2nd-6. LOLZ.
14. Samuel in for Moreno. He heads left and tries to squeeze in-between a blitzing Bynes (+) and a quick-reacting Stevens, who both stand up to their respective blocks very well, and there's nothing doing. Bynes tackles for a loss of 1.
15. 3rd-7 on the 26. Georgia in the ace and there's pretty clearly some confusion--Southernland is the H-back and goes in motion one way, then clumsily starts to go the other when the ball is snapped. Whoops. Not that it mattered, since this is a lead draw that Doolittle (+) blows to smithereens. He tackles for a loss of 2. On the one hand, why has Georgia repeatedly refused to put Stafford to use on third-and-long?
16. On the other, in this case, the reason is because they were planning on going for it on fourth down anyway. Which they do: 4th-9. Huge play. 3-man rush forces Stafford to step up in the pocket, but he's got time ... fires ... incomplete! McFadden (+) is blanketing Green down the right sideline (cover +). Go back to the tackle by Etheridge on first down here--2nd-1 becomes 2nd-6, Georgia goes nowhere on two plays, and all of a sudden Auburn's turned another long drive into nothing.
17. Auburn takes over on their own 30. Spread. Burns drops back, doesn't find anyone, drops back ... and under duress from yet another corner blitz that Fannin (-) has miserably failed to pick up, throws to no one in particular. Grounding, loss of 16. And just like that, this possession is already dead. I'm not going ot be too harsh on Burns here; it was either ground the ball or take a sack, and they amount to the same thing in the end.
18. Spread, 2nd-26. QB sweep left, and Ziemba and Green each try to block the same LB while allowing Curran a free shot at Burns (line -). No gain.
19. Time to call that special 3rd-26 play, right? Spread, screen to Fannin that's buried before it even begins moving forward when no one picks up a charging saefty (line -) -- and for all the screaming about the refs Auburn fans have done, note that Fannin gets an extremely quick forward progress whistle here before fumbling into the end zone. If play had been allowed to continue, that's six points for the Dawgs and Auburn would have no room to complain. Huge break.
20. Durst gets off a 52-yarder, but it's a line-drive along the hash, and in coverage Thorpe needlessly gives up the outside (ST -). Return winds up going for 13.
21. 1st-10 Dawgs at midfield. What on earth? Stafford fakes a draw to Moreno, then uses Moreno as a lead blocker as they both run up into the same hole. Why not just give it to the guy who can run? Moreno makes his block, but Stevens (+) avoids two would-be blockers and tackles after a gain of 4. That's the type of play I haven't seen at all from the linebackers since I started doing these breakdowns, FWIW.
22. This time it's an actual draw over the left side to Moreno; Blanc and Evans don't exactly explode past their blockers at the point-of-attack, but they don't get pushed around, either, and they collectively gum things up enough that they and Bynes can collectively haul Moreno down. Gain of 4.
23. 3rd-2, Dawgs go heavy with an H-back and a fullback. Handoff goes to the FB, but Marks (+) is the low man and trips him up with the help of a good push from Clayton that pretty much ruins the left side of the Georgia line. The ballcarrier is clearly down before the sticks, but they review it anyway, looking suspiciously like it's at Richt's request even though when the play is upheld Georgia's not charged with a timeout.
24. 4th-1 on Auburn's 40; big play. Any chance Dawgs run something other than the smart QB sneak? Nope. Stafford runs into the wad of bodies and gets the first. So it goes.
25. Auburn brings five rushers as Stafford runs play-action; Evans is almost there, but instead Stafford finds Massaquoi sitting in the middle of a diamond of four Auburn defenders for a 25-yard gain. Full credit to Dawgs for making a tough play, but someone's gotta be ready to step in front of this pass. (Cover -)
26. 1st-10 at the Auburn 13. BLEARRGGH--it's a bad snap and so the timing on Georgia's draw is off. The result is that first Goggans has an off-balance shot at Moreno for a 3-yard loss. No dice. Then Bynes (-) can bring him down for no gain; he whiffs. Gain of 3.
27. Good work by Auburn here--after play-action Stafford looks like he wants to hit his fullback in the right flat. But Goggans (+) is bearing down on him and Coleman (+) has snuck out into coverage. Stafford throws it well wide. Downfield coverage (+) looks good.
28. 3rd-7, two-back shotgun for the Dawgs. Auburn shows the big blitz ... Stafford audibles ... and, yep, Rhoads sends seven. There's got to be some miscommunication with the Dawgs here, since it's a three-man route and two of those men run to the same spot in the corner of the end zone. Stafford lobs it in their direction (the throw's too quick for the blitz to matter) but in the confusion and good coverage by Powers and McFadden (cover +) it's never close to being completed. Excellent.
29. This time Walsh gets it up and over. 10-6 Dawgs.
30. Davis catches at the 12 and returns to the 31 ... but hey, Terrell Zachery committed a really obvious block-in-the-back and instead Auburn will start at their 10 (ST -). Aside from Doolittle's block and Durst's adequate-to-decent punting, special teams have been a disaster.
31. Two-TE ace on 1st-10. Tate runs behind a good push from Ziemba and McKenzie on the left side (line +) and then leaps forward rather than accept a cutting tackle attempt by the Dawg corner; this nets him about 3-4 more yards (+) and Auburn a total of 6. If Smith had blocked the corner instead of uselessly following directly behind McKenzie, it might have been a first down.
32. Spread, with stacked twins to either side. It's just window-dressing though, since this is a QB draw. Green's guy makes a swim move right past him (line -); Burns has to stutter-step and with the timing totally ruined, he's brought down from behind after no gain. Come on, Green.
33. 3rd-4 on Auburn's 16. Givign the ball back to Georgia in great field position down four with the fourth quarter imminent is a bad idea; get a first here, Auburn. Spread. Oops--the line (-) utterly fails to pick up a blitzer on the left side of the line, leaving Ziemba standing still (he's literally standing in place in the exact spot where he was when the ball was snapped) as the Dawg defender bears down n Burns. Fortunately for Auburn, Burns (+) makes a quick read and hits Dunn on an out route right at the sticks. Forward progress gets him to ... uh ... an inch or two short. Will Tubby go?
34. Hells yeah he will when he's 5-5 and facing Georgia. A year's salary says this is Burns on the sneak ... and it is. And man, there's not a ton of push, but it's enough by the length of the football or so, I guess. (Am I surprised they didn't measure? A little.) Whew!
End third quarter
Fourth quarter and final verdicts tomorrow.
The Works, non-scholarship-style
Reassurance as well as picture missing. So, with Wes Byrum hobbled the fate of the Iron Bowl could very well come down to a walk-on sophomore kicker making the first field goal attempt(s) of his college career. And what does this potential Achilles heel and/or future ESPN original movie look like? Let's ask his roster page:
Oh. Nice to know. (If you're actually interested, Hull sort of looks like this.) If you're a believer in The Story--and you dismiss its frightful power at your peril--you must admit that the walk-on so anonymous the school can't even get his picture on the website kicking the game-winner that (sort of) salvages his team's entire season is as Story as it gets.
That said ... yeah, I'd really, really prefer the Iron Bowl doesn't come down to Morgan Hull trying to kick a game-winner. Of course, I won't be dramatically more confident if it comes down to the guy who used to look like this:
who as you may have noticed now looks like a pale shadow of that former self. How pale? A commenter at the Auburner summarizes succinctly:
Also in that link: Tommy Trott paid a visit to renowned orthopedist Dr. James Andrews, who probably should have copyrighted the phrase "renowned orthopedist" by now, and had surgery. His season is over. So it goes.
Yes, we would like a T. Boone Pickens without that nasty bankruptcy part, please. So, what pursuits does Tim Cook, heir apparent to Steve Jobs' throne at Apple and an Auburn University engineering grad, like to, uh, pursue in his free time?
I suppose I should address this. As you've no doubt heard, Will Muschamp is off the market. I can't say I see this as a huge deal, since a) Auburn's not in the head coaching market until the moment they are b) frankly, Muschamp could probably benefit from the extra time to learn about head coaching at this level. Just ask Gene "0-8 in the Big 12, here we come" Chizik. The real upshot: it's just one less potential well-qualified candidate for Auburn to interview and one more reason Tubby should be kept another season regardless of the Iron Bowl outcome.
Smoke? Blutarsky unearths the sort of "rural legend" viral e-mail that you just knew was going to surface in the wake of Franklin's departure and the inevitable scapegoating:
But geez, Tubby didn't do a whole lot to douse this particular fire when talking to the press:
In other, less semi-disturbing Tubby quotations, he's also said that "Recruiting is going fine. It's not affected by losing a few games. As coaches, you'd think it would help mentally a little bit. It really doesn't. A lot of the guys see they may have an opportunity to play a little bit sooner." That's good to hear, but you know what's better to hear? Recruits saying the same thing.
Fans. Some of ours in Huntsville, as you've seen if you have an Internet to look at all, maybe don't have quite so much faith as they ought. Then again, money's tight these days, and it's not like they're leaving the stadium in droves to miss their team's biggest comeback in school history. ATVS has a response to Saturday's exodus you should read.
Also, our fans aren't mentally fast-forwarding past the biggest rivalry game on our schedule to whine about the college football world actually daring to be impressed by scores like 63-5. We've got that going for us.
Etc. Jeremy invents the next great Internet fad, LOLstreaking ... Michigan blog Wolverine Liberation Army does Hate Week right ... and please forgive my crudity, but does this story mean that Petrino is actively engaging in a Dick measuring contest?
Oh. Nice to know. (If you're actually interested, Hull sort of looks like this.) If you're a believer in The Story--and you dismiss its frightful power at your peril--you must admit that the walk-on so anonymous the school can't even get his picture on the website kicking the game-winner that (sort of) salvages his team's entire season is as Story as it gets.
That said ... yeah, I'd really, really prefer the Iron Bowl doesn't come down to Morgan Hull trying to kick a game-winner. Of course, I won't be dramatically more confident if it comes down to the guy who used to look like this:
who as you may have noticed now looks like a pale shadow of that former self. How pale? A commenter at the Auburner summarizes succinctly:
Wes Byrum ‘07For a guy who was who he was last year, 6-of-13 between 30 and 50 yards is just .... just ... well, it's :( is what it is. On the injury front, Byrum is "resting" in the hope he can go against the Tide.
16/21
76.2%
0/0 from 10-19
5/5 20s
8/9 30s
3/7 40s
0/0 50s
Wes Byrum ‘08
11/19
57.9%
2/2 from 10-19
2/3 20-29
3/6 30-39
3/7 40-49
1/1 50+
:(
Also in that link: Tommy Trott paid a visit to renowned orthopedist Dr. James Andrews, who probably should have copyrighted the phrase "renowned orthopedist" by now, and had surgery. His season is over. So it goes.
Yes, we would like a T. Boone Pickens without that nasty bankruptcy part, please. So, what pursuits does Tim Cook, heir apparent to Steve Jobs' throne at Apple and an Auburn University engineering grad, like to, uh, pursue in his free time?
Cook is also a workaholic whose only interests outside of Apple appear to be cycling, the outdoors, and Auburn football.Get this man to work on whatever the iPhone equivalent of a new offense would be, stat! (And while we're at it, ask him for some money.)
I suppose I should address this. As you've no doubt heard, Will Muschamp is off the market. I can't say I see this as a huge deal, since a) Auburn's not in the head coaching market until the moment they are b) frankly, Muschamp could probably benefit from the extra time to learn about head coaching at this level. Just ask Gene "0-8 in the Big 12, here we come" Chizik. The real upshot: it's just one less potential well-qualified candidate for Auburn to interview and one more reason Tubby should be kept another season regardless of the Iron Bowl outcome.
Smoke? Blutarsky unearths the sort of "rural legend" viral e-mail that you just knew was going to surface in the wake of Franklin's departure and the inevitable scapegoating:
i had befriended one of the senior lineman…he was responsible for signaling in plays…he said that this past week was the hardest preparation week they have had all year…the reason…all of the signs that are used had to be changed…apparantly after the utm game, one of the utm coaches came up to tubbs and told him that his signs had been known by every team he’s played since franklin left…not only that, but mark richt called tubbs the week before the uga game (btw mark richt may be my new favorite coach because of this) and told tubberville it was in his best interest to change all of his signs because he knew all of them…wonder why we started going to a huddle now???…from everything i gather, coach tony franklin put those bad boys out there for the world to know…To which my first reaction was: Poppycock. The offense hit its rock-bottom against Tennessee and Vandy; if opponents are stealing our signals, shouldn't the offense be getting worse instead of better? (Ole Miss, for instance, apparently stole Auburn's signals so effectively that Auburn had their most total yardage since ULM.)
But geez, Tubby didn't do a whole lot to douse this particular fire when talking to the press:
So, in football, having your signs stolen shouldn’t really be an issue. But it’s one of the numerous reasons coach Tommy Tuberville ditched the arm-flailing method of communication brought to the Tigers by Tony Franklin for the old-fashioned huddle technique for Saturday’s game against Georgia.Ummm ... huh?
“You just take too many things for granted that if you’re signaling and people are seeing what you’re doing,” Tuberville said. “When you’re huddling, only 11 people in that huddle know what you’re going to do.”
Tuberville couldn’t pinpoint any examples of supposed sign-stealing.
“As coaches, you’re always wondering why are they slanting this way or doing that,” Tuberville said. “It’s probably not happening, but it gives you peace of mind for your players and coaches.”
In other, less semi-disturbing Tubby quotations, he's also said that "Recruiting is going fine. It's not affected by losing a few games. As coaches, you'd think it would help mentally a little bit. It really doesn't. A lot of the guys see they may have an opportunity to play a little bit sooner." That's good to hear, but you know what's better to hear? Recruits saying the same thing.
Fans. Some of ours in Huntsville, as you've seen if you have an Internet to look at all, maybe don't have quite so much faith as they ought. Then again, money's tight these days, and it's not like they're leaving the stadium in droves to miss their team's biggest comeback in school history. ATVS has a response to Saturday's exodus you should read.
Also, our fans aren't mentally fast-forwarding past the biggest rivalry game on our schedule to whine about the college football world actually daring to be impressed by scores like 63-5. We've got that going for us.
Etc. Jeremy invents the next great Internet fad, LOLstreaking ... Michigan blog Wolverine Liberation Army does Hate Week right ... and please forgive my crudity, but does this story mean that Petrino is actively engaging in a Dick measuring contest?
Georgia recap, quarter the second
Picking up where we left off ..
Second quarter
1. Georgia 1st-10 on their own 47 after the break and run play-action out of the ace. Stafford goes deeeeeeep to Green and McFadden (+) is all over it (cover +). Pass is long anyway; Stafford's been a little off to this point on his deep balls.
2. The counter to Moreno, and this time Doolittle (+) forces his way into the hole, causing Moreno to try a sliver up the middle; Stevens (+) has eluded the block of a WR and tackles immediately. Well done.
3. 3rd-10. It's ... a QB draw? On 3rd-10? Stafford shows precisely why this is a bad idea, forgoing what appears to be some measure of open space outside to juke his way directly into the path of Carter (+), who nonetheless had some work to do to discard his blocker and wrap up at the LOS. Puntin' time!
4. Dunn calls for a fair catch on the 16 with no one within 10 yards of him. Cripes, Dunn, we don't have to have the spectacular play you gave us last time, but can't you burrow for five yards or so at least? Don't you think this offense needs all the help it can get? (ST -).
5. Ace. Waggle, Burns (+) floats one to Hawthorne (+) at the sticks. Hawthorne makes the grab and shrugs off a tackle for a 13-yard gain. Dave Archer doesn't like Burns lofting it up like that, but when your guy is that wide open, the main thing is just getting it there, no?
6. Two-TE ace, Tate carries up the middle for almost nothing. I think it's Green who screws this up (line -); the play is designed to get everyone going right and then let Tate cut up behind the morass, with Green sealing off the DT on the left. Instead he merely brushes him on his way to block the same LB Ziemba's aiming for, and the DT is free to tackle unencumbered.
7. Spread. QB draw, and Georgia blitzes the corner right into it. Tate (+) alertly picks him up and blocks the corner into an LB, giving Burns a chance to get outside ... where Billings (-), having first given up on blocking the corner, now misses the safety. Then again, maybe this is a good move: after riding Burns out of bounds for no gain, he shoves him to the ground to pick up one of the stupider 15-yarders you'll see.
8. 1st-10 on Auburn's 45, Ace with a TE and H-back. Trott motions to the weak side and Tate carries that way ... or at least he does for a moment, before completely reversing his field and running into open space on the opposite side. This looks like a five-yard loss waiting to happen (and he started this play running far too east-west), but you have to give Tate (+) some credit for breaking three different tackles and bulling his way for 12. Whew. (Nice cut by Pugh here, btw, to give Tate the corner.)
9. After Georgia hands over five yards for an offside, it's 1st-5 on the UGA 37. Spread. QB draw, Georgia blites one of their two LBs and Bosley gets a piece of him (line +), opening up the middle. Fannin's got a one-on-one block to get Kodi the first; he makes it (+) and Burns (+) scoots for 7.
10. I. Play-action, Pugh loses his man (line -) and Burns is flushed from the pocket. He tries to sneak one into Fannin along the sideline 15 yards downfield; Curran gets his paws on it 10 yards downfield and nearly picks it.
11. Ace, Trott again motions into an H-back spot on the weakside. Waggle, Dawgs are all over it with a guy in Burns's face and one on Trott. Burns (+) does his Burns thing and jukes his way free before firing a bullet to Trott; Trott (-) not only drops it but pops it into the air and nearly gets the thing picked off. Infuriating.
12. 3rd-10, spread. Screen to Tate and the line (+), Trott, Hawthorne, and Billings (who gets away with a bit of a hold, FWIW) form what really might be fairly called a wall on the left side. Tate dashes outside for 12. Auburn's into the red zone! Yes! I mean, Oh No!
13. Two-TE ace. Give to Fannin. Green gets completely owned, but Bosley's done an excellent job with his guy and Fannin (+) sort of hops around Green and his guy for, somehow, 4.
14. Ace, Fannin over the weak side, where Georgia's blitzed the corner again. Green's just a hair late getting over to cut him off and drags him down by the neck; it's a legit holding call and killer given that the rest of the play was well-blocked and had Fannin inside the 10. (line -) Not a good drive here for Green.
15. Spread. Draw to Fannin and it's cleanly blocked initially, getting Fannin to the linebackers. Unfortunately Bosley's failed to do much with Ellerbe and as Fannin tries to get past them he's swarmed. Further bad luck ensures when Fannin's spun out of the tackle three yards backwards, then regains his balance enough to basically just reestablish forward progress at the new, crappier spot. No gain.
16. 3rd-16. Spread. The line (+) gives Burns a good pocket. Too bad the ball flies out of his hands for no reason whatsoever as he attempts to pass. Georgia recovers. (Burns -). From 2nd-6 on the 14, Auburn goes hold-no gain-turnover. Your 2008 season int he red zone in microcosm, folks.
17. Quick toss to Moreno. Despite the announcers (and the PBP) giving Doolittle credit here, I think it's Marks (+) who knifes through and trips Moreno up. Loss of 1.
18. Wow, a seven-man blitz from Auburn. Stafford goes with his first available read, an out to Green, but Doolittle (+) jumps up and bats it away.
19. OH HELL HE'S BLITZING SEVEN AGAIN. Thorpe is on an island with the streaking Massaqoui and while he's not beaten badly, he's definitely given up a step and it's 6 points if Stafford hits him; Etheridge is coming unblocked, though, and I think it hurries Stafford just enough to cause the overthrow. Terrifying, but effective, I guess. Three-and-out!
20. Dunn is having an absolute howler today. This time he loses the ball in the wind and lets it land at the 10 when he's got 10 yards on a return, minimum. Dawgs down it at the 7. 10-15 yards of field position lost again. (ST -).
21. Ace, handoff to Tate around right end. Pugh's driven back, Trott misreads which LB to block (line -) and it's a quick loss of 1.
22. Spread with a bunch left. QB draw, tons of room over the left side (line +) and a thumping Tate block get Burns 8.
23. 3rd-3. Could really use the first down this deep in our own territory. Spread, QB sweep, and as predictable a call as this is I think it still picks up the first if Pugh doesn't make a sorry effort on blocking Curran at the point-of-attack. Pugh gives him a sort of love tap and then stands there watching Curran tackle after a gain of 1. (line -)
24. 35-yarder from Durst into the wind. No return. Could be worse, I guess.
25. 1st-10 Dawgs at midfield. Straight drop from Stafford, finds Green in the zone for 12. This is actually a nice bit of analysis here from Archer--he notes that Moreno drifting into the flat pulled Johnson forward enough that Green could get in behind him in the zone. Which is exactly what happened. (I don't think you can fault Johnson, mind you; it's just a good play.)
26. Toss to Moreno over the left side and dammit it ought to go for nothing; Goggans (+) had blown things up and Bynes and Stevens are both in position in the hole. Somehow, Moreno spots the tiniest of creases between the trailing Blanc and Ricks and leaps through it for 5. Darn these talented players!
27. Play-action, then a screen to Moreno and ... uh-oh. Touchdown. How'd it happen? First, the d-line doesn't read it at all. Second, all the deep receiver action comes to the opposite side of the field, drawing Bynes and Stevens that way. Third and most importantly, there's a crackback block by the receiver on the opposite side on Evans, who's holding down that half of the field; he gets flattened by it and I wonder if Powers (who's lined up over the guy and sort of drifts behind him into the center of the field) fails to yell CRACK the way I remember being taught in junior high football. As mentioned Powers (--) has drifted out of position and Moreno has both two blockers and a ton of room--still, the tackling effort of Powers (who backpedals all the way to the goalline), Bynes, and Etheridge leaves a lot to be desired. 7-6 Dawgs.
28. Raycom presents the kickoff to us from the directly-on-the-sideline angle. So Davis returns it to the 25. But I don't know how. Apparently Georgia's in the Christmas spirit again, though, handing Auburn another 15 free post-play yards for some infraction or another.
29. I, give to Fannin around right end. Good blocks by McKenzie on the strongside end and by Green on the LB give Fannin the corner; he picks up 5. (Line +)
30. I again. Um, perhaps Gabe McKenzie should have been brought back over to the offensive side of the ball as soon as we started requiring TEs to block again? He gets a terrific sustained block on the end here, which along with Pugh's drive of his guy to the turf, a little clip by Davis, and even a brush-block by Billings on a charging LB gets Fannin a crease. That's five yards, but then Fannin (+) drags 1, 2, 3, 4 of these clowns for six more and draws a facemask! Hell of a play. (line +)
31. 1st-10 on the Georgia 30. Ace, H-back strongside. Waggle, Georgia completely unfooled and Burns (+) makes a splendid throw off his back foot to McKenzie anyway. Gain of 6.
32. Two-TE ace. Ziemba shoved backwards, then watches his guy break free and tackle for loss. Fannin with no chance here. (Line -).
33. Spread on 3rd-5. You'll never guess what the call is--Burns on the keeper! Wholesale failure on the line (and another corner blitz) sees four Dawgs in the backfield before Burns gets outside the tackle box. Where are the little curls and slants that Burns had so much success with against WVU and Ole Miss? (line -)
34. Byurm (-) on for a 42-yarder. In this wind, I'm not optimistic. That's why--the kick sails wide by a mile.
35. With 23 seconds left, Georgia kneels out the half.
End second quarter
Two drives covering 17 plays, 98 yards, and 8:17 combined result in zero points. So it goes.
Second quarter
1. Georgia 1st-10 on their own 47 after the break and run play-action out of the ace. Stafford goes deeeeeeep to Green and McFadden (+) is all over it (cover +). Pass is long anyway; Stafford's been a little off to this point on his deep balls.
2. The counter to Moreno, and this time Doolittle (+) forces his way into the hole, causing Moreno to try a sliver up the middle; Stevens (+) has eluded the block of a WR and tackles immediately. Well done.
3. 3rd-10. It's ... a QB draw? On 3rd-10? Stafford shows precisely why this is a bad idea, forgoing what appears to be some measure of open space outside to juke his way directly into the path of Carter (+), who nonetheless had some work to do to discard his blocker and wrap up at the LOS. Puntin' time!
4. Dunn calls for a fair catch on the 16 with no one within 10 yards of him. Cripes, Dunn, we don't have to have the spectacular play you gave us last time, but can't you burrow for five yards or so at least? Don't you think this offense needs all the help it can get? (ST -).
5. Ace. Waggle, Burns (+) floats one to Hawthorne (+) at the sticks. Hawthorne makes the grab and shrugs off a tackle for a 13-yard gain. Dave Archer doesn't like Burns lofting it up like that, but when your guy is that wide open, the main thing is just getting it there, no?
6. Two-TE ace, Tate carries up the middle for almost nothing. I think it's Green who screws this up (line -); the play is designed to get everyone going right and then let Tate cut up behind the morass, with Green sealing off the DT on the left. Instead he merely brushes him on his way to block the same LB Ziemba's aiming for, and the DT is free to tackle unencumbered.
7. Spread. QB draw, and Georgia blitzes the corner right into it. Tate (+) alertly picks him up and blocks the corner into an LB, giving Burns a chance to get outside ... where Billings (-), having first given up on blocking the corner, now misses the safety. Then again, maybe this is a good move: after riding Burns out of bounds for no gain, he shoves him to the ground to pick up one of the stupider 15-yarders you'll see.
8. 1st-10 on Auburn's 45, Ace with a TE and H-back. Trott motions to the weak side and Tate carries that way ... or at least he does for a moment, before completely reversing his field and running into open space on the opposite side. This looks like a five-yard loss waiting to happen (and he started this play running far too east-west), but you have to give Tate (+) some credit for breaking three different tackles and bulling his way for 12. Whew. (Nice cut by Pugh here, btw, to give Tate the corner.)
9. After Georgia hands over five yards for an offside, it's 1st-5 on the UGA 37. Spread. QB draw, Georgia blites one of their two LBs and Bosley gets a piece of him (line +), opening up the middle. Fannin's got a one-on-one block to get Kodi the first; he makes it (+) and Burns (+) scoots for 7.
10. I. Play-action, Pugh loses his man (line -) and Burns is flushed from the pocket. He tries to sneak one into Fannin along the sideline 15 yards downfield; Curran gets his paws on it 10 yards downfield and nearly picks it.
11. Ace, Trott again motions into an H-back spot on the weakside. Waggle, Dawgs are all over it with a guy in Burns's face and one on Trott. Burns (+) does his Burns thing and jukes his way free before firing a bullet to Trott; Trott (-) not only drops it but pops it into the air and nearly gets the thing picked off. Infuriating.
12. 3rd-10, spread. Screen to Tate and the line (+), Trott, Hawthorne, and Billings (who gets away with a bit of a hold, FWIW) form what really might be fairly called a wall on the left side. Tate dashes outside for 12. Auburn's into the red zone! Yes! I mean, Oh No!
13. Two-TE ace. Give to Fannin. Green gets completely owned, but Bosley's done an excellent job with his guy and Fannin (+) sort of hops around Green and his guy for, somehow, 4.
14. Ace, Fannin over the weak side, where Georgia's blitzed the corner again. Green's just a hair late getting over to cut him off and drags him down by the neck; it's a legit holding call and killer given that the rest of the play was well-blocked and had Fannin inside the 10. (line -) Not a good drive here for Green.
15. Spread. Draw to Fannin and it's cleanly blocked initially, getting Fannin to the linebackers. Unfortunately Bosley's failed to do much with Ellerbe and as Fannin tries to get past them he's swarmed. Further bad luck ensures when Fannin's spun out of the tackle three yards backwards, then regains his balance enough to basically just reestablish forward progress at the new, crappier spot. No gain.
16. 3rd-16. Spread. The line (+) gives Burns a good pocket. Too bad the ball flies out of his hands for no reason whatsoever as he attempts to pass. Georgia recovers. (Burns -). From 2nd-6 on the 14, Auburn goes hold-no gain-turnover. Your 2008 season int he red zone in microcosm, folks.
17. Quick toss to Moreno. Despite the announcers (and the PBP) giving Doolittle credit here, I think it's Marks (+) who knifes through and trips Moreno up. Loss of 1.
18. Wow, a seven-man blitz from Auburn. Stafford goes with his first available read, an out to Green, but Doolittle (+) jumps up and bats it away.
19. OH HELL HE'S BLITZING SEVEN AGAIN. Thorpe is on an island with the streaking Massaqoui and while he's not beaten badly, he's definitely given up a step and it's 6 points if Stafford hits him; Etheridge is coming unblocked, though, and I think it hurries Stafford just enough to cause the overthrow. Terrifying, but effective, I guess. Three-and-out!
20. Dunn is having an absolute howler today. This time he loses the ball in the wind and lets it land at the 10 when he's got 10 yards on a return, minimum. Dawgs down it at the 7. 10-15 yards of field position lost again. (ST -).
21. Ace, handoff to Tate around right end. Pugh's driven back, Trott misreads which LB to block (line -) and it's a quick loss of 1.
22. Spread with a bunch left. QB draw, tons of room over the left side (line +) and a thumping Tate block get Burns 8.
23. 3rd-3. Could really use the first down this deep in our own territory. Spread, QB sweep, and as predictable a call as this is I think it still picks up the first if Pugh doesn't make a sorry effort on blocking Curran at the point-of-attack. Pugh gives him a sort of love tap and then stands there watching Curran tackle after a gain of 1. (line -)
24. 35-yarder from Durst into the wind. No return. Could be worse, I guess.
25. 1st-10 Dawgs at midfield. Straight drop from Stafford, finds Green in the zone for 12. This is actually a nice bit of analysis here from Archer--he notes that Moreno drifting into the flat pulled Johnson forward enough that Green could get in behind him in the zone. Which is exactly what happened. (I don't think you can fault Johnson, mind you; it's just a good play.)
26. Toss to Moreno over the left side and dammit it ought to go for nothing; Goggans (+) had blown things up and Bynes and Stevens are both in position in the hole. Somehow, Moreno spots the tiniest of creases between the trailing Blanc and Ricks and leaps through it for 5. Darn these talented players!
27. Play-action, then a screen to Moreno and ... uh-oh. Touchdown. How'd it happen? First, the d-line doesn't read it at all. Second, all the deep receiver action comes to the opposite side of the field, drawing Bynes and Stevens that way. Third and most importantly, there's a crackback block by the receiver on the opposite side on Evans, who's holding down that half of the field; he gets flattened by it and I wonder if Powers (who's lined up over the guy and sort of drifts behind him into the center of the field) fails to yell CRACK the way I remember being taught in junior high football. As mentioned Powers (--) has drifted out of position and Moreno has both two blockers and a ton of room--still, the tackling effort of Powers (who backpedals all the way to the goalline), Bynes, and Etheridge leaves a lot to be desired. 7-6 Dawgs.
28. Raycom presents the kickoff to us from the directly-on-the-sideline angle. So Davis returns it to the 25. But I don't know how. Apparently Georgia's in the Christmas spirit again, though, handing Auburn another 15 free post-play yards for some infraction or another.
29. I, give to Fannin around right end. Good blocks by McKenzie on the strongside end and by Green on the LB give Fannin the corner; he picks up 5. (Line +)
30. I again. Um, perhaps Gabe McKenzie should have been brought back over to the offensive side of the ball as soon as we started requiring TEs to block again? He gets a terrific sustained block on the end here, which along with Pugh's drive of his guy to the turf, a little clip by Davis, and even a brush-block by Billings on a charging LB gets Fannin a crease. That's five yards, but then Fannin (+) drags 1, 2, 3, 4 of these clowns for six more and draws a facemask! Hell of a play. (line +)
31. 1st-10 on the Georgia 30. Ace, H-back strongside. Waggle, Georgia completely unfooled and Burns (+) makes a splendid throw off his back foot to McKenzie anyway. Gain of 6.
32. Two-TE ace. Ziemba shoved backwards, then watches his guy break free and tackle for loss. Fannin with no chance here. (Line -).
33. Spread on 3rd-5. You'll never guess what the call is--Burns on the keeper! Wholesale failure on the line (and another corner blitz) sees four Dawgs in the backfield before Burns gets outside the tackle box. Where are the little curls and slants that Burns had so much success with against WVU and Ole Miss? (line -)
34. Byurm (-) on for a 42-yarder. In this wind, I'm not optimistic. That's why--the kick sails wide by a mile.
35. With 23 seconds left, Georgia kneels out the half.
End second quarter
Two drives covering 17 plays, 98 yards, and 8:17 combined result in zero points. So it goes.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
SEC Power Poll ballot, Week 12
1. Florida. Heavens-to-betsy! Gee willikers! Ye gods! Sweet merciful heavens! Holy toledo! Jeepers! Goodness gracious sakes alive! Jiminy Christmas! Egads! (Etc. All justified when you beat five bowl teams in five weeks and 42-14 is the closest of those five scores.)
2. Alabama. Voting the Gators tops in a power poll makes sense, but anyone who drops the Tide (or Texas Tech) behind a one-loss team--any one-loss team--places a very curious value indeed on losing vis a vis winning.
GAP SO WIDE THE GRAND CANYON THINKS IT COULD SLIM UP A BIT
3. Georgia. The only thing that makes less sense to me than this offense averaging only 26.9 points per SEC game is, like, molecular quantum physics. No, wait--molecular quantum physics as explained by Lou Holtz.
GAP SO CAVERNOUS THERE ARE FISH AT ITS BOTTOM WHO HAVE NO EYES
4. Ole Miss. Ole Miss 59, Louisiana-Monroe 0; Louisiana-Monroe 31, Troy 30; Troy 31, LSU 3 (however temporarily). Consider that a prediction.
5. LSU. I dunno, I'm starting to think opposing defenses are sending Jarrett Lee e-mails like DEAR MR. LEE: MY NAME IS PRINCE TEBO MUTOMBO OF THE REPUBLIC OF PIKSIXIA AND I HAVE INHERITED 47,000 FOOTBALL POINTS AFTER THE DEATH OF MY FATHER KING LORENZO MUTOMBO OF PIKSIXIA. I NEED YOU TO HELP ME KEEP MY FOOTBALL POINTS SAFE. IF YOU ARE WILLING TO PAY VIA INTERCEPTION TRANSFER A SMALL SCOREBOARD INCREASE FEE OF SEVEN FOOTBALL POINTS FOR ME, I WILL MOVE MY POINTS TO A SAFE ACCOUNT IN GAYNESVILLE AND BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU 7,000 FOOTBALL POINTS AS A TOKEN OF MY GRATITUDE. THEY WILL BE YOUR POINTS YOU CAN USE TO WIN YOUR TEAM FOOTBALL. PLEASE HELP ME MR. LEE.
6. South Carolina. Eh, so that was the worst first quarter I've ever seen an SEC team play. Still an 8-win team.
7. Vanderbilt. Dude, if Adidas doesn't sign the 'Dores (and D.J. Moore, the best player in this league whose name doesn't rhyme with Mim Mebow) up for the next round of "Impossible is Nothing" commercials, I'm gonna be hella pissed.
8. Kentucky. Were even Kentucky fans really that upset about seeing their team lose when said loss sent Vandy to a bowl? Besides, they needed that anger for Gillespie.
9. Arkansas. It's true that scientists working with the Large Hadron Collider have discovered a new particle that stays in place in the nucleus only until a second nearby particle becomes dislodged, at which point the first particle shifts noticeably in the direction of the vacancy created by the second. However, it's only a rumor that this particle has been named the Petrino. That part's not true.
10. Auburn. Great to see Auburn finally, finally get over the top after so many weeks of trying. Trying to cover the spread, I mean. That's an eight-game losing streak we snapped there. Also, the trying to finally hit dead last in the country in red zone efficiency. We've been after that one for a while, too.
11. Tennessee. Normally, facing Kentucky and Vandy in November's a good thing. Now, though, maybe the Vols would prefer to face two teams who won't take as much joy in kicking sand in their face?
12. Mississippi St. If the Bulldogs can't beat the Hogs or Rebels, you'll be able to make an argument this is, in fact, the worst season yet of Croom's tenure.
Georgia recap, quarter the first
The 112th edition. Bring it.
First quarter
1. Morgan Hull draws kickoff duties and to start Auburn off on the right foot ... it's a hideous squib that by all rights should bounce its way out of bounds. Hull -. Auburn catches a break when it somehow rolls into the corner and is picked up at the 5, giving Great Story Pybus and others (ST +) a chance to tackle at the 17.
2. Georgia in the I on their first play from scrimmage ... WORST FEARS CONFIRMED. It's a lead draw over the left side, Doolittle (-) and Coleman are annihilated on the line, Evans gets blown up by Southerland, Bynes (-) is savaged by a lineman, and Moreno is nine yards downfield before he's even touched. Auburn, please do something immediately to assure me this isn't going to happen all damn game.
3. That's not what I was looking for. Georgia finds just as much open space on the long handoff to the flanker as WVU and Ole Miss did. McFadden gets cut and A.J. Green strolls for 13. Not too exercised about it--still think I'd rather Rhoads play off, keep Stafford from connecting on the bomb, and hope UGA screws it up or is too proud to keep going back to the well.
4. Spread. Draw to Moreno, Bynes (-) is unblocked but reacts slowly and then barely even slows Moreno down as he dashes by. Not a strong start for our linebackers, to say the least.
5. Southerland motions into an offset I, play-action, Stafford looks for Massaquoi deep down the right sideline. Decent coverage by McFadden, but there's maybe a window if Stafford can lay it in there in the wind. He can't.
6. Auburn lines up five on the LOS vs. the I, slant towards the playside, and have Johnson (+) recover from taking an initial wide angle to grab Moreno by the waist as he crosses the line--and he still pulls forward for a solid five.
7. First 3rd down of the game. Two-back shotgun. Clayton gets a nice bull rush but it's all for naught--Green has come well open on the curl (cover -) with Thorpe in man-to-man. Tough play there, but Thorpe (-) loses sympathy by taking a poor angle and allowing Thorpe to gain another 14 yards.
8. 1st-10 Georgia on the AU 11; so far six Dawg plays have netted 72 yards. Ewwww. Auburn gets a bit unlucky on this one--they slant heavily towards the strong side only for Georgia to run the lead over the other side, where the blitzing Bynes and Stevens are the only defense against another wide open crease. They're blocked, but Coleman (+) does an outstanding job to avoid a cut, reverse field, and tackle a spinning Moreno. Gain of 4, could have been worse.
9. Decent play by Auburn here; Moreno's slowed first by Johnson blitzing off the edge and getting a hand on him as he hits the line, then by Marks (+) having shoved his guy into the hole. Moreno spins and doesn't have the balance to elude Stevens after picking up 4.
10. 3rd-3 from the 4. Endzone jumpball to Green working against McFadden, and McFadden (+, cover +) times his shove perfectly--too early and it's a flag, too late and it's too late, but this one comes right after Green makes the grab and puts his foot well out-of-bounds. Huge stop.
11. BLOCKED! They blocked it! No points after that terrifying drive! Doolittle just plows his way through the middle of the lie and swats it. Nothin' fancy. Good job by McFadden to pick up some extra yards, too. (ST +)
12. Auburn opens in the I on their 22. Georgia opens with--I sh*t you not--nine guys in the box if you count the safety that's ostensibly over the slot but staring directly into the backfield. Fannin gets the start and the handoff, and not surprisingly given the "nine guys in the box" thing, finds a linebacker in the intended hole. But Berry and Bosley (line +) have their guys totally stoned and Fannin (+) makes the right read, cutting back and scooting between them for 6.
13. Ace, 3-WR after Fannin motions out. Weird play--think this is supposed to be a stop-and-go to Fannin with Burns pump-faking on the stop, but Burns doesn't even take a second step before trying to pump. Between that and a stout push from the UGA line (line -), Burns is way too crowded and off-balance to get anything on the throw, which is a mile out of bounds.
14. Spread on 3rd-4. The QB keeper everyone in the stadium knows is coming comes, and it works anyway--it's a sweep right with Fannin as the lead blocker, and even though Fannin doesn't block a soul he decoys the unblocked Curran so far outside Burns has a cutback lane thanks to Pugh riding his guy down the line and Berry pancaking/possibly dragging his guy to the ground (line +). Even then it takes a nice move from Burns (+) to avoid a tackle and pick up the first.
15. 1st-10 on the 33, I-formation. Eight in the box and Georgia blitzes two to the strong side--which, unfortunately, is where the play is going. Davis meets his guy two yards in the backfield rather than at the LOS and by the time Fannin's skipped around them, the other LBs have closed and tackle for no gain. Auburn will have to start throwing on first down or there's going to be a lot of this. After the play, Fannin's ticked at what he thinks was a quick "forward progress" whistle, but I'm fine with it--the result of a later whistle is a fumble a lot more times than it's "ball carrier suddenly breaks free for positive yardage."
16. Spread. Burns drops back, has a pocket (line +), and has to check down to Fannin for 2.
17. 3rd-8. Spread. Burns rolls right and again, no one's open. He slips forward for three and Auburn will punt. Honestly, I'd much rather Burns tuck it and live to fight another day than launch one into coverage.
18. Man, the ball's been bouncing Auburn's way on special teams so far. Durst hangs one up in the wind that's only about a 35-yarder, but it slips past the return guy and boings its way down to the 6. Sweet.
19. Georgia in the ace and they run that snazzy little counter play they like where Stafford holds out the ball one way and then actually hands it off to Moreno the other. Auburn could maybe do a better job up front, but McNeil (-) is nonetheless in position to tackle and make this a gain of 1 or 2; he misses, gain of 15.
20. The Dawg line screws up and lets Clayton (-) in untouched on Moreno; he whiffs. Decent job by Evans of standing up to the tackle at the point-of-attack, causing Moreno to lose his balance a bit and allow Etheridge to tackle after a gain of 4.
21. Weird formation from Auburn; three down linemen, an LB lined up over the TE on the strong side, and then three more linebackers--including a shifted-in Etheridge--bunched in the middle of the field. With the corners covering twins to one side, the closest member of the secondary to Massaquoi on the opposite side is Thorpe 10 yards off the LOS; Stafford just throws a bolt seven yards downfield and MoMass catches and makes the first with ease. I think this is a mistake in alignment; pre-snap, Bynes seems to motion to Etheridge to edge wider (and into position, theoretically, to cut off this exact throw) and Etheridge barely moves.
22. Auburn's going to have to move a safety into the box, 'cause the front seven's just getting mauled at this point. Seven Dawg blockers take on seven Tiger defenders and Georgia goes 7-for-7; Moreno into the secondary again, gain of 19. Why is Coleman lined up so much wider than the DTs, and if he's going to do that, why is no LB sliding over to cover for him? (This is exactly where the play goes, of course.)
23. Moreno out, thank heavens. Marks (+) gets a good push down the line and swipes at replacement RB as he passes the LOS, causing him to wobble a bit and giving Etheridge (-) an excellent opportunity to tackle for a gain or only 2. He misses. McNeil cleans up after 6.
24. FINALLY. Doolittle (+) breaks into the backfield and bumps Southerland as replacement RB follows him; the bump allows Bynes (+) a free shot he's happy to take advantage. Solid lick, loss of 1.
25. 3rd-5, Auburn 41. Massaquoi catches after coming wide open on the curl, but do you know why he's wide open on the curl? Offensive pass interference, that's why.
26. 3rd-20, and Georgia runs up the white flag on the drive with a draw to Moreno. (With wideouts and a QB like this: why?) He runs around a bit but never really threatens to break loose. Gain of 8, Dawgs will punt.
27. Goodness f'ing gracious. Dunn fields at the 15 and then goes back and forth between which lane to take about, oh, six different times. Result: tackled at the 4. Horrible.
28. I. Play-action, deep to Slaughter ... excellent coverage and the pass was nowhere near him (Burns -). Nice call (if you ask me), poor execution.
29. Ace, twins to the weak side, and I think Burns needs to check out of this rush with Tate to the strong side: not only does UGA have the requisite eight in the box, the extra d-lineman is on that side and the LBs are shifted that way. No matter, play's run anyway, and as expected gains 2 when Green's a little late cutting Daniel Ellerbe in the hole.
30. 3rd-8 on the Auburn 7.5; a first would be huge. The weird unblocked attempted screen to Fannin is not huge; Curran reads it and snuffs it immediately. Just a nice play by him; if he doesn't read this Fannin appears to have enough room in front of him for the first.
31. Durst lines up at the back of his end zone, heavy rush ... they got him! Flag! First down, and ... HOLY HELL he dropped the punt! Auburn recovers the fumble for what seems like the first time this season! Wow, Auburn may have finally found a team that sucks at special teams just as badly as they do. (I'll say this: at least they got their money's worth on the roughing flag. No soccer-flopping from Durst on this one.)
32. 1st-10, Auburn 49. I, Fannin as the FB. Would you like to take a guess as to why Fannin is the FB? Because it's the patented Borges play-action wheel route, and when the line (+) gives Burns plenty of time he finds Fannin wide slap open. It's not a great or even good pass--instead of hitting him in stride, Fannin has to slow and come towards the center of the field to make the catch--but Fannin (+) makes the best of it and then some, cutting back all the way across the field and picking up an excellent block from Smith (+) for the TOUCHDOWN! Man, do I love that play. It's like Sex Panther--60 percent of the time, it works every time.
33. You've got to be kidding me. Clayton Crofoot drops the snap on the extra point. Clayton Crofoot. Drops. The. Snap. Clayton Crofoot. Why can nothing ever, ever come easily for this team? 6-0, Auburn.
34. Hull drops it at the 16. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt this is the wind.
35. 1st-10 Dawgs on their own 31. Yet another long handoff, yet another simple gain of 15 as McFadden (-) gets shoved around by the lone blocker. Depressingly easy.
End first quarter
Second quarter tomorrow. These things get too long if I don't break them up, I've decided.
Blogpoll roundtable
So hey, who wants to see me answer random questions asked by some random other member of the Blog Poll? No one? Tough.
1. By now everyone has heard that if there is a three way tie in the Big 12 South the highest ranked team in the BCS will play in the Big 12 Championship Game. That means the humans (66% of the BCS Poll) will determine the Big 12 South representative. Let’s assume Oklahoma sinks the pirate ship at home next week. Try to sway the pollsters by arguing which team you think should face off against the Big 12 North.
Fair enough. We'll take this step-by-step.
1. Head-to-head: Basically a draw, but you have to give Texas a slight edge since their big win in the three-way tie came at a neutral venue while Tech and Oklahoma will have both needed home field advantage to get their big wins.
2. Big 12 schedule: Texas in a walk, since they drew Missouri and the other two didn't.
3. Nonconference schedule: Oklahoma, also in a walk. TCU and Cincy are both miles better than anyone the 'Horns scheduled and I hear Tech's noncon slate killed at the Comedy Club last week.
So who comes out ahead? Not Tech, that's for sure. And if you're picking between the Sooners and the 'Horns ... uh, shouldn't you go with the team of those two teams that beat the other team? If by the time they've finished with Tech and Oklahoma St. Oklahoma has a decisive edge in Sagarin's overall schedule rating--which at the moment is all Texas-- well, maybe you say that the three-way head-to-head tie just ought to be broken that way. But otherwise (and I suspect the final math will indeed be "otherwise") the 'Horns ought to get the benefit of the doubt. (Too bad there's basically no chance it works out this way.)
2. ESPN is aggressively bidding on the rights to the BCS when Fox’s contract expires after the 2009 season. (Which they've since won--ed.) My half baked theory is if they do win the rights they will push for a +1 system. Lucrative television deals have landed ESPN in bed with each of the BCS conferences. The revenue a playoff would generate could be a huge motivator for the four letter to be the common denominator and unifier among the conferences that finally helps them all to see the light of why a playoff would be good for college football. Help expand upon or debunk this theory.
I don't think even the might of the House of Mouse will strongarm the mules in the Pac-10 and Big-10 into a plus-one until the new contract expires, unless possibly an undefeated USC or perfect Penn St. wind up playing third fiddle to undefeated SEC and Big 12 teams. We get that scenario a time or two, and I suspect the timetable accelerates substantially.
But when that contract does expire (in 2015, sigh), yeah, I could see ESPN playing the hero's role (of all things) in bringing us the playoff-like substance we so desperately need. Not necessarily for their ability to tug on the ears of the principals involved alone, but because when they do tug on those ears, they'll have something practical to say into them: namely, exactly how many gazillions of dollars they'll be willing to pay for a four-team playoff of some kind.
That, finally, should at some point be enough to convince everybody on board.
3. Rivalry week is around the corner. How do you think your team will fare? Feel free to talk a little or a lot of trash.
Well, pretty much the sole purpose of this blog over the next week-and-a-half will be to answer this question, so for now I'll just say:
until proven otherwise.
4. And now for a little fun… Assemble your dream announcing team. Pick a play-by-play announcer, color commentator, sideline reporter and for the hell of it celebrity guest that drops on by.
Now this is a question. Let's break it down bit by bit ...
PBP: I've got a ton of sympathy for the perennially underrated Sean McDonough, who deserves much, much better than the random midday ESPN2 games he's stuck with. A couple years back Mike Tirico always did a bang-up job on ESPN's Thursday night games in my opinion; naturally, he's since been assigned to NBA-only duty. I'd take those two guys over Chris Fowler or Brad Nessler, but you also have to respect that Fowler and Nessler bring the professionalism on a week-by-week basis even as they're paired with the likes of Craig James and Paul Maguire.
Of course, the only actual choice here is Ron Franklin. No one else comes close.
Color: Typically, good color guys go through several phases in their career
1. Lots of nuts-and-bolts analysis, perhaps a little wooden on the mic, difficulty getting their knowledge across
2. More seasoned communicator, but still with incisive observations and quality information
3. Analysis begins to be lost in haze of producer-driven storylines and exclusive focus on stars, but still some shreds of insight
4. Useless blithering pap
Phase No. 2, obviously, is the announcing sweet spot and we have precious few college football color guys currently operating in that phase. Guys like Danielson and Davie are well on their way to Phase 4 (where Maguire already dwells); Spielman and Griese's best days are behind them; Herbstreit can't turn off his Gameday bobblehead persona long enough to do any real X's-and-O's.
Which is why while I'm supremely hopeful for the Trev Alberts experiment, right now there's really only one choice at color as well: Todd Blackledge, who once-upon-a-time was joined with McDonough at CBS to create the best CFB broadcasting team I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. Now he's saddled with Mike Patrick and still he manages to say a few insightful things each game he calls. He's the best.
Sideline: If we have to have one at all, I'd take Holly Rowe circa 2004-2005. But even Rowe has offered far too many "Let me tell you about this crazy and/or humorous and/or touching anecdote that is in no way related to the current action on the field"-style reports the past couple of seasons and not enough actual news. I'm assuming this is because her bosses are idiots. If I can get the one that asks actual questions of coaches at halftime and reports actual news, I guess I'll take her.
Celebrity: Charles Barkley can drop in for five minutes. That's it.
1. By now everyone has heard that if there is a three way tie in the Big 12 South the highest ranked team in the BCS will play in the Big 12 Championship Game. That means the humans (66% of the BCS Poll) will determine the Big 12 South representative. Let’s assume Oklahoma sinks the pirate ship at home next week. Try to sway the pollsters by arguing which team you think should face off against the Big 12 North.
Fair enough. We'll take this step-by-step.
1. Head-to-head: Basically a draw, but you have to give Texas a slight edge since their big win in the three-way tie came at a neutral venue while Tech and Oklahoma will have both needed home field advantage to get their big wins.
2. Big 12 schedule: Texas in a walk, since they drew Missouri and the other two didn't.
3. Nonconference schedule: Oklahoma, also in a walk. TCU and Cincy are both miles better than anyone the 'Horns scheduled and I hear Tech's noncon slate killed at the Comedy Club last week.
So who comes out ahead? Not Tech, that's for sure. And if you're picking between the Sooners and the 'Horns ... uh, shouldn't you go with the team of those two teams that beat the other team? If by the time they've finished with Tech and Oklahoma St. Oklahoma has a decisive edge in Sagarin's overall schedule rating--which at the moment is all Texas-- well, maybe you say that the three-way head-to-head tie just ought to be broken that way. But otherwise (and I suspect the final math will indeed be "otherwise") the 'Horns ought to get the benefit of the doubt. (Too bad there's basically no chance it works out this way.)
2. ESPN is aggressively bidding on the rights to the BCS when Fox’s contract expires after the 2009 season. (Which they've since won--ed.) My half baked theory is if they do win the rights they will push for a +1 system. Lucrative television deals have landed ESPN in bed with each of the BCS conferences. The revenue a playoff would generate could be a huge motivator for the four letter to be the common denominator and unifier among the conferences that finally helps them all to see the light of why a playoff would be good for college football. Help expand upon or debunk this theory.
I don't think even the might of the House of Mouse will strongarm the mules in the Pac-10 and Big-10 into a plus-one until the new contract expires, unless possibly an undefeated USC or perfect Penn St. wind up playing third fiddle to undefeated SEC and Big 12 teams. We get that scenario a time or two, and I suspect the timetable accelerates substantially.
But when that contract does expire (in 2015, sigh), yeah, I could see ESPN playing the hero's role (of all things) in bringing us the playoff-like substance we so desperately need. Not necessarily for their ability to tug on the ears of the principals involved alone, but because when they do tug on those ears, they'll have something practical to say into them: namely, exactly how many gazillions of dollars they'll be willing to pay for a four-team playoff of some kind.
That, finally, should at some point be enough to convince everybody on board.
3. Rivalry week is around the corner. How do you think your team will fare? Feel free to talk a little or a lot of trash.
Well, pretty much the sole purpose of this blog over the next week-and-a-half will be to answer this question, so for now I'll just say:
until proven otherwise.
4. And now for a little fun… Assemble your dream announcing team. Pick a play-by-play announcer, color commentator, sideline reporter and for the hell of it celebrity guest that drops on by.
Now this is a question. Let's break it down bit by bit ...
PBP: I've got a ton of sympathy for the perennially underrated Sean McDonough, who deserves much, much better than the random midday ESPN2 games he's stuck with. A couple years back Mike Tirico always did a bang-up job on ESPN's Thursday night games in my opinion; naturally, he's since been assigned to NBA-only duty. I'd take those two guys over Chris Fowler or Brad Nessler, but you also have to respect that Fowler and Nessler bring the professionalism on a week-by-week basis even as they're paired with the likes of Craig James and Paul Maguire.
Of course, the only actual choice here is Ron Franklin. No one else comes close.
Color: Typically, good color guys go through several phases in their career
1. Lots of nuts-and-bolts analysis, perhaps a little wooden on the mic, difficulty getting their knowledge across
2. More seasoned communicator, but still with incisive observations and quality information
3. Analysis begins to be lost in haze of producer-driven storylines and exclusive focus on stars, but still some shreds of insight
4. Useless blithering pap
Phase No. 2, obviously, is the announcing sweet spot and we have precious few college football color guys currently operating in that phase. Guys like Danielson and Davie are well on their way to Phase 4 (where Maguire already dwells); Spielman and Griese's best days are behind them; Herbstreit can't turn off his Gameday bobblehead persona long enough to do any real X's-and-O's.
Which is why while I'm supremely hopeful for the Trev Alberts experiment, right now there's really only one choice at color as well: Todd Blackledge, who once-upon-a-time was joined with McDonough at CBS to create the best CFB broadcasting team I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. Now he's saddled with Mike Patrick and still he manages to say a few insightful things each game he calls. He's the best.
Sideline: If we have to have one at all, I'd take Holly Rowe circa 2004-2005. But even Rowe has offered far too many "Let me tell you about this crazy and/or humorous and/or touching anecdote that is in no way related to the current action on the field"-style reports the past couple of seasons and not enough actual news. I'm assuming this is because her bosses are idiots. If I can get the one that asks actual questions of coaches at halftime and reports actual news, I guess I'll take her.
Celebrity: Charles Barkley can drop in for five minutes. That's it.
Monday, November 17, 2008
It means everything
The last chapter of The Story will be televised to the widest audience possible. This is also how stories (the good ones, at least, the old crowd-pleasers) operate: the hard-scrabble underdog doesn't take on the unbeatable favorite in the backyard in front of friends and family. What made David David was that Goliath went down in front of everyone, forever.
------------------------
Usually it's best to leave the shredding of Stewart Mandel's latest intellectual gambit to Michael at B&B, but he seems busy and anyway, the following sentiment appeared in a dozen different places after the Iowa-Penn St. game. So I feeling entitled to point out that this ...
But why, you ask, is the regular season "more important" with the BCS in place? Let us count the ways -- just using last weekend as an example. If college football had a playoff ...... mindlessly equates "playoffs" with an eight- or 16-team version. 'Cause, see, in a four-team version both the Iowa game (which costs the Nits a guaranteed shot at a national title as opposed to one that depends on the kindness of Big 12 strangers) and PSU's upcoming Michigan St. tilt (in which the whole nation will wait with baited breath to see if the Nits or Trojans grab the fourth playoff berth) become vastly more important to the country-at-large.
• Iowa's dramatic upset of Penn State wouldn't have mattered in the slightest. The Nittany Lions can and probably will still win the Big Ten. The loss would only hurt their playoff seeding.
But that's not really my point. My point is that it's stunning to see a national writer tell Iowa fans that their season-defining, possibly program-defining victory (should Ferentz dig the Hawkeyes back out of the last couple of years' worth of mediocrity) "wouldn't have mattered in the slightest" if Penn St. went on to take part in a playoff. That win and the story those that were there will tell their grandkids someday in the robot house are irrelevant. Now, I know, Mandel is intentionally discussing the BCS and BCS ramifications alone ... but isn't the entire "let's hone our focus on the BCS to microscopic levels at the exclusion of what's important about college football, like Iowa" viewpoint identical to the playoffs-ruin-everything viewpoint Mandel is arguing against? In trying to argue that playoffs would strip college football of its uniqueness, Mandel strips out exactly what about the Iowa-Penn St. game helps make college football unique.
Not that Mandel can even get his pro-BCS argument straight anyway ...
• Alabama's overtime win over LSU -- one of the most intense endings I've ever covered -- would have been largely irrelevant. While the game would still be a big deal because of Nick Saban's return to Baton Rouge, the palpable tension in that stadium after the Tigers blocked the Crimson Tide's field goal was due to the fact that Alabama's entire season was on the line.
Under a playoff, if the Tide had lost ... oh well. They could still clinch a spot in the SEC title game the following week.
Right, the same way Florida did two years ago after losing to Auburn ... the way LSU did last year after losing twice ... the way Florida will again after losing to Ole Miss this year. BCS or playoff, that game wasn't going to matter in terms of the national championship picture anyway.
And in those blind Mandelian terms, neither will the Iron Bowl.
--------------------
Those are, of course, the same blind Mandelian terms the overwhelming majority of Alabama fans are happy to accept. Over and over again over the past six years, they have told us their sights are always set higher than mere rivalry (Tennessee sometimes excluded), that games that aren't played with championships on the line aren't worth caring about, that Auburn supporters deserve derision and mockery for daring to invest so much in a single game rather than titles. In short: they have told us that Auburn's six wins don't really matter. They don't really count for anything.
I think the tune would be entirely different if they had won a few of those games and certainly will be when they finally do break the streak--at which point the measure of our two programs will magically be who wins the Iron Bowl again, not which one shamefully wants to win it more--but for now, this tune is theirs. It is the tune sung by the likes of Stewart Mandel, the tune danced by grade-fudgers to keep the budding professionals eligible, the tune written by the NFL and, it has to be said, played by no one at this level so beautifully as by the Tide's resident coachbot.
Let them keep it. I will keep college football, where before the draft rankings and the quarterback camps and luxury boxes and million-dollar contracts and polls and marching bands and even the damn sweat and blood, comes the hate. That's where this sport we love starts. Auburn gets that. Alabama claims they don't. This is the way things have to be. But it doesn't mean I envy them. Ever. At all.
Besides, should Auburn do the damn-near unthinkable and leave Tuscaloosa with a win a week from Saturday that the Tide follow with a loss to Florida the week after that, Auburn fans will look back on this season with a certain fondness laced with disappointment while Tide fans will do with a certain disappointment laced with fondness. The game will mean everything to Auburn regardless. Here's to hoping Alabama finds out after the fact exactly how much it means to them.
T-minus 12 days. Let the hate flow, Auburn.
Dude ...
Has no one else noticed that Daniel Moore ...
... is leading a secret double-life as legendary comic actor (and underrated songwriter) Michael McKean?
Quite the Renaissance man, he.
... is leading a secret double-life as legendary comic actor (and underrated songwriter) Michael McKean?
Quite the Renaissance man, he.
The Works, zebra hunting-style
Insert "And somehow they still managed to miss half-a-dozen calls" wisecrack here.
Yipes, stripes. Jeremy's a wee bit upset about the officiating during the game last Saturday. As in "rehash the 1992 Auburn-Georgia debacle and cite a whole series of angry Auburner comments approvingly" upset. In a blockquoted nutshell:
That’s what I was thinking about yesterday. As my gut turned. As my throat swelled. As my legs couldn’t get comfortable. My Auburn heart hurt. My Auburn heart hurts. We were supposed to win that game. Everyone saw it and felt it and saw it and knows it.I have no doubt Jeremy's far, far from alone in this regard and I gotta say, that pass interference call on the Dawgs' last touchdown drive may have been the single worst one I've ever seen.
But yeah, I'm taking the boring "the officials didn't lose that game for us" tack, because they didn't. Aside from that one PI call, I can't remember any notably bad calls or noncalls in the Dawgs' favor (I suppose I may find a couple more when I recap the game)--the others I think of off the top of my head were "questionable" and that's the extent of it. And, of course, the officials didn't drop an extra point hold or misfire on an open fourth-down fade. I don't begrudge anyone else their anger, but the JCCW's sitting it out and hoping for better luck next time.
Newsy news. Not a ton of developments from Tubby's Sunday presser, but two big pieces of injury information: Trott's probably toast for the Irown Bowl, and Byrum's knee is likewise damaged in some fashion, making Hull the kicker from here on out. Thus the decision to go for it on the
4th-and-2.
Which, frankly, was always the best option anyway. Auburn's offense still isn't to the point where they could expect to drive into field goal position again and Lord knows expecting the FG unit to come through on decent-length attempts in that wind doesn't seem especially wise, either. The choice to go was correct. (The choice to air it out into the end zone is infinitely more debatable, but as I said this morning, seeing as a slightly better throw from Kodi gets us a quick six, I'm not going to complain.)
The other bit from Tubby concerns the absence of Mario Fannin at game's end:
On not playing Mario Fannin late: "We threw the ball 23 of the last 30 times. We didn't know as much with him as far as protections. He was in on some passing plays. With two weeks to prepare for this game, there shouldn't be any problem. At the end of the game, it becomes a mental as well as physical game. He's not there yet. He'll progress along as we go. We just played the odds with Ben Tate."Makes sense to me. I'd still prefer Fannin to get more of the touches Tate got/gets (though Tate ran better Saturday than he has in weeks and weeks), but I can't see how the presence of Fannin turns either of those last two drives into something other than what they were.
Some may disagree. Acid Reign, for instance, who does sagely note that 12 offensive touches isn't enough for a guy who goes for 108 yards on those touches. AR also notes exactly how bad it got on punt returns:
Punt Returns: F. Dunn caught the first one behind the 15, and retreated back inside his own five with a half-dozen Bulldogs all over him. A senior just CAN'T make those kinds of decisions! Dunn's second attempt was a fair catch with no one within 15 yards of him. Dunn's third appearance resulted in him letting the ball hit the ground at the 11, and be downed at the 7. Every Georgia punt resulted in Auburn starting at their own 20 or worse. We tallied NEGATIVE 8 returns yards, here.Seriously: what on earth happened here? At least we won't have to listen to the three Daves tell us that Dunn is ranked fifth in the country or whatever on punt returns when he hadn't actually made a return since Southern Miss.
Well, that could have gone worse. Andy Bitter brings us a nice little recap of the AU men's hoops team's season-opening win against Missouri State, and lest you think that season-opening wins against lesser squads are something to sneeze at, Mark Gottfried would like to have a word with you (as would Jeff Lebo, who as you may recall kicked off the 2007 season on the right foot by losing to Tulane). Of course, whatever enthusiasm might have been generated by said win has to be tempered by the fact that--stop me if you've heard this one before--one of Auburn's players got injured.
Not an omen of good fortune. Last week, Jay Tate made an astute point (or at least, a substantially more astute point than the "I don't know why they're playing Fannin" point) about Auburn's offensive line:
Auburn was prepared to outlast opponents this season. Remember how Tony Franklin wanted to run 80-90 plays per game? The line was built to handle that. The "smash-mouth" stuff was ditched. Then Franklin was fired, Steve Ensminger and Hugh Nall went back to the offense they know -- smash-mouth stuff -- and now the line isn't ready for it.But their agility and quickness will come in awful handy against Terence Cody, right? Right?
Look, LT Lee Ziemba is listed at 285 pounds. He's a lean guy. He's also playing with a bum knee.
RT Ryan Pugh is listed at 6-foot-4 (he's more like 6-2) and 280 pounds. Pugh doesn't look that heavy to me.
Those are exceptionally light tackles in an era where guys at that position routinely exceed 300 pounds.
Aaaaaaand finally ... a buncha big fat congrats to the Vandy Commodores, who are going bowling for the first time of my football-watchin' life. I quite honestly wondered if I'd ever see the day. What's simultaneously surprising and not surprising is that it happened this year. As Philip writes:
If you lined up the preseason press clippings for every Vanderbilt football team from 1983 to 2008, and rated them by probability that each squad would be “The One” to break our losing streak, where would 2008 rate? Probably behind 1992, 1993, 1994, 2000, 2005, 2007, and no telling how many others I’m overlooking.That it did end up happening ay ear aheado f schedule is the surprise; but then again, on some level, doesn't the pressure of trying to make a bowl at Vandy mean that it was always going to be a team without much expected from it that would break through the glass ceiling? In any case, it's time to retire all the "Vandy in a bowl = apocalypse" jokes, or, as JRS memorably put it (in a post nicely titled "Yes They Did") -- "a black president and a Vanderbilt bowl trip ... America is ready for some m*********ing change for sure."
Apparently so. Good job, 'Dores.
Monday knee-jerk: Past is prologue, perhaps
"Kill anyone today?"
"Day ain't over yet."
--City Slickers
---------------------------
Oh, I shouldn't compare this Auburn team in any shape, form, or fashion to Jack Palance or Jack Palance's character Curly. Palance and Curly are men's men, who chew sandstone like chewing gum and hunt game with nothing more than their steely glare and would never, ever throw a deep fade to the end zone on 4th-and-2 from the opponent's 21 with 4:17 to play.
But until Saturday, the secret feeling 'round these parts ever since that bitter, miserable second half against Vanderbilt was that Auburn's 2008 campaign was finished. The season was done. It had contracted a case of DEATH. Sure, there were games to play. Sure, we'd watch the underclassmen for improvement, for reasons to believe 2009 would be better. And sure, above all, there was Tubby-watch and the lingering hope--with Tubby, there's always some level of hope, isn't there?--that Auburn would catch lightning-in-a-bottle-made-of-opponent's-turnovers and stumble into victory.
But 5-7 was what we had to expect. 5-7 was what, barring Tubby pixie dust, we were going to get. The offense we saw against Vanderbilt and the spreading rot on the defense we saw take hold against Arkansas ... by that point, the ship had sailed. The die was cast. The sun had set.
Not so much now. There was a glimmer against Ole Miss. Maybe a further glimmer in Kodi Burns's dynamism (if nothing else) against UT-Martin. Now it's pretty clear the sun's been up all along. Oh, it's been hugging the horizon, and of course it may still set on a 5-7 record and Tubby in a mess of hot water. No doubt about that.
But the day ain't over yet.
---------------------------------
Why am I sounding a note of optimism after a game Auburn had half-a-dozen chances to win and didn't? After what might have been the worst special teams performance yet in a season haunted at every turn by poor special teams play? After a game in which our opponent gift-wrapped victory and handed it to Auburn in person, only Auburn thought they were playing Yankee Swap or Dirty Santa or however you call it and exchanged the victory for the package where every pass into the end zone hits the ground?
A ton of reasons:
--Between Burns still slicing-and-dicing his way for the occasional four or five yards, Mario Fannin threatening to return the word "super" to the beginning of his name, and Ben Tate actually succeeding in his daring "two steps backward, three steps forward" plan, Auburn had something that kinda sorta looked like a successful rushing attack against a defense that doesn't suck. 3.4 yards-a-carry isn't much, but it's a step in the right direction.
--That step took place in part because the offensive line got something resembling a push up front from time to time. The pass-protection (up until the very final play of the game, anyway) continued its relatively sharp form from the Ole Miss game, unless you really want to complain about giving up one sack to a team that tried to unleash Rennie Curran on the QB from time to time. This? Also a step.
--The first quarter excluded, the linebackers started tackling again. The defensive line started occasionally pushing people around again. The opponent wanted no part of throwing towards Jerraud Powers again and Walt McFadden was in people's faces again. The defense, in short, looked like the defense that choked the life out of teams in the early part of the season ... again. It's a step.
--A deficit of one first down, 19 to 20. A deficit of only 50 total yards, 303 to 351. Step.
--A lead in the fourth quarter. Step. A handful of attempts at the end zone to win the game. Step.
Over the past three weeks, this team has moved forward. Not enough to defeat a team like Georgia, unfortunately. But they have gone from not moving the ball to moving it but turning it over to moving it and turning it over on downs. From breaking to bending but-not-always-breaking to mostly just bending.
I don't know if these steps will be enough to win a week from Saturday or not. But after a season spent watching Auburn dash after its own tail, I will take these steps.
--------------------------
Auburn did not lose this game so much as the field goal unit lost the game. Clayton Crofoot drops an extra point, the first out-and-out drop by an Auburn holder in what's got to be eons. Byrum misses another field goal. For want of a nail the rider was lost, and for want of those points two other drives that should end in field goal attempts end in passes launched fruitlessly into the end zone. Even if we assume one of those two hypothetical field goals is missed--an exceedingly fair assumption at this point--the one that was made plus the four lost points from earlier would equal 20 points.
Yes, the offense could have either made that first field goal attempt easier in a driving wind. Yes, they could have made them academic by scoring a touchdown on the two late drives. (For the record, the call to Billings on 4th-and-2 I'm not too troubled by; if Burns makes a better throw there, that's a touchdown. But why not have him take off on 3rd- or 4th-and-1 on the final possession? Maybe he scores a la Clemson. But as long as he makes the first--and as spread out as Georgia was, he would have--there's time to spike the ball and get yer shot, maybe two, at the end zone.) Yes, the rest of the special teams units were scarcely any better.
But the offense did enough to put 20 points on the board and the defense held Georgia to 17. There are many more steps to be taken, but the biggest one has to be taken on this unit.
-----------------------------
Because we are Auburn and they are Alabama and Alabama happens to be the No. 1 team in the country and Auburn has beaten them six consecutive times, Georgia--much as I want to beat them--was never going to be more than a sort of convoluted dramatic prelude, the first half of a special two-part season finale.
What kind of TV show are we talking about? Coming in, I thought it would be some "Wire"-like gritty HBO Original series, maybe part 1 demoralizing us even further before some brief flicker of hope in a competitive first half in part 2 before we Auburn fans all learn how truly cruel the world can be. Now? Maybe it's the TV version of Rocky, where the plucky underdog first learns from his setbacks before gaining a newfound dignity and respect in a slim, uplifting defeat.
Or, maybe, it's the same old cliched crap, where the sports team starts off cocky, loses in stunning fashion, loses again, grows, gets better, takes steps, and finally puts everything together in the biggest game of the year and wins in dramatic, crazy fashion and the previous no-account quarterback gets the standing ovation and the girl and everything's swell. It's been done a million times before. But that's because we can't help but love it every time. That's how The Story goes. And maybe that's what Auburn and Alabama are caught up in right now. If you squint and tilt your head a certain way, it kind of looks it, doesn't it? And it doesn't work if Auburn beats Georgia. It just doesn't. The Story doesn't have two wins in the biggest games of the year.
Like the rest of you, I cursed up a storm when Stafford took that last knee and had to resist drinking my brain to goo and sighed and sighed and sighed that 11 games in, Auburn still hasn't killed anyone that matters this season. But hey--they day ain't over yet, and maybe, just maybe, that's a good thing.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Blogpollery, Week 12
Somewhat easier ballot to fill out this week, as you'll see in the deltas from 1 through 12 ...
1-12: It says something about how lousy this week's slate of games was--and how uncompetitive it proved to be--that none of the top 12 teams on the JCCW's previous ballot earned the sort of victory that would merit either a jump or a slide. The only real potential argument-changer was Florida reducing the House of Spurrier to naught but rubble and ash, but even that performance didn't change the fact that--as stated last week--Texas has both a better collection of wins and the better loss.
13-20: The other contenders for this spot aren't even close to having anything like the USC win on their resume, and after beating Cal even the Beavers' second win is better than the likes of Michigan St.'s or Pitt's best win. They're closer to Missouri than their trailers are to them.
As for mid-major states Boise and Ball, Oregon and Navy just aren't good enough to prop them up any longer. The Midshipmen's loss at home to iffy Notre Dame and the Cardinals' mediocre win over a bad Miami (Ohio) team means they have to slip. It's too bad; I think their general week-in, week-out dominance is a tad on the underappreciated side. But when you play in the MAC and your nonconference schedule is Navy, Indiana, Western Kentucky, and Northeastern, them's the breaks. And while we're discussing mids, the combination of BYU actually beating a team with a pulse (in Air Force) and the general chaos in the ACC is enough to push them to 20th.
21-23: You explain to me what the hell the do with the ACC. The one thing I'm sure of is that North Carolina should not go behind Miami, seeing as how the Tar Heels 1) have the same overall record 2) have some decent nonconference wins Miami doesn't and most importantly 3) beat the 'Canes on their home turf. But then, if apply that last criterion, how can I leave Maryland behind the 'Heels? Honestly, I'd like to, since the Terps have the big Cal and UNC wins and pretty much nothing (now that Wake his dissolved) behind them. But oh well, those Cal and UNC wins are worth something, I guess.
24-25: LSU was previously hanging their hat on that South Carolina win; not so much any more. Now it's only the fact that all three of their losses came to top-11 teams that's keeping them in the poll. The last spot came down to two four-loss teams in Ole Miss and Iowa who each have one stunning upset on the resume; since Ole Miss's came on the road over what appears to be the better team, they get in.
Waitlist: Iowa gets in next week over the LSU-Ole Miss loser if they handle their business at Minnesota. Oregon has something of an argument, but they lost to all three of the truly good teams on their schedule and count "home against Arizona" as their best win. Northwestern (@Iowa, @ Minnesota) has better wins (if that ugly Indiana loss, as does half the ACC: Boston College, Georgia Tech, and Florida St. would have all have gripes if they hadn't lost to teams like, well, themselves.
| ||
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Tech | -- |
| 2 | Alabama | -- |
| 3 | Texas | -- |
| 4 | Florida | -- |
| 5 | Oklahoma | -- |
| 6 | Southern Cal | -- |
| 7 | Penn State | -- |
| 8 | Utah | -- |
| 9 | Oklahoma State | -- |
| 10 | Ohio State | -- |
| 11 | Georgia | -- |
| 12 | Missouri | -- |
| 13 | Oregon State | 6 |
| 14 | Boise State | 1 |
| 15 | Michigan State | 1 |
| 16 | TCU | 1 |
| 17 | Ball State | 3 |
| 18 | Pittsburgh | -- |
| 19 | Cincinnati | 2 |
| 20 | Brigham Young | 6 |
| 21 | Maryland | 5 |
| 22 | North Carolina | 7 |
| 23 | Miami (Florida) | 3 |
| 24 | LSU | -- |
| 25 | Mississippi | 1 |
Dropped Out: Florida State (#20), Virginia Tech (#22), California (#23), South Carolina (#25).
1-12: It says something about how lousy this week's slate of games was--and how uncompetitive it proved to be--that none of the top 12 teams on the JCCW's previous ballot earned the sort of victory that would merit either a jump or a slide. The only real potential argument-changer was Florida reducing the House of Spurrier to naught but rubble and ash, but even that performance didn't change the fact that--as stated last week--Texas has both a better collection of wins and the better loss.
13-20: The other contenders for this spot aren't even close to having anything like the USC win on their resume, and after beating Cal even the Beavers' second win is better than the likes of Michigan St.'s or Pitt's best win. They're closer to Missouri than their trailers are to them.
As for mid-major states Boise and Ball, Oregon and Navy just aren't good enough to prop them up any longer. The Midshipmen's loss at home to iffy Notre Dame and the Cardinals' mediocre win over a bad Miami (Ohio) team means they have to slip. It's too bad; I think their general week-in, week-out dominance is a tad on the underappreciated side. But when you play in the MAC and your nonconference schedule is Navy, Indiana, Western Kentucky, and Northeastern, them's the breaks. And while we're discussing mids, the combination of BYU actually beating a team with a pulse (in Air Force) and the general chaos in the ACC is enough to push them to 20th.
21-23: You explain to me what the hell the do with the ACC. The one thing I'm sure of is that North Carolina should not go behind Miami, seeing as how the Tar Heels 1) have the same overall record 2) have some decent nonconference wins Miami doesn't and most importantly 3) beat the 'Canes on their home turf. But then, if apply that last criterion, how can I leave Maryland behind the 'Heels? Honestly, I'd like to, since the Terps have the big Cal and UNC wins and pretty much nothing (now that Wake his dissolved) behind them. But oh well, those Cal and UNC wins are worth something, I guess.
24-25: LSU was previously hanging their hat on that South Carolina win; not so much any more. Now it's only the fact that all three of their losses came to top-11 teams that's keeping them in the poll. The last spot came down to two four-loss teams in Ole Miss and Iowa who each have one stunning upset on the resume; since Ole Miss's came on the road over what appears to be the better team, they get in.
Waitlist: Iowa gets in next week over the LSU-Ole Miss loser if they handle their business at Minnesota. Oregon has something of an argument, but they lost to all three of the truly good teams on their schedule and count "home against Arizona" as their best win. Northwestern (@Iowa, @ Minnesota) has better wins (if that ugly Indiana loss, as does half the ACC: Boston College, Georgia Tech, and Florida St. would have all have gripes if they hadn't lost to teams like, well, themselves.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Friday preview: Hope
First part here. Photo at the bottom of the post by Todd Van Ernst and borrowed here.
When the dust had settled on Wes Byrum's gamewinning field goal Wes Byrum's gamewinning field goal last fall, and the same Auburn team that had lost to Mississippi St. and trailed New Mexico St. deep into the second quarter walked out of Florida Field with a win, I thought at first it was the most pleasantly shocking experience I had ever had as an Auburn football fan.
Sometime later I remembered: No, no it isn't. Nov. 13, 1999. Auburn, 4-5 with two of those wins coming in one-touchdown games against Appalachian St. and Idaho. Georgia, 6-2, ranked 14th in the country. Georgia the home team. Halftime score: 31-0, Auburn.
By the time previously Ben "Eh, whatever" Leard had connected for his fourth touchdown of pass of the day, my ecstasy had actually waned a bit, having crossed over in part to pure, unadulterated confusion: 31-0? Today? What? No, seriously: what? I had never been more happily stunned as an Auburn fan. 10 years later, even with Tommy Tuberville at Auburn's helm for every one of those years, I still haven't. The first surprise was always going to be the biggest surprise, I guess. Once we knew what Tubby was capable of, the shock wasn't ever going to be quite the same.
In fact, by the end of last season (thanks in no small part to that Florida win), the shock wasn't that Auburn had defeated a much more talented, much higher-ranked team: the shock was that Auburn had lost to that team. The LSU loss earlier this year hurt not just for being a loss, but because this was twice consecutively Tommy Tuberville had his team in position to surprise again, to reprise in some small fashion that first wonderfully bewildering moment between the hedges nine years ago, and could not do it.
This is why I do worry about Tubby's Auburn future--and Auburn's future, period-- should he lose these final two games at the Amen Corner (a nickname that seems more appropriate in 2008 than it ever did during the tenure of the coach that coined it). Auburn is, once again, in the position of being a decisive underdog to two of the best teams in the country. Once again, there's precious little in the way of rational reasons to believe Auburn will win either game. Once again, a win will be nothing less than a wondrous, near-fatal blow to the Auburn fandom coronary. If Tubby can no longer win in these hopeless situations, if Tubby can't shock us any more, is he even Tubby? And would we want someone who is no longer Tubby still coaching our football team?
There is no other way to respond to that other than to say "we'll cross that bridge when we get there," because until then, he's still Tubby. He's still the same coach who took his a football team into Athens in 1999 and came back with the Auburn Tigers. Still the same coach who beat Florida and Spurrier in 2001, Alabama and Fran in 2002, Florida and Urban Meyer in 2006 and 2007. Until proven definitively otherwise, he's still Surprise made human and pacing the Auburn sideline in a headset and glasses.
Tommy Tuberville, flawed as he may be, is the reason I have hope for Auburn in tomorrow's game against Georgia. What he did for Ben Leard, he can do for Kodi Burns. What he did for that bunch of Tigers, he can do for these. He won that game. He can win this one.
Prove it, Tubby. Prove it, Auburn. Let's go.
War Eagle.
When the dust had settled on Wes Byrum's gamewinning field goal Wes Byrum's gamewinning field goal last fall, and the same Auburn team that had lost to Mississippi St. and trailed New Mexico St. deep into the second quarter walked out of Florida Field with a win, I thought at first it was the most pleasantly shocking experience I had ever had as an Auburn football fan.
Sometime later I remembered: No, no it isn't. Nov. 13, 1999. Auburn, 4-5 with two of those wins coming in one-touchdown games against Appalachian St. and Idaho. Georgia, 6-2, ranked 14th in the country. Georgia the home team. Halftime score: 31-0, Auburn.
By the time previously Ben "Eh, whatever" Leard had connected for his fourth touchdown of pass of the day, my ecstasy had actually waned a bit, having crossed over in part to pure, unadulterated confusion: 31-0? Today? What? No, seriously: what? I had never been more happily stunned as an Auburn fan. 10 years later, even with Tommy Tuberville at Auburn's helm for every one of those years, I still haven't. The first surprise was always going to be the biggest surprise, I guess. Once we knew what Tubby was capable of, the shock wasn't ever going to be quite the same.
In fact, by the end of last season (thanks in no small part to that Florida win), the shock wasn't that Auburn had defeated a much more talented, much higher-ranked team: the shock was that Auburn had lost to that team. The LSU loss earlier this year hurt not just for being a loss, but because this was twice consecutively Tommy Tuberville had his team in position to surprise again, to reprise in some small fashion that first wonderfully bewildering moment between the hedges nine years ago, and could not do it.
This is why I do worry about Tubby's Auburn future--and Auburn's future, period-- should he lose these final two games at the Amen Corner (a nickname that seems more appropriate in 2008 than it ever did during the tenure of the coach that coined it). Auburn is, once again, in the position of being a decisive underdog to two of the best teams in the country. Once again, there's precious little in the way of rational reasons to believe Auburn will win either game. Once again, a win will be nothing less than a wondrous, near-fatal blow to the Auburn fandom coronary. If Tubby can no longer win in these hopeless situations, if Tubby can't shock us any more, is he even Tubby? And would we want someone who is no longer Tubby still coaching our football team?
There is no other way to respond to that other than to say "we'll cross that bridge when we get there," because until then, he's still Tubby. He's still the same coach who took his a football team into Athens in 1999 and came back with the Auburn Tigers. Still the same coach who beat Florida and Spurrier in 2001, Alabama and Fran in 2002, Florida and Urban Meyer in 2006 and 2007. Until proven definitively otherwise, he's still Surprise made human and pacing the Auburn sideline in a headset and glasses.
Tommy Tuberville, flawed as he may be, is the reason I have hope for Auburn in tomorrow's game against Georgia. What he did for Ben Leard, he can do for Kodi Burns. What he did for that bunch of Tigers, he can do for these. He won that game. He can win this one.
Prove it, Tubby. Prove it, Auburn. Let's go.
War Eagle.
Friday preview: Georgia, the nuts-and-bolts
Sen'Derrick Marks: the most important non-quarterback player on Auburn's team starting at 11:30 a.m. tomorrow.This week's preview is getting split into two parts. This one will focus on the rational, down-to-down, matchup-type analysis which will make me want to bang out a new door between our place and the apartment next door with my head. The next one will be the irrational optimistic one in which I lay out the reasons I still have hope for this game because being a college football fan without hope is dumb. Besides, Auburn really could win. I'm serious.
But not for the reasons in this post.
When Auburn has the ball: Maybe, just maybe, things won't be quite as bad as you think.
Sure, Auburn's still 100th in the nation in total offense even after playing UT-Martin. Sure, I have no confidence whatsoever in our current offensive coaching staff to do what Kentucky did last week and find a way to make the absolute most out of their one genuine offensive weapon, a mobile QB. Sure, I'm basing that statement off of three halves against UT-Martin and Ole Miss, neither of which have defenses statistically anywhere near Georgia's.
And yet ... and yet ... Auburn punted a total of twice in those three halves. Burns has showed some (if not an overwhelming amount) consistency on the short slant and out routes. Burns's legs mean that Auburn now has some modicum of ability ot move the ball on the ground even out of the spread. And while the ace/I stuff didn't accomplish much against Ole Miss, between its first-half success in Morgantown and Kentucky's shoving of the Dawgs around last week, there's a glimmer of hope it could net a few yards tomorrow, too. To top it off, Burns has even hit some downfield passes each of the last two weeks.
Put it all together--a 6-yard out here, a 5-yard QB draw there, maybe a dash of Chris Slaughter down the sideline--and you've got an offense that I think can move the ball on the Dawgs a little bit. Not a lot. But a little bit.
The question is whether Auburn can turn that "little bit" into points. Burns's decision-making poisoned the well against Ole Miss; the fumblies screwed things up against Martin (to the extent things got screwed up). Until they actually do it, you can't assume they will. Until Auburn hits the 20-point mark on offense against an SEC team, you can't expect them to do that. But for the first time since they took the field against Mississippi St., I honestly feel like maybe, just maybe, the potential is there.
I'm not even that confident, however, about how things will go ...
When Georgia has the ball, because Auburn's got only one shot at keeping these guys from running all over us. When Blutarsky writes ...
The one truly excellent unit that will see the field tomorrow is the Georgia offense. Looking at the others, both Georgia’s and Auburn’s defenses started out well this season, but have sagged lately, and Auburn’s offense never got going. If there aren’t any hiccups or surprises, on paper that should be enough to generate at least a two-touchdown difference in the score. On paper.... I tend to agree with him. Auburn got gashed by Arkansas and West Virginia all the way around and while the secondary played very well in Oxford, they couldn't do a thing with Ole Miss's ground game. So why should it be any different against Georgia, who has more talent and a better all-around offense than any of them?
Well, it shouldn't, really. Most likely, the Dawgs will blow open vast holes in the Auburn front seven, force the safeties to come up in run support, then throw to their wide receiving terrors running free downfield. This is the most probable outcome. If Auburn and Georgia played tomorrow's game 10 times, Georgia would probably put up four touchdowns or more, oh, 7-and-a-half times.
But there is one thing the Razorbacks, Mountaineers, and Rebels all had that the Dawgs do not have. And that is an intact offensive line. Oh, Georgia's line will still be good enough (and well coached enough) to do some damage. But Hog damage? 'Eer damage? Rebel damage? Maybe not. Those lines are, probably, better.
And while I'm not sure Marks, Coleman, and Doolittle are really so much healthier than they were against Arkansas, they're healthier now than they've been since then. They'd better be. Because they have to take over this game. They have to close up holes before they open. They have to tackle Moreno (and King) every single time they get the chance. They have to put enough pressure on Staford by themselves that Rhoads can leave the back seven intact and winning, hopefully, the same downfield battles that it won against Ole Miss.
If Georgia had the same caliber line as Arkansas or West Virginia or Ole Miss, I would say this is style of domination was not possible. And it remains deeply, deeply unlikely. But the Dawgs are beat up. Perhaps they do not have that kind of line. And maybe, just maybe, that kind of domination is possible after all.
When special teams are on the field: Auburn has to be perfect. Not just good. Perfect. Robert Dunn cannot fumble a punt into the endzone. Chris Slaughter cannot let a bouncing ball bounce by him for 20 yards of field position. (Remember when we were so proud of our punt returns? Dunn scaring Southern Miss into submission seems like a lifetime ago.) Hull cannot land a kickoff at the 11. Durst cannot waste a drive to the Dawg 45 by booting the ball into the end zone. The Dawgs cannot break loose for more than a first down's worth or two returning punts or kickoffs. Davis has to get Auburn past the 30--minimum--on kickoff returns. And for the love of everything holy, Byrum--make your field goals.
Anything less than perfection on special teams will reduce Auburn's chances to just a notch or two above zilch.
Nuts-and-bolts conclusion: To ask this Auburn team for a win against this Georgia team is to ask for perfection. This Auburn team, unfortunately, has not been anywhere close to perfection yet this year. To ask for a win is to ask for something deeply improbable.
But entering last year's Florida game, last year's Auburn team was perhaps--perhaps--even further from perfection. And the game they played in the Swamp that night, while not perfect, was close enough that we all could touch it. I believe Auburn can come that close again. I do. Yes, we are asking for a win. We are asking the improbable. But even looking at these nuts-and-bolts and putting aside our blind hope in our head coach, our home field advantage, our pure blind luck which has to come home to us sometime: We, the Auburn hopeful, are not asking the impossible.
More soon.
A relatively brief preview of Auburn's 2008-2009 men's basketball team
Look, as you can probably guess by the fact that the "mid-majors" tag has four times as many posts as the "Auburn hoops tag" (if still not nearly so many as it ought to have), I'm just not that into Auburn basketball.
Call me a fair-weather fan if you like, since I probably would be if they ever got back to the good old Sonny Smith days where you could count on an NCAA berth and some fun wins against big-time SEC competition, but those days seem far, far behind us now and will likely stay that way until at least the new arena opens. The voracious basketball fan that I keep mostly silent during football season is (like Bally) quite honestly as fired up to see what that Siena Saints team that returns all five starters after beating the tar out of Vandy is last year's NCAA will do as I am Auburn. Maybe that makes me a bad Auburn Fan. So be it.
But hey, it's not like I don't care at all, and someone's gotta blog about Auburn hoops, so from time to time it might as well be me. And thus I am here to inform you: Auburn will open its season tonight against Missouri St. of the MVC. The Bears are undergoing a substantial makeover that includes a new coach and a bunch of new contributors,but at Auburn things are pretty much status quo for the Lebo era:
Auburn will be missing freshman guard Frankie Sullivan, who hasn't been able to practice in several weeks due to a sprained ankle. Senior guard Rasheem Barrett, bothered by a serious groin pull, has practiced sparingly, but should be ready to play at least limited minutes tonight.Aside from the usual injury concerns, here's the few things you should know about Auburn's hoops team as it enters Lebo's make-or-almost-certainly-break season:
-- The inside-outside balance actually isn't bad. If Korvotney Barber (who led the nation in FG percentage before he broke his hand 10 game in last year) can return to form and senior guards Quantez Robertson (at the point) and Rasheem Barrett (at the 2) can use the attention paid to Barber to hit some outside shots and run the offense more fluidly, the team could at least avoid becoming one-dimensional offensively. (Of course, since Auburn over the last several years has frequently been a no-dimensional team in the halfcourt, this would be a dramatic improvement.
-- The frontcourt, Barber aside, is a mess. Lucas Hargrove (a 6-6 junior forward) isn't a disaster but probably wouldn't start or see the major minutes he's going to get for Auburn at many other SEC schools. Behind Hargrove it's all JUCOs, including Johnnie Lett, who got a start in the exhibition win over Morehouse despite Blue Ribbon having this to say about him:
You get the feeling looking at 6-9, 240-pound junior Johnnie Lett's stats at Okaloosa-Walton that he knows his limitations. He averaged a modest 5.4 points and 6.6 rebounds. His forte is blocking shots; he averaged 2.2 a game a year ago.Yes, I'm sure the guy who "knows his limitations" when playing at the JUCO level will be more than ready to step into the starting lineup of an SEC contender. Sheesh.
-- The backcourt depth is all about the newcomers. This Tay Waller kid exploded in the exhibition game and shot the lights out at JUCO; Sullivan is the kid from Uniontown you've probably heard about who scored 51 points in last year's 2A title game for his fifth state title in six varsity years. If they can play it'll be a huge help since 6-1 junior DeWayne Reed (along with Hargrove, the only returning scholarship players besides the three seniors) isn't exactly what we'd call an "explosive" offensive threat.
It would appear to me Lebo is in a catch-22; since his guards are so small (Barrett's the only one taller than 6-3) he can't play them at the 3 without getting killed on the defensive end, but if he doesn't he's going to be sticking one of the JUCO forwards out there whose offensive repertoires appear "limited" at best. And that's just talking about the starting five; it's hard to see how Auburn has even a hint of offensive potential in the post if Barber's not in the game. If Waller and Sullivan are even better than advertised and if Barber can handle playing 35-40 minutes a game and if absolutely everyone stays healthy HA HA HA sorry, reflex, Auburn might be able to worm their way to within a couple games of .500 in the SEC record and collect an NIT bid.
But I think that's about the ceiling, and we get to see how close Auburn's going to come to even that starting tonight.
(The football preview for tomorrow will be arriving relatively shortly.)
The Works, hate to say hate-style
More please.If you could that, uh, inability-to-stand-them into another kickoff return, that'd be swell. The AJC brings you your requisite "It's a rivalry, but not that kind of rivalry" overview of the Deep South's Oldest Rivalry. Most of the information included therein--did you know Vince Dooley went ot Auburn?!?!?--is decidedly of the O RLY variety, but there's one particularly juicy quote that's well worth sharing:
“I hate to say hate, but I can’t stand Georgia,” Auburn running back Tristan Davis said this week.Just this once, Tristan, I think it's OK if you want to use the H-word if you really want. (Me? I'm waiting 'til the next game on the schedule. But to each his own.)
News galore. Obviously the big development from yesterday afternoon was that Tray Blackmon is no longer with the team, is now working part-time to support his family, and may or may not ever see the field for Auburn again. I'm going to wait until it's official before writing Blackmon's final, sad career obituary, but suffice it to say this is about as depressing as news beyond the sidelines gets. So much potential, so little chance now of ever seeing it realized.
Elsewhere: Eddie Gran popped up to tell us that "big-play guy" Mario Fannin could get the start tomorrow and that Morgan Hull is now officially the man on kickoffs. Both of these developments are positive from the JCCW's view: I think it's time to pick one horse and ride him at RB, and since Lester just can't seem to get healthy enough to be that horse, I think it's time to hand the keys to Fannin. (I tried to work a third transportation-based metaphor and couldn't. Sorry.) As for kickoffs, Byrum just hasn't cut it. Might as well see what Hull can do given the job full-time.
Season of DEATH. Charles Goldberg on the joys of the 11:30 kickoff:
Auburn had pinpointed this game as its showcase for recruits because of the atmosphere the Georgia game always creates. It figures that in this disappointing season that Raycom stole some of the recruiting thunder by assigning it as an 11:30 a.m. TV game, a time that makes it tough for all the recruits to make it, and a time in which the atmosphere won't be at a fever pitch.Huzzah. (Please keep the recruits who are in attendance in mind, boo birds.) The meat of Goldberg's article, though, is that Auburn's recruiting is being made tougher by Gogue's declining to discuss Tubby's status until after they've had their postseason meeting. On the one hand, yeah, I can't imagine it's helping discussions with recruits. On the other, I hardly think Gogue deserves a scolding for not making a commitment RIGHT THIS SECOND when two of the three biggest games of the season are still to come. If this is a decision that's worth deliberating over--and as much as I like Tubby, at this point, it is--then it's worth waiting until Gogue has much information as possible before deciding.
Nightmare fuel. Auburntron brings it:
Oh, if only I could believe that Tubby was this indestructible. The blAUgosphere was rife with cool visuals this week, with Wire Road and Shug bringing you this gem from Dye's days in Athens ...
... as well as a small shot from the last time Auburn lined up in what would today be referred to as an Orangeout. Also, TWER does their TWER thing (with BONUS patriotism trash talk) and while I can't really get behind the pessimism at Lifetime of Defeats regarding the upcoming Iron Bowl, I'm willing to excuse it when the analogies come this creative:
I'm required to show you this. Mark McCarter suggests the Tide players should cast off the miserable shackles of coachbot rule just long enough to smell the undefeated roses:
There is always so much talk about "it's a business trip" and the "24-hour rule" and "focus" and how, as Nick Saban put it, it's "toxic" to think about polls and rankings.OMGCOACHBOTLOLZ. Fun as it is to see this little gem appear, even I think suggesting that Saban has sucked all the joy out of it is an exaggeration. The guy did grease up his iron joints enough to offer that chest-bump a couple weeks back.
These kids have already accomplished remarkable things, they've had some fun games and memories to last a lifetime, and I hope they're embracing that now, and not merely worrying about lofty goals.
A friend from a national publication observed after covering Alabama that "Saban has sucked all the joy out of this." I hope that's not the case.
Etc. The SEC's coaches play poker at Team Speed Kills, with hilarious results ... Saurian Sagacity takes what I think is a pretty telling look at the "Big 12: Bad Defense, or Brilliant Offense?" question.
Aaaand finally ... I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that after my post defending Brad Lester from Paul Westerdawg's charge he'd predicted a win tomorrow, PWD responded with a fine counterpost. I certainly stand by my defense of Lester, but I can also admit that in the face of a change-of-subject this deft and propaganda this stirring, there's not much else other than to throw up one's hands and say "Well played, sir." So: Well played, sir.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Ole Miss recap, half the second
Picking up where we left off oh so long ago, in the hope we can still, somehow, learn just a little bit more about Auburn's chances as they head into Amen Corner.
Third quarter
Dave Baker catches Tubby coming out of the tunnel. "We can't run the ball," Tubby says, with obvious frustration. "You can't run it, you can't win in this league.
"We're not a bad football team," he continues. "We're not ... we ... we gotta get some continuity." Man. I'm sure there's a better word for it, but the one I'm left with is "frazzled." He's a frazzled coach at the moment. I don't blame him.
1. Ole Miss kicks off, Davis fields along the right sideline and finds a tiny bit of room in the middle of the field before being dragged down at the 24. Eh.
2. Spread. Well, that's a good way to start the half: Burns (+) drops back, gets excellent protection (line +), and drops one right in the breadbasket of Slaughter (+), who's run a fly down the sideline and shrugs off a challenge from the corner to make the catch. 37 yards--it's taken Auburn one play to surpass their longest gain of the entire first half. (Or at least, it has after a lengthy review that determines Slaughter's heel merely hovered over the sideline rather than came down on it on his route.)
3. Ace, Trott as H-back. Waggle, Burns hits Trott underneath and he gets crushed by an onrushing safety for a loss of 3. Burns probably should have thrown it earlier, giving Trott enough time to try and maneuver around the guy, but it's more a good play by Ole Miss.
4. Spread. Burns tries to hit Billings on a quick out and the throw is low--but it's one it appears to me Billings (-) ought to come up with.
5. 3rd-13. Spread. Burns (+) takes off when the combination of a weird-looking stunt and man-to-man coverage leaves him a pasture to run up into. Trott (+) gets in a dude's way just enough to get Burns the first down.
6. 1st-10 on the Rebel 27. Offset I. Rebels bring two of their linebackers up to the LOS. This doesn't work out so well--Auburn leaves the backside DE unblocked to run the lead iso behind Ziemba and Green on the strong side, and neither he nor a guy Pugh only kinda blocks can get close to making the play. So with one and sometimes two blockers on everyone else, when Tate breaks through there's no one to keep him out of the secondary. Ziemba and Trott wall off the left side of the hole, Green and Berry take care of the right side, Bosley and Davis flatten the lone linebacker, and when the safeties both take the wrong angle--expecting Tate to bounce outside around the Bosley/Davis block--Tate has smooth sailing for the TOUCHDOWN! Nice, nice vision by Tate (+) here and a fabulous job by the line (++). 10-7. Hope springs eternal.
7. Byrum (+) gets the ball to the goalline. Iffy coverage and iffy, dance-around returning sticks the ball on the 22.
8. Rebels in the ace, and this isn't the statement you want your defense to make on their first play of the second half: all seven guys in the front seven get blocked, opening up a ton of room for Eason to cut back and gain 7 before Etheridge tackles him. Too easy.
9. Auburn lines up six on the LOS and bring them all, only for Snead to throw quickly and well before the rush has a chance to reach him, as he did in the first half. As he did in the first half, though, his downfield pass is out of bounds by 10 yards and nowhere near its target. Good coverage (+).
10. Not sure what Ole Miss is thinking on 3rd-3. They spread out in a two-back shotgun and run what appears to be a zone read, but block the backside DE. This leaves only five blockers (one of which is an RB) against six Auburn defenders in the box. Stevens (+) is the unblocked man and closes quickly to tackle for no gain. Sweet.
11. Dunn is again swarmed after a high 40-yard kick, fair catch.
12. 1st-10 on Auburn's 30. Offset I, play-action, nice pocket (line +) and Burns has an easy pitch-and-catch with Billings on the out route, who sort of wriggles backwards in his attempt to wriggle forwards and ends up only gaining 4.
13. Offset I, they try the left side again with Tate. This time Peria Jerry shoves Green straight backwards and Bosley doesn't have much better luck with his man (line -). Tate smothered, loss of 1.
14. 3rd-7. Spread. No gripes with the pass protection this half--the line (+) gives Burns all day and despite what looks like about the happiest case of happy feet I've ever seen (seriously, Burns looks like he's playing Track and Field on ye olde Nintendo Power Pad) he finds Hawthorne crossing over the middle for 21.
15. 1st-10, Rebel 46. Offset I, play-action. Burns again has time to set his feet and throws confidently to ... no one who's even in the picture. ??? Dave Archer theorizes that Davis was trying to run the wheel route and got cut off. Seems likely enough.
16. Ace-shotgun ... I think? Four of the five linemen and Trott are in a three-point stance with only Ziemba standing up at the snap. This suggests a pass, does it not, since the notably struggling-in-pass-protection Ziemba is the one who's in a two-point stance? Sure enough, Burns fires to Slaughter on the slant for 6.
17. Spread on 3rd-4. Burns (-) has enough time to find someone (if not a ton of it) and makes a truly bad read, following a triple-covered Trott the whole way and ignoring a check-down to Fannin that would have been 10 yards at least.
18. AAARRGGGHH. Durst (-) punts from the Ole Miss 40 and blasts it well into the end zone. Net of 20.
19. Simple off-tackle play from Ole Miss out of the I to start their drive, and it goes for an easy 5 yards--Clayton (-) got sealed off at DE, Stevens can't do anything with the pulling guard, and Bynes (-) is just too passive in trying to meet the ballcarrier. Ugh.
20. Wild Rebel. Clayton (-) lines up as the opposite DE this time, but with the same result--neither he nor a blitzing Stevens can get off their blocks at the point of attack and it's five more.
21. Much better from the DL this time as Doolittle and Goggans stand their guys up and Jake Ricks (+) bulls his backwards, creating a logjam at the hole. Eason slithers away from Ricks but Clayton and Stevens tackle.
22. Rebels spread it out and Snead takes his time this time; not a drop of pass rush. Coverage is good, though (+) so he checks down to Eason. Evans (-) meets him immediately and doesn't tackle cleanly, giving up an extra couple of yards before Bynes arrives.
23. 3rd-3. Well-executed tight coverage (+) from Auburn doesn't give Snead the quick throw he wants, and despite having a bit of a pocket he tucks and starts looking for running room. Clayton sacks from behind, but this one belongs to the secondary. Nice sequence all around from the D here.
24. Punt, fair catch, lather, rinse, repeat.
25. Still a three-point game and points on this drive would be huge. Spread on 1st-10, QB draw, another great job by Bosley with blocks both on the LOS and downfield (line +) and Burns picks up 6 without too much effort.
26. Ace-shotgun, handoff strongside to Fannin. Trott completely misses his block (line -) and Fannin has to stop in his tracks. Loss of 3, and for this offense losing 3rd-and-short for 3rd-and-7 or 8 is big step backwards.
27. NEVERMIND. Spread, there's time (line +), Burns (+) tosses a rope down the sideline to Billings (+), who does very well to get his foot down quickly and pick up 29.
28. 1st-10, Rebel 47. I, give to Fannin off-tackle right, and Green can't get out on the weakside 'backer quickly enough (line -). He and the safety converge and tackle after a minimal gain.
29. Spread, time once again for Burns (line +), but unfortunately Burns (--) only has eyes for Trott. He stares him down and fires over the middle into triple-coverage, with predictable--i.e. intercepted--results. Crud.
30. Stevens (-) is lined up over a wideout, and you would think Ole Miss would exploit this y going deep or something. Instead, they exploit it by having the wideout block Stevens clean out of the play as a swing pass to McCluster is reacted to waaaay too late by the other LBs and the secondary. 11 yards.
31. Rebels in the I, and man ... Auburn's been much, much better this game against the pass than the run, but they're still lining up an LB (Johnson, in this case) out over a WR while then bringing McNeil all the way to the LOS on the opposite side. Search me. Result: Goggans for some reason slants hard towards the strongside, McNeil is blocked easily behind him, Stevens and Bynes (-) are picked up by the fullback and pulling guard, respectively (though Bynes should do better), and there's a massive hole. If Hood doesn't tackle after a 10-yard gain it's a TD. Terrible.
32. Little play-action pass to the TE on 2nd-1 picks up 9 to the Auburn 32. Stevens (-) totally buys the fake and is well out of position.
33. Good, good play here by Bynes (+), who blitzes up the middle, gets just enough of a push to where his arm can bother Snead's passing lane, then perfectly times his jump to swat the ball down. Excellent.
34. Snead rolls left and again the Rebels take advantage of coverage (-) positioning itself in the next zip code. Easy catch for seven--McFadden, who I think is in coverage here, isn't even in the picture when the ball is caught--and a sloppy tackle attempt by the charging Pybus yields two more.
35. 3rd-1. Rebels in the I and run the little toss counter after the fake to the fullback. Stevens (-) is unblocked and readily gives up contain by biting hard on the fake anyway. McNeil (-) lets himself get driven back and a bad angle by Etheridge gets McCluster 18 yards to the Auburn 6. If you count the swing as a rushing play, the Rebels' three rushes on this drive have gone for 10, 9, and 18.
36. Stevens does make the play this time, snagging McCluster by the ankles on a Wild Rebel keeper. A hold brings the Rebels back, though. Teehee.
37. Ole Miss in a weird one-receiver I-plus-H-back set. The call's a play-action fake that fools no one, though a curiously hard slant from the line results in no pressure whatsoever. Everyone's well covered, though (coverage +) and Hood even has an outside chance of picking Snead's ball towards the corner. Not quite.
38. Draw play to Eason, and it picks up 6 before Pybus (+) disengages from a block and gets him by the ankles. Blanc is surprisingly downfield to help out, too, but it's not quite just "good effort"; he got the hell blocked out of him up front.
39. 3rd-goal from the 11. Snead again has all day, but again seems to pull the ball down awfully quickly when no one breaks open immediately (cover +). He bobs and weaves his way almost back to the line when Blanc crushes him. To top it off, Ole Miss draws a personal foul for something we never see (thanks, Raycom) and now instead of a TD Ole Miss is trying a 45-yard field goal. Hell yes.
40. He misses! Auburn escapes without giving up points despite basically sucking like the cold black vacuum of outer space for most of that drive.
41. Spread. Burns rolls right and after Trott (+) does a nice job of selling his block, hits his TE drifting back across the field. Well-drawn up, well-executed play all-around ... too bad Trott's not exactly scary in the open field and gets tackled after a gain of 6.
Fourth quarter
42. Ace-shotgun. Fake zone read (the line pulls right; Burns doesn't have the option to keep here) to Tate. The strongside DE shoots past Trott (line -), who tackles him. Hold. Again 2nd-and-short turns into something much more daunting.
43. Spread. Burns has time (seriously, the line [+] may be struggling to open up running lanes, but they're owning the Ole Miss in pass protection right now) and finds Slaughter on a crossing route for 8. Nice pickup to set up 3rd-and-makeable.
44. Spread. Incredible play by Burns (+), who gets tripped up by the legs of the rushing Jerry and puts a hand down to keep his knees just off the ground. He then regains his footing and fires to Slaughter (+), who makes the grab and turns immediately towards the sticks for the extra few yards and a first.
45. Spread. And boy, it doesn't get any prettier than this: Burns (+) pump-fakes and then lofts a perfectly arced ball to a wide-open Slaughter down the sideline. 42 yards, 1st-10 at the 17. (line +)
46. Spread. Whoops--Burns (-) gets a tiny bit more heat up the gut than the last several pass plays and fires his slant to Slaughter way high. Not going for much regardless.
47. Spread, QB draw, and the Rebels blitz a corner in untouched. Burns has to crazy-juke to avoid him and goes down for a loss of 3. Just a good (or fortunate) play-call by the Rebel DC.
48. 3rd-13. Spread. 3-man-rush and ... you know, those three men get just a smidgen more push than they should, and I think that does contribute to Burns (---) not setting his feet properly at all before he flings a killer interception that flies a mile and a half over Slaughter's head. But it's an easy fix here for Burns--if he steps up into the pocket he's got a ton of room in which to either throw or take off. Awful decision, an even worse throw. (Baker reports from the sideline a minute later that Burns expected Billings to run an out route. Doesn't change anything about Burns throwing without being able to step into it when one step forward gives him plenty of space in which to maneuver.)
49. 1st-10, Ole Miss on their own 34. Sweep left, Goggans (-) gets stood up and yields the corner. 5 quick yards.
50. Snead takes a shotgun snap and rolls right ... no one open (cover +). Bynes chases him out after a yard or two.
51. Rebels spread it out on 3rd-3, Shay Hodge sits down in the zone between Stevens and Bynes, and Snead finds him with a dart. Probably not a ton that could be done about that; just good execution.
52. Facing a handoff right out of the I, Auburn slants the DL hard to the opposite side and blitzes Stevens and Bynes around the other end. Goggans (-) once again has to do better as the DE at the point of attack--he gets shoved five yards straight downfield and when the blitzers get picked up, Bolden has a hole for nearly 10.
53. Hey now, that's how it's supposed to work! Ricks (+) shoves his guy aside and draws a second blocker, leaving just one pulling OL for both Bynes and Stevens. He picks Stevens and Bynes (+) is free to make a quick, solid tackle.
54. 3rd-and-inches, Snead sneaks for the first. Fine. What's not fine is Evans (-) finishing the play off by needlessly grabbing the facemask and tacking on a quick 15.
55. Blanc (+) bulls his way into the backfield and totally blows up a sweep right. Ricks is on hand to tackle for a loss of 4. (!)
56. %$&@! More specifically, %$&@ Raycom. Snead runs a waggle and Coleman's all over him, forcing him to throw a quick four-yard curl to Wallace with Hood in tight coverage. It's incomplete and ... flag. PI. We don't see said PI, though, since my broadcast isn't in HD and the camera doesn't whip around to the play until the ball is already there. No problem as long as there's replay, right? They don't give us a replay.
57. Etheridge (-) walks almost into the box and is in position to make the play on an I handoff over the weakside--he just doesn't react, though, as McCluster rushes past him for 5. Bynes (+) does a good job here of shedding a block from the tackle and holding the gain down--but why doesn't he do that more often?
58. Play-action, again Snead has nowhere to throw (coverage +). He scrambles back across the field and Evans (-) should find a way to stop him for a loss; instead he gives up the corner and Snead squeaks out two.
59. Ole Miss runs the same play that LSU scored their second touchdown on--the counter flip paired with a halfback pass. McCluster doesn't like what he sees downfield and keeps, torching Stevens (-) in the open field to gain 7.
60. Wild Rebel keeper on 1st-goal from the 7 is snuffed out nicely by Etheridge and Evans, but Clayton gets a hand up as the RB goes by and gets a little bit of his facemask. This is a five-yarder last year and is supposed to be ignored completely this year, but nope. Flag. Half the distance.
61. Nice play by Ole Miss, bringing the FB in motion right, then having him sneak back across the line into the left flat after a waggle. Snead flips it to him for a simple touchdown. Pybus (-) appears to be the linebacker with responsibility to that side.
62. 17-7, 6:45 to play, Auburn needs some very good things to happen in a big hurry. Davis (ST -) losing the kickoff in the sun and letting it bounce through the end zone is not a good start.
63. Spread, which I'm sure will be the formation of choice from this point forward and will only be noted if it's something else. First, a false start from Ziemba! (line -).
64. QB draw, Lester (-) fails miserably on his lead block and Burns is wrapped up almost immediately.
65. Burns and Billings hook up on the quick out route for 7. Nice calm execution there, though I kinda wish Billings has taken the sliver of opportunity for more yards-after-catch.
66. 3rd-9. The line (+) gives Burns (-) a nice pocket, but he just plain misses his throw to Billings on the sideline comeback route. Ugly.
67. Durst punts, but more importantly somebody in the Rebel line gets called for "hands to the face" and Auburn picks up a cheap first down. Wheeee!
68. Burns rolls left on 1st-10 and finds a wide open Slaughter (+) along the sideline. He plugs away past the first tackler for about three extra yards. More of that, please.
69. Ace-shotgun for 2nd-1 and the line opens up a crease over the left side for Burns to keep for the first ... though if Pugh and Tate can do a little more with their blocks, this maybe breaks open for a big gainer.
70. Pugh gets beaten badly in pass protection here (line -), causing Burns to throw a 50-yard bomb towards Billings off his back foot. It's not a bad effort as such, but pretty well out-of-bounds nonetheless.
71. Burns finds Swinton running the same route that Slaughter turned into nine yards a moment ago for ... nine yards. The fun part of this play is the blitzing linebacker who hurdles Tate a la that dude for Navy against Notre Dame last year. It would have had a similar result, too, had Burns not already released the ball.
72. Burns connects with Carr this time on the eight-yard out. I'm not giving him pluses for fairly routine throws like this, but Burns does deserve some credit for hitting them consistently. Hell, let's give him a collective (+) for the last three.
73. Ah, our sophomore quarterback giveth, our sophomore quarterback taketh away. It's a three-receiver route and Burns (--) never looks in the direction of two guys running shorter routes on the left side of the field, meaning it's an easy play for the deep safety to drift towards Carr running a fly down the opposite sideline. Burns also has some pressure and is on his back foot. Carr is also blanketed by his man. Away goes the pass anyway, and it's predictably picked.
74. There's 3:50 left in the game and Ole Miss is up 10; they're going to run the ball and Auburn has looked awful against the run for most of the day. So why only seven in the box here? Same ol' same ol', Carter (-) gets himself too far upfield, Johnson (-) takes a bad angle, huge hole, yadda yadda yadda. Johnson (+) does cause some excitement by tracking back and stripping Eason of the ball 12 yards downfield; Hood recovers and Auburn's in business ... until the replay official decides Eason's knee was down first. How he's seeing "definitive" evidence here is beyond me. The better team is without question the one that's in front, but the officiating breaks have by-and-large broken for the Rebels.
75. 1st-10. Exact same play, same result when Auburn stunts/slants itself out of the hole. Bynes at least avoids a block and tackles after a short gain.
76. Blecch. Johnson (-) lines up at the LOS and for whatever reason rushes towards the outside almost on an overlap with the DE; the Rebels seal Doolittle (-) inside and run right through the abandoned gap for another 10. Missed tackled from McNeil (-) makes it 17. It's all academic from here.
So play-by-play stops here as well. It's worth noting that Burns does check down to Fannin twice on Auburn's final drive; maybe he can be encouraged to do so more often?
Plus/minus
Three notes first: I lumped the tight-end blocking in with the line this time, so Trott's numbers are solely about his receiving duties; the individual secondary numbers are mostly from run support (or lack thereof) and should be taken with the understanding that downfield coverage was excellent; and two individually assigned minuses on special teams play (to Etheridge and Slaughter, specifically) were included under "ST."
Offense: Slaughter +3, Trott +2, Lester +1, Line +1, Fannin 0, Billings 0, Dunn -1, Hawthorne -1, Tate -1, Burns -4.
Defense: Cover +13 (uh ... this may need some tweaking next time), Ricks +2, Hood +1, Blanc +1, Coleman +1, Bynes 0, Pybus 0, Doolittle -1, Johnson -1, Slade -1, Evans -1, Goggans -1, McFadden -1, Clayton -2, McNeil -2, Etheridge -2 Carter -2, Stevens -3.
Special teams: Byrum +1, Durst +1, other ST -4.
Verdicts
Give Ensminger some modicum of credit here: after the power running game and the ace-shotgun proved so utterly futile in the first half, they pretty well disappeared in the second. Auburn went virtually all spread all the time, it more or less worked. After finishing -4 in the first half, the stout pass-protecting of the line took them to +5 in the second. (The irony of said line griping nonstop about Franklin not letting them line up in a three-point stance and fire off when apparently they're better at sitting back and pass-blocking is beyond rich.) Auburn punted six times in the first half and only once in the second, and that was from the Rebel 40. All six second-half drives finished in Ole Miss territory. For maybe the first time all season, Auburn took on a defense with a pulse and could be fairly called "successful" ...
... if not for the occasional wayward decision-making of Burns. Of those six drives, one was the TD and one ended the game--the other four ended with 1. Burns making a bad read on 3rd-4 2. Pick 3. Pick 4. Pick. Burns should certainly get a a lot of credit for Auburn's ability to move the ball in the second half. But the reason that movement didn't result in points lies squarely on his shoulders. With the run game kaput, it's his offense, 100 percent, for better, for worse. When you finish the game with only seven points, it's only fair to say that as much potential as Burns showed, it was for worse. What's sad is that this half was probably as close as we'll come this year to seeing what Franklin imagined in action. If he'd trusted Burns enough to work through these bad decisions, where would Franklin and this offense be now?
Defensively, the plus/minus for the defensive line and linebackers are just too generous. Take the play that started the half--Ole Miss lines up seven blockers against seven Auburn defenders and makes a successful block on every single damn one of them. I don't know where to stick a minus--do they all get one?--but this nonetheless a comprehensive failure. I do think it's fair to assume the DTs are a notch ahead of the DEs (particularly in run support) and LBs (Stevens was -4 for the second half FWIW), but when you've given up 5.7 yards a carry, it's safe to say no one in the front seven covered themselves in glory.
As for the secondary, that +13 is probably exaggerating things, but maybe not by too much; Ole Miss never completed a pass longer than 20 yards and didn't complete a single one longer than 11 yards in the second half. This is somewhat by design, of course, since Auburn elected to give up anything underneath unless it was a short-yardage situation. But still, for a group this young and banged-up (remember, Hood played basically the entire game) to do this well covering the deep ball is a hell of a performance. Holding a bomber like Snead to 4.7 yards-per-attempt is VICTORY no matter how you slice it. If only the front seven had been able to do a little more to help them out.
What's it mean for Georgia?
Our defensive line has to not just be good; they have to dominate. Our secondary is perhaps more up to the task of covering Green and Massaquoi deep than we might initially think, but they're still going to have to play mostly in the same deep coverage we saw here to do it. The way Auburn's linebackers are playing, any halfway-decent hole up front is going to mean Moreno loose in the secondary. Basically, those holes can't develop. Marks and Doolittle have to play at their very best' Ricks and Blanc can't allow for any letdowns when they rotate in; and Carter, Goggans, and Clayton all have to do a much better job of holding up against the rush. Thank goodness Gerogi'a so beat up along the o-line, because it means there's a shot they'll do just this; otherwise, Moreno is going to have a field day.
Offensively, it might be worth trying the power stuff early on to see if it goes anywhere. If not? Screw it--spread 'em out and pray Kodi keeps his head. If he does, and those drives we saw in the second half against the Rebels turn into points ... who knows? But if Auburn continues banging its head against the ace-shotgun, straight-ahead wall, then we most certainly do know. We know it won't be pretty.
Third quarter
Dave Baker catches Tubby coming out of the tunnel. "We can't run the ball," Tubby says, with obvious frustration. "You can't run it, you can't win in this league.
"We're not a bad football team," he continues. "We're not ... we ... we gotta get some continuity." Man. I'm sure there's a better word for it, but the one I'm left with is "frazzled." He's a frazzled coach at the moment. I don't blame him.
1. Ole Miss kicks off, Davis fields along the right sideline and finds a tiny bit of room in the middle of the field before being dragged down at the 24. Eh.
2. Spread. Well, that's a good way to start the half: Burns (+) drops back, gets excellent protection (line +), and drops one right in the breadbasket of Slaughter (+), who's run a fly down the sideline and shrugs off a challenge from the corner to make the catch. 37 yards--it's taken Auburn one play to surpass their longest gain of the entire first half. (Or at least, it has after a lengthy review that determines Slaughter's heel merely hovered over the sideline rather than came down on it on his route.)
3. Ace, Trott as H-back. Waggle, Burns hits Trott underneath and he gets crushed by an onrushing safety for a loss of 3. Burns probably should have thrown it earlier, giving Trott enough time to try and maneuver around the guy, but it's more a good play by Ole Miss.
4. Spread. Burns tries to hit Billings on a quick out and the throw is low--but it's one it appears to me Billings (-) ought to come up with.
5. 3rd-13. Spread. Burns (+) takes off when the combination of a weird-looking stunt and man-to-man coverage leaves him a pasture to run up into. Trott (+) gets in a dude's way just enough to get Burns the first down.
6. 1st-10 on the Rebel 27. Offset I. Rebels bring two of their linebackers up to the LOS. This doesn't work out so well--Auburn leaves the backside DE unblocked to run the lead iso behind Ziemba and Green on the strong side, and neither he nor a guy Pugh only kinda blocks can get close to making the play. So with one and sometimes two blockers on everyone else, when Tate breaks through there's no one to keep him out of the secondary. Ziemba and Trott wall off the left side of the hole, Green and Berry take care of the right side, Bosley and Davis flatten the lone linebacker, and when the safeties both take the wrong angle--expecting Tate to bounce outside around the Bosley/Davis block--Tate has smooth sailing for the TOUCHDOWN! Nice, nice vision by Tate (+) here and a fabulous job by the line (++). 10-7. Hope springs eternal.
7. Byrum (+) gets the ball to the goalline. Iffy coverage and iffy, dance-around returning sticks the ball on the 22.
8. Rebels in the ace, and this isn't the statement you want your defense to make on their first play of the second half: all seven guys in the front seven get blocked, opening up a ton of room for Eason to cut back and gain 7 before Etheridge tackles him. Too easy.
9. Auburn lines up six on the LOS and bring them all, only for Snead to throw quickly and well before the rush has a chance to reach him, as he did in the first half. As he did in the first half, though, his downfield pass is out of bounds by 10 yards and nowhere near its target. Good coverage (+).
10. Not sure what Ole Miss is thinking on 3rd-3. They spread out in a two-back shotgun and run what appears to be a zone read, but block the backside DE. This leaves only five blockers (one of which is an RB) against six Auburn defenders in the box. Stevens (+) is the unblocked man and closes quickly to tackle for no gain. Sweet.
11. Dunn is again swarmed after a high 40-yard kick, fair catch.
12. 1st-10 on Auburn's 30. Offset I, play-action, nice pocket (line +) and Burns has an easy pitch-and-catch with Billings on the out route, who sort of wriggles backwards in his attempt to wriggle forwards and ends up only gaining 4.
13. Offset I, they try the left side again with Tate. This time Peria Jerry shoves Green straight backwards and Bosley doesn't have much better luck with his man (line -). Tate smothered, loss of 1.
14. 3rd-7. Spread. No gripes with the pass protection this half--the line (+) gives Burns all day and despite what looks like about the happiest case of happy feet I've ever seen (seriously, Burns looks like he's playing Track and Field on ye olde Nintendo Power Pad) he finds Hawthorne crossing over the middle for 21.
15. 1st-10, Rebel 46. Offset I, play-action. Burns again has time to set his feet and throws confidently to ... no one who's even in the picture. ??? Dave Archer theorizes that Davis was trying to run the wheel route and got cut off. Seems likely enough.
16. Ace-shotgun ... I think? Four of the five linemen and Trott are in a three-point stance with only Ziemba standing up at the snap. This suggests a pass, does it not, since the notably struggling-in-pass-protection Ziemba is the one who's in a two-point stance? Sure enough, Burns fires to Slaughter on the slant for 6.
17. Spread on 3rd-4. Burns (-) has enough time to find someone (if not a ton of it) and makes a truly bad read, following a triple-covered Trott the whole way and ignoring a check-down to Fannin that would have been 10 yards at least.
18. AAARRGGGHH. Durst (-) punts from the Ole Miss 40 and blasts it well into the end zone. Net of 20.
19. Simple off-tackle play from Ole Miss out of the I to start their drive, and it goes for an easy 5 yards--Clayton (-) got sealed off at DE, Stevens can't do anything with the pulling guard, and Bynes (-) is just too passive in trying to meet the ballcarrier. Ugh.
20. Wild Rebel. Clayton (-) lines up as the opposite DE this time, but with the same result--neither he nor a blitzing Stevens can get off their blocks at the point of attack and it's five more.
21. Much better from the DL this time as Doolittle and Goggans stand their guys up and Jake Ricks (+) bulls his backwards, creating a logjam at the hole. Eason slithers away from Ricks but Clayton and Stevens tackle.
22. Rebels spread it out and Snead takes his time this time; not a drop of pass rush. Coverage is good, though (+) so he checks down to Eason. Evans (-) meets him immediately and doesn't tackle cleanly, giving up an extra couple of yards before Bynes arrives.
23. 3rd-3. Well-executed tight coverage (+) from Auburn doesn't give Snead the quick throw he wants, and despite having a bit of a pocket he tucks and starts looking for running room. Clayton sacks from behind, but this one belongs to the secondary. Nice sequence all around from the D here.
24. Punt, fair catch, lather, rinse, repeat.
25. Still a three-point game and points on this drive would be huge. Spread on 1st-10, QB draw, another great job by Bosley with blocks both on the LOS and downfield (line +) and Burns picks up 6 without too much effort.
26. Ace-shotgun, handoff strongside to Fannin. Trott completely misses his block (line -) and Fannin has to stop in his tracks. Loss of 3, and for this offense losing 3rd-and-short for 3rd-and-7 or 8 is big step backwards.
27. NEVERMIND. Spread, there's time (line +), Burns (+) tosses a rope down the sideline to Billings (+), who does very well to get his foot down quickly and pick up 29.
28. 1st-10, Rebel 47. I, give to Fannin off-tackle right, and Green can't get out on the weakside 'backer quickly enough (line -). He and the safety converge and tackle after a minimal gain.
29. Spread, time once again for Burns (line +), but unfortunately Burns (--) only has eyes for Trott. He stares him down and fires over the middle into triple-coverage, with predictable--i.e. intercepted--results. Crud.
30. Stevens (-) is lined up over a wideout, and you would think Ole Miss would exploit this y going deep or something. Instead, they exploit it by having the wideout block Stevens clean out of the play as a swing pass to McCluster is reacted to waaaay too late by the other LBs and the secondary. 11 yards.
31. Rebels in the I, and man ... Auburn's been much, much better this game against the pass than the run, but they're still lining up an LB (Johnson, in this case) out over a WR while then bringing McNeil all the way to the LOS on the opposite side. Search me. Result: Goggans for some reason slants hard towards the strongside, McNeil is blocked easily behind him, Stevens and Bynes (-) are picked up by the fullback and pulling guard, respectively (though Bynes should do better), and there's a massive hole. If Hood doesn't tackle after a 10-yard gain it's a TD. Terrible.
32. Little play-action pass to the TE on 2nd-1 picks up 9 to the Auburn 32. Stevens (-) totally buys the fake and is well out of position.
33. Good, good play here by Bynes (+), who blitzes up the middle, gets just enough of a push to where his arm can bother Snead's passing lane, then perfectly times his jump to swat the ball down. Excellent.
34. Snead rolls left and again the Rebels take advantage of coverage (-) positioning itself in the next zip code. Easy catch for seven--McFadden, who I think is in coverage here, isn't even in the picture when the ball is caught--and a sloppy tackle attempt by the charging Pybus yields two more.
35. 3rd-1. Rebels in the I and run the little toss counter after the fake to the fullback. Stevens (-) is unblocked and readily gives up contain by biting hard on the fake anyway. McNeil (-) lets himself get driven back and a bad angle by Etheridge gets McCluster 18 yards to the Auburn 6. If you count the swing as a rushing play, the Rebels' three rushes on this drive have gone for 10, 9, and 18.
36. Stevens does make the play this time, snagging McCluster by the ankles on a Wild Rebel keeper. A hold brings the Rebels back, though. Teehee.
37. Ole Miss in a weird one-receiver I-plus-H-back set. The call's a play-action fake that fools no one, though a curiously hard slant from the line results in no pressure whatsoever. Everyone's well covered, though (coverage +) and Hood even has an outside chance of picking Snead's ball towards the corner. Not quite.
38. Draw play to Eason, and it picks up 6 before Pybus (+) disengages from a block and gets him by the ankles. Blanc is surprisingly downfield to help out, too, but it's not quite just "good effort"; he got the hell blocked out of him up front.
39. 3rd-goal from the 11. Snead again has all day, but again seems to pull the ball down awfully quickly when no one breaks open immediately (cover +). He bobs and weaves his way almost back to the line when Blanc crushes him. To top it off, Ole Miss draws a personal foul for something we never see (thanks, Raycom) and now instead of a TD Ole Miss is trying a 45-yard field goal. Hell yes.
40. He misses! Auburn escapes without giving up points despite basically sucking like the cold black vacuum of outer space for most of that drive.
41. Spread. Burns rolls right and after Trott (+) does a nice job of selling his block, hits his TE drifting back across the field. Well-drawn up, well-executed play all-around ... too bad Trott's not exactly scary in the open field and gets tackled after a gain of 6.
Fourth quarter
42. Ace-shotgun. Fake zone read (the line pulls right; Burns doesn't have the option to keep here) to Tate. The strongside DE shoots past Trott (line -), who tackles him. Hold. Again 2nd-and-short turns into something much more daunting.
43. Spread. Burns has time (seriously, the line [+] may be struggling to open up running lanes, but they're owning the Ole Miss in pass protection right now) and finds Slaughter on a crossing route for 8. Nice pickup to set up 3rd-and-makeable.
44. Spread. Incredible play by Burns (+), who gets tripped up by the legs of the rushing Jerry and puts a hand down to keep his knees just off the ground. He then regains his footing and fires to Slaughter (+), who makes the grab and turns immediately towards the sticks for the extra few yards and a first.
45. Spread. And boy, it doesn't get any prettier than this: Burns (+) pump-fakes and then lofts a perfectly arced ball to a wide-open Slaughter down the sideline. 42 yards, 1st-10 at the 17. (line +)
46. Spread. Whoops--Burns (-) gets a tiny bit more heat up the gut than the last several pass plays and fires his slant to Slaughter way high. Not going for much regardless.
47. Spread, QB draw, and the Rebels blitz a corner in untouched. Burns has to crazy-juke to avoid him and goes down for a loss of 3. Just a good (or fortunate) play-call by the Rebel DC.
48. 3rd-13. Spread. 3-man-rush and ... you know, those three men get just a smidgen more push than they should, and I think that does contribute to Burns (---) not setting his feet properly at all before he flings a killer interception that flies a mile and a half over Slaughter's head. But it's an easy fix here for Burns--if he steps up into the pocket he's got a ton of room in which to either throw or take off. Awful decision, an even worse throw. (Baker reports from the sideline a minute later that Burns expected Billings to run an out route. Doesn't change anything about Burns throwing without being able to step into it when one step forward gives him plenty of space in which to maneuver.)
49. 1st-10, Ole Miss on their own 34. Sweep left, Goggans (-) gets stood up and yields the corner. 5 quick yards.
50. Snead takes a shotgun snap and rolls right ... no one open (cover +). Bynes chases him out after a yard or two.
51. Rebels spread it out on 3rd-3, Shay Hodge sits down in the zone between Stevens and Bynes, and Snead finds him with a dart. Probably not a ton that could be done about that; just good execution.
52. Facing a handoff right out of the I, Auburn slants the DL hard to the opposite side and blitzes Stevens and Bynes around the other end. Goggans (-) once again has to do better as the DE at the point of attack--he gets shoved five yards straight downfield and when the blitzers get picked up, Bolden has a hole for nearly 10.
53. Hey now, that's how it's supposed to work! Ricks (+) shoves his guy aside and draws a second blocker, leaving just one pulling OL for both Bynes and Stevens. He picks Stevens and Bynes (+) is free to make a quick, solid tackle.
54. 3rd-and-inches, Snead sneaks for the first. Fine. What's not fine is Evans (-) finishing the play off by needlessly grabbing the facemask and tacking on a quick 15.
55. Blanc (+) bulls his way into the backfield and totally blows up a sweep right. Ricks is on hand to tackle for a loss of 4. (!)
56. %$&@! More specifically, %$&@ Raycom. Snead runs a waggle and Coleman's all over him, forcing him to throw a quick four-yard curl to Wallace with Hood in tight coverage. It's incomplete and ... flag. PI. We don't see said PI, though, since my broadcast isn't in HD and the camera doesn't whip around to the play until the ball is already there. No problem as long as there's replay, right? They don't give us a replay.
57. Etheridge (-) walks almost into the box and is in position to make the play on an I handoff over the weakside--he just doesn't react, though, as McCluster rushes past him for 5. Bynes (+) does a good job here of shedding a block from the tackle and holding the gain down--but why doesn't he do that more often?
58. Play-action, again Snead has nowhere to throw (coverage +). He scrambles back across the field and Evans (-) should find a way to stop him for a loss; instead he gives up the corner and Snead squeaks out two.
59. Ole Miss runs the same play that LSU scored their second touchdown on--the counter flip paired with a halfback pass. McCluster doesn't like what he sees downfield and keeps, torching Stevens (-) in the open field to gain 7.
60. Wild Rebel keeper on 1st-goal from the 7 is snuffed out nicely by Etheridge and Evans, but Clayton gets a hand up as the RB goes by and gets a little bit of his facemask. This is a five-yarder last year and is supposed to be ignored completely this year, but nope. Flag. Half the distance.
61. Nice play by Ole Miss, bringing the FB in motion right, then having him sneak back across the line into the left flat after a waggle. Snead flips it to him for a simple touchdown. Pybus (-) appears to be the linebacker with responsibility to that side.
62. 17-7, 6:45 to play, Auburn needs some very good things to happen in a big hurry. Davis (ST -) losing the kickoff in the sun and letting it bounce through the end zone is not a good start.
63. Spread, which I'm sure will be the formation of choice from this point forward and will only be noted if it's something else. First, a false start from Ziemba! (line -).
64. QB draw, Lester (-) fails miserably on his lead block and Burns is wrapped up almost immediately.
65. Burns and Billings hook up on the quick out route for 7. Nice calm execution there, though I kinda wish Billings has taken the sliver of opportunity for more yards-after-catch.
66. 3rd-9. The line (+) gives Burns (-) a nice pocket, but he just plain misses his throw to Billings on the sideline comeback route. Ugly.
67. Durst punts, but more importantly somebody in the Rebel line gets called for "hands to the face" and Auburn picks up a cheap first down. Wheeee!
68. Burns rolls left on 1st-10 and finds a wide open Slaughter (+) along the sideline. He plugs away past the first tackler for about three extra yards. More of that, please.
69. Ace-shotgun for 2nd-1 and the line opens up a crease over the left side for Burns to keep for the first ... though if Pugh and Tate can do a little more with their blocks, this maybe breaks open for a big gainer.
70. Pugh gets beaten badly in pass protection here (line -), causing Burns to throw a 50-yard bomb towards Billings off his back foot. It's not a bad effort as such, but pretty well out-of-bounds nonetheless.
71. Burns finds Swinton running the same route that Slaughter turned into nine yards a moment ago for ... nine yards. The fun part of this play is the blitzing linebacker who hurdles Tate a la that dude for Navy against Notre Dame last year. It would have had a similar result, too, had Burns not already released the ball.
72. Burns connects with Carr this time on the eight-yard out. I'm not giving him pluses for fairly routine throws like this, but Burns does deserve some credit for hitting them consistently. Hell, let's give him a collective (+) for the last three.
73. Ah, our sophomore quarterback giveth, our sophomore quarterback taketh away. It's a three-receiver route and Burns (--) never looks in the direction of two guys running shorter routes on the left side of the field, meaning it's an easy play for the deep safety to drift towards Carr running a fly down the opposite sideline. Burns also has some pressure and is on his back foot. Carr is also blanketed by his man. Away goes the pass anyway, and it's predictably picked.
74. There's 3:50 left in the game and Ole Miss is up 10; they're going to run the ball and Auburn has looked awful against the run for most of the day. So why only seven in the box here? Same ol' same ol', Carter (-) gets himself too far upfield, Johnson (-) takes a bad angle, huge hole, yadda yadda yadda. Johnson (+) does cause some excitement by tracking back and stripping Eason of the ball 12 yards downfield; Hood recovers and Auburn's in business ... until the replay official decides Eason's knee was down first. How he's seeing "definitive" evidence here is beyond me. The better team is without question the one that's in front, but the officiating breaks have by-and-large broken for the Rebels.
75. 1st-10. Exact same play, same result when Auburn stunts/slants itself out of the hole. Bynes at least avoids a block and tackles after a short gain.
76. Blecch. Johnson (-) lines up at the LOS and for whatever reason rushes towards the outside almost on an overlap with the DE; the Rebels seal Doolittle (-) inside and run right through the abandoned gap for another 10. Missed tackled from McNeil (-) makes it 17. It's all academic from here.
So play-by-play stops here as well. It's worth noting that Burns does check down to Fannin twice on Auburn's final drive; maybe he can be encouraged to do so more often?
Plus/minus
Three notes first: I lumped the tight-end blocking in with the line this time, so Trott's numbers are solely about his receiving duties; the individual secondary numbers are mostly from run support (or lack thereof) and should be taken with the understanding that downfield coverage was excellent; and two individually assigned minuses on special teams play (to Etheridge and Slaughter, specifically) were included under "ST."
Offense: Slaughter +3, Trott +2, Lester +1, Line +1, Fannin 0, Billings 0, Dunn -1, Hawthorne -1, Tate -1, Burns -4.
Defense: Cover +13 (uh ... this may need some tweaking next time), Ricks +2, Hood +1, Blanc +1, Coleman +1, Bynes 0, Pybus 0, Doolittle -1, Johnson -1, Slade -1, Evans -1, Goggans -1, McFadden -1, Clayton -2, McNeil -2, Etheridge -2 Carter -2, Stevens -3.
Special teams: Byrum +1, Durst +1, other ST -4.
Verdicts
Give Ensminger some modicum of credit here: after the power running game and the ace-shotgun proved so utterly futile in the first half, they pretty well disappeared in the second. Auburn went virtually all spread all the time, it more or less worked. After finishing -4 in the first half, the stout pass-protecting of the line took them to +5 in the second. (The irony of said line griping nonstop about Franklin not letting them line up in a three-point stance and fire off when apparently they're better at sitting back and pass-blocking is beyond rich.) Auburn punted six times in the first half and only once in the second, and that was from the Rebel 40. All six second-half drives finished in Ole Miss territory. For maybe the first time all season, Auburn took on a defense with a pulse and could be fairly called "successful" ...
... if not for the occasional wayward decision-making of Burns. Of those six drives, one was the TD and one ended the game--the other four ended with 1. Burns making a bad read on 3rd-4 2. Pick 3. Pick 4. Pick. Burns should certainly get a a lot of credit for Auburn's ability to move the ball in the second half. But the reason that movement didn't result in points lies squarely on his shoulders. With the run game kaput, it's his offense, 100 percent, for better, for worse. When you finish the game with only seven points, it's only fair to say that as much potential as Burns showed, it was for worse. What's sad is that this half was probably as close as we'll come this year to seeing what Franklin imagined in action. If he'd trusted Burns enough to work through these bad decisions, where would Franklin and this offense be now?
Defensively, the plus/minus for the defensive line and linebackers are just too generous. Take the play that started the half--Ole Miss lines up seven blockers against seven Auburn defenders and makes a successful block on every single damn one of them. I don't know where to stick a minus--do they all get one?--but this nonetheless a comprehensive failure. I do think it's fair to assume the DTs are a notch ahead of the DEs (particularly in run support) and LBs (Stevens was -4 for the second half FWIW), but when you've given up 5.7 yards a carry, it's safe to say no one in the front seven covered themselves in glory.
As for the secondary, that +13 is probably exaggerating things, but maybe not by too much; Ole Miss never completed a pass longer than 20 yards and didn't complete a single one longer than 11 yards in the second half. This is somewhat by design, of course, since Auburn elected to give up anything underneath unless it was a short-yardage situation. But still, for a group this young and banged-up (remember, Hood played basically the entire game) to do this well covering the deep ball is a hell of a performance. Holding a bomber like Snead to 4.7 yards-per-attempt is VICTORY no matter how you slice it. If only the front seven had been able to do a little more to help them out.
What's it mean for Georgia?
Our defensive line has to not just be good; they have to dominate. Our secondary is perhaps more up to the task of covering Green and Massaquoi deep than we might initially think, but they're still going to have to play mostly in the same deep coverage we saw here to do it. The way Auburn's linebackers are playing, any halfway-decent hole up front is going to mean Moreno loose in the secondary. Basically, those holes can't develop. Marks and Doolittle have to play at their very best' Ricks and Blanc can't allow for any letdowns when they rotate in; and Carter, Goggans, and Clayton all have to do a much better job of holding up against the rush. Thank goodness Gerogi'a so beat up along the o-line, because it means there's a shot they'll do just this; otherwise, Moreno is going to have a field day.
Offensively, it might be worth trying the power stuff early on to see if it goes anywhere. If not? Screw it--spread 'em out and pray Kodi keeps his head. If he does, and those drives we saw in the second half against the Rebels turn into points ... who knows? But if Auburn continues banging its head against the ace-shotgun, straight-ahead wall, then we most certainly do know. We know it won't be pretty.
Special Guest Enemy: Hey Jenny Slater
Awwwww yeaaaaaaaah.If you've spent any time hanging out in the SEC blogosphere at all, you'll have no problem recognizing the dead-sexy visage above as belonging to Hey Jenny Slater's Doug Gillett, not only one of the Interweb's foremost Dawg bloggers but one of the funniest, best bloggers of the college football stripe out there, period. Even Yahoo!'s recognizing these days.
So it kicked a substantial amount of ass to get together with Doug (who's every bit as hawt in person as you'd expect) over the wonders of Internet messaging for a back-and-forth over this weekend's edition of the Deep South's Oldest Rivalry. This part is me grilling him on the Dawgs; my answers to Doug's queries are already up and available hyah. I'm in bold, he's in quotes. Enjoy.
So despite my best efforts to blot the stains of the last two years' meetings from my memory, there's no way around the fact the Dawgs absolutely plastered my Tigers the last couple of years. And now we're 4-5 and have an offense Mississippi St.'s fans think is mediocre. How confident are the Dawgs and their fans about this game, do you think? Any chance they could be OVERconfident please please please?
"Some of the fans are overconfident, but I don't think the more enlightened ones are, and I certainly don't think the players or coaches are, not after last week. I think there's a general recognition that the defense really has to step it up, particularly since it looks like Auburn could be running an offense very similar to what we saw from the Wildcats."
Well, similar in the sense that I guess both have young and slithery QBs, but if Auburn scores 38 points I suspect that immediately following the final whistle the ground will finally open up and swallow us all. That aside, UK did have some success, to say the least. How'd that happen and could you give us a read on how much Auburn can expect to repeat it?
"Well, I think part of it was the fact that Randall Cobb was starting for the first time and we didn't know quite what to expect from him -- I don't think anybody thought we'd be seeing a slightly modified version of the triple option up there. That said, if there were any major adjustments made once we knew what they were doing, I didn't see them.
"I would hope that now that we've kind of received our 'wake-up call' in that regard, we'll be better prepared against Kodi Burns and the Tigers, but in a weird way the Tigers' lack of an offensive identity might work to their advantage in some phases of the game: I can't speak for every Georgia fan out there, but I have no earthly idea WHAT kind of offense we're going to see on the Plains this weekend."
Well, generally speaking, the type will most likely be "bad." With guys like Rennie Curran around, though, I'm surprised things seem to be so slipshod on Georgia's side of the ball. What matchups was Kentucky exploiting? Where are those chinks in the Bulldogs' (sort of thin and cheap-looking) armor?
"I think the main matchup was 'crafty and talented' versus 'not particularly motivated.' But their O-line was controlling the line of scrimmage pretty well against our defensive front and leaving it up to our back seven to make most of the tackles. Granted, the early loss of Jeff Owens this season was a major blow to our defensive line, but there's still too much talent there for us to be getting handled the way we have been by some of the better teams on our schedule."
One of Auburn's main offensive weapons in the West Virginia game, in particular, was Burns escaping from the 'Eer pass rush and scrambling for first downs on third down. As I'm not expecting Auburn to get a ton of push--UK's success aside--there's probably going to be some third-and-longs. How have the UGA linebackers and safeties been in QB contain?
"Pretty decent -- there's a lot of speed back there, after all -- but we haven't faced all that many truly elite running QBs this year. Tebow, obviously, is the exception. We didn't let Mackenzi Adams run too wild on us, if memory serves, but that's the only one I can think of in recent weeks."
One last question about the defense--while Burns tossed a whole series of killer picks against Ole Miss, he did show some ability to burn the Rebels deep once they'd committed eight guys to stopping the run. Do you expect Martinez to sell out against Burns's running ability and do we have any shot at completing a few bombs against the Dawg secondary? Remember that our receivers are not especially threatening.
"Unfortunately, that's been a worry of mine. In theory, our secondary is talented enough that we should be OK in one-on-one situations, but we haven't picked off many balls this year -- I think one of our backup linebackers is second on the INTs list, which is crazy -- and too often we seem to chose "draw an interference flag" as Plan A on pass defense. I think we should be able to contain Auburn's passing game pretty well, but it all comes down to how motivated we are and whether we take the Tiger offense seriously (which is why all this "Ehh, Auburn's offense sucks, this'll be a slam-dunk" talk bugs me so much)."
Moving over to the other side of the ball, Matt Stafford looks like the future No. 1 draft pick we all expected at times and like freshman and/or keg-lifting Matt Stafford at others (Florida, 'Bama). Can you pinpoint what exactly has caused him to struggle when he's struggled?
"Well, getting down by three- or four-TD margins certainly didn't do him any favors, since he's a natural gunslinger and having a big deficit to make up only increases his propensity for trying to do too much and making ill-advised throws. In instances where we're still in the game and the ground game is clicking well, Stafford has been pretty solid. The only multiple-INT games he's had other than Alabama and Florida were Tennessee and Vandy, and the first one, at least, had to do with a few head-scratching play calls down inside the 20. So I'd look for Stafford to play pretty smart this weekend unless somehow the score just starts getting completely out of hand.
"Now that I've said that, of course, Auburn's going to return four punts for TDs and be up 28-0 at the end of the first quarter. You're welcome."
Sadly, that's about the most logical method for Auburn to take a 28-0 lead, and even that's fairly illogical since it requires Auburn to force four punts.
Moreno has seemed to have a fairly quiet season, Edwin Moses impressions aside. Is that more the line's struggles or just the massive deficits vs. UF/UA or has he just not been as explosive as he was last year?
"Having to abandon the run against Florida and 'Bama hurt him, of course, but I think defenses are just more prepared for him this time around. He's still had a good season -- went over 1,000 yards against Kentucky, making him the first Dawg since Herschel to go four figures in his first two years -- but I think opposing defenses are just more committed to stopping him than perhaps they were last year. The benefit for us, of course, is that that's opened things up for Stafford, who's having by far the best season of his career."
Damn you and your fancy-shmancy "balance" and fancy-schmancy "talent." Sigh. I honestly think the one place Auburn's defense might have an out-and-out advantage is up front, where we've got some quality guys coming back from injury and the Dwags have been hurtin' all year. What's the current status for the Dawg o-line? Any particular weak links?
"Our depth situation has gone from bad to worse -- Justin Anderson tweaked something last week and is out for Auburn (and perhaps Georgia Tech as well), leaving us with only seven O-linemen to rotate this weekend. That's gonna leave at least a few of them gassed by the time this thing gets into the fourth quarter, so while Stacy Searels has done a phenomenal job of coaching the line through some incredible adversity, we've got to be very, very careful against Auburn -- just because Stafford's jersey has been kept mostly clean this season doesn't mean he can afford to sit around back there and wait too long for a play to open up."
Between the line's lack of depth and the general edge towards that shakiness that seems to plague Stafford when UGA's played from behind (last week excepted, I suppose), does it make it even more important than usual for the Dawgs to get out early? Is Richt going to be looking for the proverbial knockout blow?
"I would think so, yeah, except that we jumped out to 14-0 on Kentucky in the blink of an eye last week and that didn't help us any. That just makes it all the more important that we stay focused and not take anything for granted on Saturday -- of course, if we do grab an early lead, it would really help if y'all could be sufficiently demoralized to just give up and let us roll the rest of the way."
This is where I wonder if the shadows of the past two seasons are going to cast their black, uh, shadows on the game--if Auburn does fall behind, especially the way so much of this season has gone, I wonder if they'll assume it's just '06 or '07 again and if not give up, then at least lose that confident edge they've got to have to hang with the Dawgs. It'll take more than effort, unfortunately, it'll take that extrasuperhuman effort Tubby's been so good at producing in these sorts of games over the years. Who knows if Auburn'll have it around this time or not.
One more question: the game's in Jordan-Hare. Are we still operating under the "road team always wins" assumption? Would you rather have this game in Athens or on the Plains?
"Having really come of age as a Georgia fan during the mid-to-late 1990s, when the 'home-field curse' was at its peak, I'd still rather have this one in Auburn. Keep in mind last year's home win was buoyed by the energy of the 'Blackout' atmosphere at Sanford Stadium, and I think it's safe to say we're not going to be whipping that out again for quite a while. Which is not to say that merely having the game in Auburn makes me rest easy about this one, but in a game that's going to be so intangible-heavy, it's something, I guess."
Oops, one more question: Why do you say it's "intangible-heavy"? I think the tangibleness of Stafford, Green, Moreno, Curran, etc. should play a pretty big role.
"Well, as a Georgia fan, I gotta say I'm worried about the motivation level on both sides. Part of me thinks a lot of the reason Georgia's defense was so slack last week in Kentucky was that we'd just gotten blown off the field in Jacksonville and our last chance at a national title was pretty much gone; right now we're just playing for bowl placement (Orlando or Tampa? oooh, the possibilities). Auburn, meanwhile, has not only pride on the line but also bowl eligibility, and they know they could salvage a rocky season by ending the season with a pair of shockers over top-10 teams (and a pair of historic arch-rivals to boot). Again, I'm hoping that the scare in Lexington will serve as a wake-up call for our guys, but they damn sure better be prepared to face a very motivated (or desperate; you say potato, I say po-tah-to) Auburn team in a few days."
Makes sense.
Major thanks again to Doug and if you're not reading Hey Jenny Slater, you really should be.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Newsbits
Now starting at linebacker for Auburn University ... --So, yeah, it's still the season of DEATH: The good news:
Three starting defensive linemen should be back for Saturday's game against Georgia.The good news on Johnson is that Chris Evans was of course already platooning with him. The bad news is that Chris Evans probably needed the platoon to help rest his fractured toe. Although maybe now the platoon will feature Great Story Pybus, the same Great Story Pybus who according to the article "missed the Tennessee-Martin game with undisclosed injuries."
The bad news: Two new starters - receiver Montez Billings and linebacker Merrill Johnson - could be out.
Billings has a broken nose and Johnson has a broken hand, according to coach Tommy Tuberville, who revealed the injuries Tuesday. Billings has a chance to return this week, but Johnson is likely to be out until the Iron Bowl on Nov. 29.
Sigh. On the plus side, Powers believes he's back to something approximating full fitness. Against Mo Massaquoi and A.J.
--I should note that Auburn fans don't actually get to do much complaining about injury woes when ...
Since the preseason, (Kiante) Tripp has moved from right tackle to left tackle to tight end and now back to right tackle again. This will be the fifth different combination the Bulldogs have used on the offensive line this season when they face Auburn on Saturday.If Marks, Coleman, and Doolittle are all back to their usual selves, this could be somewhat promising.
--As an occasional reader of Uniwatch who would be a more regular reader if I didn't spend 90 minutes clicking through to pics of various uniform irregularities every single time I visited, it's awesome that Auburn is honoring Virgil Starks with a helmet decal, but also awesome that the decal itself is awesome:
Nicely, nicely done, whoever's responsible. (And oh, on the subject of uniforms: a Uniwatch reader noticed that Kodi's apparently the only Auburn player who wears his numbers on his socks.)
Apologizing for the sparse content today; I got a late start and now I'm off to crank out the second half of the Ole Miss recap. Back when it's finished.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
The Works brings its dancin' shoes
Crank That. Surprisingly--no, wait, the opposite of that--it turns out Auburn's players haven't forgotten about that whole blackout-and-Soulja Boy thing between the hedges last year. Any chance of some kind of reverse stunt from Auburn this year?
"It was a hurtful feeling to see those guys dancing," (Rod) Smith said. "We have an opportunity to get those guys back. Maybe we can talk to coach Tubs and play some music."
Well, I'd be fine with re-appropriating Soulja Boy if we can get the classic Barney YouTube (warning: NSFW, NSF one's sanity past the 45 second-mark) on the jumbotron. Barring that, though, I'd recommend some Girl Talk (also not work recommended):
That is my honest recommendation and not at all just an excuse to make all the hipsters out there jealous by mentioning I'm going to see Mr. Talk in person tonight. (And oh, for the record: still don't care about Georgia's dancing last year. The only proper method for registering a complaint is victory. Ask Florida.)
Welcome back, Robert. Dunn got his first real crack at recapturing his punt-returnin' magic this past weekend. Tubby, your evaluation?
"It was a terrible decision," Tuberville said. "He said the sun got in his eyes. You can't have mistakes like that."Awesome. Also of note from Herndon's column: Auburn's kickoff coverage left more than a bit to be desired, as Acid Reign ("F. Giving up 29 yards per return to a FCS team is terrible.") will tell you as well.
Speaking of Acid ... he took a crack at explaining the offense's plight recently as well. This is the factoid that struck me:
In 2005, the message sent by the offensive staff during the 2004 season was realized. Despite a perfect season, we signed Montez Billings, Robert Dunn, Andrew McCain, Gabe McKenzie, and Tommy Trott. Prechae Rodriguez was a Juco signee. Again, no big time game-breakers. This was NOT a class one would expect, after a 13-0 season!Um ... er ... no, it's not. All respect to Trott and Dunn, but there's no way around it.
Obligatory "they play other sports?" joke goes here. Good news from Auburn's other sporting fronts: the men's hoops team had a much better exhibition outing than that loss to AUM a couple of years back, and it appears Lebo could have found an actual three-point shooter in this Waller kid. Even better news from the soccer team, which somehow finagled not only an NCAA Tournament berth (expected) but hosting duties for the first two rounds (not expected) including a potential matchup with No. 2 seed Florida St. NCAA to 'Noles: up yours!
Now, just don't ask about the volleyball team, which is somehow on pace to finish with even fewer SEC wins than last year's 3.
Mid-major hatin'. With Jay Bilas back in business, I'm steeling myself for the usual steady diet of passive-aggressive mid-major bashing on the basketball end for the next few months. But on the football end you rarely see such naked disdain for mid-majors as Mark Schlabach expresses here:
(E)quality and common sense still have to outweigh inclusion.Nevermind that to judge by the polls, no one but no one was arguing that Tulsa was ever "the best team from a non-BCS league"; nevermind that Tulsa outgained the 'Hogs by nearly 100 yards and likely would have won if not for a kickoff return; nevermind that Utah and Boise have already conquered teams in Oregon St. and Oregon (not to mention TCU) that are leagues and leagues better than Arkansas. If Utah and Boise were really any good, Tulsa wouldn't have lost in Fayetteville. It only stands to (non)reason.
A few weeks ago, when Tulsa looked like the best team from a non-BCS league, Golden Hurricane coach Todd Graham said he was confident his team would qualify for a BCS bowl game if it finished unbeaten ... The Golden Hurricane promptly lost to Arkansas, one of the worst teams in the SEC.
The Razorbacks, sitting at the bottom of the SEC West, are probably good enough to beat Ball State, Boise State and Utah, too.
What's weird is that I actually agree with Schlabach's final assessment of these teams' BCS-worthiness: Utah yes (assuming they beat BYU), Boise no, Ball St. no. But it's not because Tulsa lost to Arkansas or because of some sort of nonsensical assumption about how Boise would fare against Pitt or North Carolina's schedule, to name two teams Schlabach claims are more deserving of a BCS berth. (All those of you who think Boise would have found a way to beat Bowling Green and Virginia, raise your hand.) If you want to deny them because you find them lacking on the field, fine. If you want to deny them because you find them lacking in your own Land of Hypotheticals, that's not fine whatsoever.
Just funny. Jay G. Tate last Friday:
Hey everyone. It's one day before the BIG homecoming game and I'm feeling a bit underwhelmed. You know the feeling. It's like when Ben Tate takes a hand-off out of the shotgun formation and starts that arduous journey beyond the tackle.That's funny. But this is funnier: Jay G. Tate reporting on Ben Tate's statements to the press the next night:
Ben Tate on his health and how it affected his play today: "I'm 100 percent. Does it look like I'm not 100 percent? I'm fine. I've been fine since the Ole Miss game. It's just a matter of going out there and producing -- no matter what the odds are or what my line is doing. I have to fight and get yards."Gee, Jay, are you trying to tell us something about Ben Tate's speed? (Also funny: the headline on this Tate article, which I'm 99.9 percent sure is is none-too-hidden sarcasm).
Lastly, a great big giant THANK YOU to all our men and women in uniform, past and present. You rock. And if you'd like a more thoughtful take on the former Armistic Day and what it means, I'd suggest visiting Doug's place at HJS.
Am I crazy?
Since I'm not a football coach and the closest I ever came to the actual coaching and playing of the game was my two years running 12th-string for my junior high team in 7th and 8th grade, it always feels awful presumptuous of me to question coaching strategy. Not individual coaching decisions, so much--when the other team is down one and in easy field goal range with under two minutes to play, the head coach should call the timeouts burning a hole in his pocket--but the broader, gameplanning-type stuff still mostly seems a notch or two above my blogging pay grade.
But geez louise, this habit of Auburn's to play their corners waaaaaaay off the line of scrimmage (as documented painfully against both Ole Miss and West Virginia) drives me bonkers. Good defense just shouldn't hand its opponents 8-10 yards whenever said opponents feel like taking them, should it? I can sort of understand that thinking against Ole Miss--Jevon Snead has both a cannon and the receivers with which to aim it at--but shouldn't the first order of business in defending Pat "recruited as a wideout at LSU" White be to force him to complete downfield passes instead of long handoffs? When facing a I-AA quarterback, even if it's a decent one, shouldn't he be forced to prove he can complete low-percentage downfield passes first before giving up the easy stuff? Apparently not, according to Will:
Maybe they're right. Maybe this is the best fit for our hobbled personnel. And maybe we'll see something different against Georgia or 'Bama (though against such precision deep ball-tossers as Stafford and Wilson, I'll be surprised).
But it's hard to see how this approach has worked for Auburn thus far. West Virginia shredded it. Ole Miss stuttered, but this seemed to have as much to do with Snead's hiccups as anything Auburn did (5.7 yards-per-rush). With the game still very much in doubt, I-AA Tennessee-Martin gained 30 or more yards on six of seven midgame possessions.
I won't say it with complete conviction, but I do have to wonder: at some point, doesn't the Auburn defense needs to focus on forcing the offense to make a difficult play as opposed to hoping they screw up an easy one? There's not a whole lot left for Auburn to lose this season. Might as well lose it charging forward instead of sitting back on one's heels.
But geez louise, this habit of Auburn's to play their corners waaaaaaay off the line of scrimmage (as documented painfully against both Ole Miss and West Virginia) drives me bonkers. Good defense just shouldn't hand its opponents 8-10 yards whenever said opponents feel like taking them, should it? I can sort of understand that thinking against Ole Miss--Jevon Snead has both a cannon and the receivers with which to aim it at--but shouldn't the first order of business in defending Pat "recruited as a wideout at LSU" White be to force him to complete downfield passes instead of long handoffs? When facing a I-AA quarterback, even if it's a decent one, shouldn't he be forced to prove he can complete low-percentage downfield passes first before giving up the easy stuff? Apparently not, according to Will:
Auburn had no answer for basically one play, namely a very simple pitch-and-catch from quarterback Cade Thompson to receiver Mike Hicks. Number 19 was camped out and wide open over on the short-side flat for what felt like a hundred snaps. Thompson, who was only sacked once, had pleny of time to throw, and Hicks must have thought he was playing pre-game drills without a defense most of the time. Not being stupid, UTM's play callers kept calling a play that worked fine, and AU rarely did anything about it.I understand the theory of playing off, or at least I think I do. You prevent the big play. You force an opponent to drive the length of the field without making mistakes (and, admittedly, there were several times UT-Martin failed to pull this off). You give a secondary both as green and as banged-up as it could possibly be as much rope as you can. Auburn's coaches have decided that living with the eight-yard devil we know is better than living with the potential 50-yard devil we don't.
Maybe they're right. Maybe this is the best fit for our hobbled personnel. And maybe we'll see something different against Georgia or 'Bama (though against such precision deep ball-tossers as Stafford and Wilson, I'll be surprised).
But it's hard to see how this approach has worked for Auburn thus far. West Virginia shredded it. Ole Miss stuttered, but this seemed to have as much to do with Snead's hiccups as anything Auburn did (5.7 yards-per-rush). With the game still very much in doubt, I-AA Tennessee-Martin gained 30 or more yards on six of seven midgame possessions.
I won't say it with complete conviction, but I do have to wonder: at some point, doesn't the Auburn defense needs to focus on forcing the offense to make a difficult play as opposed to hoping they screw up an easy one? There's not a whole lot left for Auburn to lose this season. Might as well lose it charging forward instead of sitting back on one's heels.
English language amended by blogger decree, "Should" now synonymous with "will"
This is what Brad Lester allegedly said yesterday, although the original link to where he said these things appears to be broken (and would be behind a paywall anyway):
"It’s a disappointing season, but we feel like we can make up for our season by winning these last two," Lester said. "If we win these last two games, it won’t be as bad ... I have no doubt in my mind," Lester said. "We should beat both teams by a good amount of points. I feel real good about it."Now, assuming Lester is being quoted accurately, is this a level of confidence bordering on capital-C Cocky? Yep. Is expressing this level of confidence to the media the wisest of ideas? No. Will "a good amount of points" and "I have no doubt" show up on bulletin boards in T-town and Athens within the week? Probably.
But is this a prediction, a guarantee, or any kind of promise? No, it is not. If we win, Lester says. We should beat both teams, he claims. If and should do not mean the same thing as when and will.
Unfortunately, this didn't keep Paul Westerdawg (a blogger I have and will continue to have a tremendous amount of respect for) from curiously titling his post in response
Auburn's Lester Predicts AU to beat UGA and BamaPWD is right that Lester "(t)alks a lot for a team that's 5-5, and on a two game losing streak against the Bulldogs." But it's not a prediction. And it's sure as hell not a guarantee, as it's portrayed to be at the Fanhouse ("It's never a good idea to guarantee victory ... Apparently Auburn running back Brad Lester didn't get the memo") by a certain pro-'Bama blogger whose identity you'll never guess.
Two things, gentlemen:
1. It's the mainstream media's job to take athletes' quotes and stretch their meanings beyond the breaking point of truth in the exalted holy name of Hype. I suggest you let them handle it.
2. Not that you should necessarily be faulted for this--this is, likewise, my job rather than yours--but neither of you note that as loudmouthed, overconfident, and possibly even delusional as this quote makes Lester out to be, it's exactly the sort of attitude that Auburn needs right now. Any rational analysis has to conclude that Georgia and Alabama will both, very likely, blow our Tigers clean off the field. But as that conclusion isn't going to lend itself to either a productive week of practice or an energetic performance on Saturday, rationality has no place here. Auburn needs overconfidence. It needs delusion. If Auburn doesn't believe that a combination of intense preparation and perfect execution will lead to not only victory but a potentially decisive one, hell, they've lost already.
So, no I'm not angry to hear Lester say he "has no doubt" Auburn should win these next two games. I'd be a lot more upset to hear him say he did.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Virgil Starks
Starks stands with Chris Evans during Evans's Senior Day last Saturday.I didn't know Virgil Starks. Not personally. Our paths crossed precisely once, when I was working in the Auburn English Center as part of my duties as a first-year Master's student/Graduate Teaching Assistant. Once a week the English Center staff got together for "practicum," in which we'd have some sort of presentation and/or discussion to help us with our English Center responsibilities. Because we saw a lot of athletes in the EC, one week Virgil Starks came by to speak to us for about 30 minutes or so on various issues related to athletes and academics.
I'll be perfectly honest: I don't recall a lot of the specifics of Mr. Starks' talk. The biggest point he wanted to impress upon us, if I remember correctly, was that he and the athletic department wanted to know ASAP when an athlete was getting into academic trouble, before it was too late for him and the rest of the academic support staff to help them. But if I don't remember the details of what Virgil Starks spoke about that day, I remember the style in which he spoke as vividly as anything. He spoke with energy. With forcefulness. With care. With an intensity that made it clear that when people--Tubby included--said that Starks cared and cared deeply about his athletes making the grade, it wasn't just a blast of "We want our athletes to graduate, honest we do" hot air. Oh, he cared.
Afterwards, I told my fellow GTAs that a guy like that could never have been named Joe Smith or Bob Jones. He was always going to have to be called something with zing, something with pep. That guy always had to have been Virgil Starks.
Remembering this morning what it was like to listen to him, it reminded me of a passage from one of my favorite books. I won't get into all the geeky details, but in this story a young woman goes though a period of insane, frantic activity--long walks at midnight, piano practice in the wee hours, an entire house cleaned in a day, etc.--only to be whisked away to another world prematurely because a magic spell has caused her to live her life much faster than anyone else.
I've known a few people like Virgil Starks, human supernovas who burst at the seams with energy, only to pass on long before any of us expect them to. This is how I think of them: not as people who didn't get as much life as they deserved, but as those who simply lived a full life in a lot less time than it takes the rest of us.
Godspeed, Mr. Starks. You'll be missed.
Knee-jerk: Mr. Brightside
Kodi Burns escapes the evil Auburn players from the Mirror Universe. No jokes about Mirror Universe Auburn being 8-2, please.If a time-traveler from the distant future appeared in front of me at the start of this season and said, "Hello, Mr. Hinnen. I am a time-traveler from the distant future. You will live to be 117 years old before you die by rhino trampling on a visit to Baltimore. I'm curious: is it your belief that in those 117 years, you will ever see that Auburn is tied midway through the third quarter with a Smythe Division team ...
"Smythe Division?" I say. "Do you mean I-AA, FCS, whatever?"
"Oh, yes," the traveler says. "Sorry, the various divisions of college football will eventually be renamed for the old '80s NHL divisions as a method of appeasement for our new Canuck overlords after the Royal Canadian Mounted Invasion of 2047. Back to my question: do you believe the day will ever come when Auburn is tied midway through the third quarter with a I-AA team and that by the end of the game, you would be happy with Auburn's performance?"
"Tied midway through the third quarter? Unless it was one of those really good, Appalachian St., New Hampshire-type teams and it was a rebuilding season for a new coach, no I can't say that I would. There can't be any kind of excusing Auburn for remaining tied with a I-AA cuppitycake that deep into the game. It's not going to happen," I would say.
"Thank you," the traveler would say. "By the way, if you look directly behind you right now, you'll see Vice-President Dick Cheney riding the unicycle that would eventually claim his daughter's life."
"What?" I would say, turning, as the traveler said "Kidding!" and vanished with a pop.
The point is this: much to the surprise of Jerry circa August 2008, I'm not that upset after Auburn found themselves knotted up at 20 against Tennessee-Martin Saturday before scoring the game's final 17 points on 89 yards' worth of Kodi Burns touchdown run. I might even be sort of ... satisfied?
Admittedly, this may be because I "watched" this game via the technological marvel that is the CSTV Gametracker, meaning that while most Auburn fans had their retinas seared by things like Brad Lester fumbling in Auburn territory to set up the tying touchdown or Burns starting the game 0-4, I was watching tiny Flash-animated cones representing Lester and Burns and a tiny bouncing cartoon football. The Auburn flailing that led to 20-20 was pronounced by no less an authority than the Mrs. JCCW as "cute" when presented via Gametracker. This may have altered my perceptions in a fashion no amount of box score-poring or vein-of-anger tapping can repair.
Also, no, a 37-20 win over Tennessee-Martin in no way met my hopes and/or pregame expectations for this game. "Satisfied" isn't related to those. My hopes and/or pregame expectations were that Auburn would give us some sort of reassurance they would compete--or, what the hell, pull off the miracle--against Georgia and Alabama. I was, as Rod Stewart would say, looking to find a reason to believe. When your team is tied with Tennessee-Martin 20-20 in the third quarter and would be trailing if not for three different Skyhawk drives into Auburn territory combining for zero points, you have not found them.
But here's the thing: when Martin scored to tie the game at 20, Auburn was staring directly into the abyss. The final, pack-it-in, "Who's gonna coach us next year?" black abyss. They were at the edge. They could look inside and even, if they squinted, see Tennessee plummeting out of sight. Teams that come that close usually manage to regain their balance and back away from the edge. But sometimes they don't.
Auburn did. Say that for them. They didn't even waste any time going about their backing-away-from-the-edge business: the drive following 20-20 went 60 yards in 7 plays for 7 points and and took just 2:59. I could have done without the SkyHawk drive to the Auburn 34 on the following possession, but after taking their peek into the bottomless depths, Auburn decided that was close enough and played accordingly. Touchdown, field goal, touchdown, 37-20, victory, Tubby safe for another week at least, thank goodness thank goodness thank goodness. They could have slipped. They did not.
How much is that worth? Not a lot. But this season, I will take it. Relief should not be confused with celebration. But there has been such little relief. It remains unlikely there will be any more. So yes, this season, this week, I will take this win and hold it and let it warm my shivering hands.
Assorted thoughts from the box score
--Wes Byrum, good from 48, 44, and 24, miss from 46. It's a start. Maybe he will come back to us after all.
--Hope has a name, and that name is Tristan Davis. By the by, I am going to open up Gametracker for the beginning of both Auburn's final two games. I have done it twice this season: once when Game Plan didn't show the start of the Arkansas game, and Saturday. Both times Davis returned Auburn's first kickoff for a touchdown. If you think I am beyond calling upon such ridiculous coincidences for help against the likes of Georgia and Alabama ... wait, scratch that. I don't think any of the JCCW's readers would think that, actually.
--I know that so many various limbs across the defense have been bent in unhelpful ways this season, it seems unfair to gripe about the defense bending yet some more against Martin when they broke so rarely: the bottom line is that the defense gave up 13 points and one of those was after a short field provided by Lester's fumble. However, note that Martin finished the game with a fumble inside the Auburn 15, two interceptions on Auburn's goalline, and a turnover-on-downs at the Auburn 10. Four possessions inside the red zone, zero points. This game could have gone very, very differently and however you would like to slice it, giving up 5.3 yards a play to a I-AA team does not bode well for what Auburn will give up this weekend.
--It's been my opinion that Burns just wasn't been as aggressive running the ball as he could have been against WVU and Ole Miss. He slid early rather than gutting out a yard or two, picked his way through blockers when he could be more direct, etc. I'm guessing that this was not an issue against UTM. I'm guessing this is what Auburn will have to hang its hat on against Georgia and the Tide: other than the threat of Burns making chicken salad out of the chicken feathers of protection breakdowns and waggles, what are opponents of these cailber really going to fear about Auburn's offense? Burns will have to be as aggressive on the ground as he can possibly be. Saturday was a good sign in that department. (At least, I'm assuming it was. 158 yards suggests so.)
--Between some nice gains on the ground and a competent (if not explosive) passing attack, the offense actually finished with the better day than the defense. Consider: only one punt. I don;t care whose defense they were facing: this offense finishing the day with a single punt is some kind of accomplishment.
--Dear Auburn coaches: please do not give Eric Smith the ball any more this season when Auburn is trying to run the clock out on a victory. Thank you. (Not that this will very, very likely be an easy request to comply with.)
Sign No. 3,574 we're living the Season of DEATH
The Deep South's Oldest Rivalry will appear on Raycom and kick off at 11:30 a.m. this Saturday for the second time in three years. Vanderbilt at Kentucky will air on ESPN2. (Not that this means ESPN necessarily passed on Auburn-Georgia to take Vandy-UK, since I think Raycom often--if not every week--has first choice after CBS and ESPN get their first picks. But still.)
On the one hand: watching Auburn and Georgia--Auburn and Georgia!--take the field at 11:30 a.m. is going to feel, as it did a couple of years ago, positively surreal. This is the one game on Auburn's schedule I feel like should always take place under the lights--whether it's Cox to Aromashadu or the First Overtime or the sprinkler game, the most memorable entries in this series always seem to happen at night. (Last year excepted from the Auburn perspective.) I know when neither team has lived up their preseason expectations (one notably moreso than the other, of course) the game is going feel cheapened. But the pre-noon kickoff--sorry, Raycom, and/or you disgusting morning people--is going to feel like an additional level of cheapening. Bleccch.
On the other: I'd convinced myself the Ole Miss game was Auburn's final rodeo with the Three Daves, our final bittersweet good-bye to a lifetime of lovable incompetence. Now, suddenly: reprieve! And one we'll be more prepared for; it wasn't until the break between the third and fourth quarters that I thought, Hey, this is probably the final time I'll ever these guys mangle up an Auburn broadcast. So it's nice to have one last proper farewell. Relatively speaking.
Parting in this case really is accurately labeled "sweet sorrow."
I do mean the "relatively." I'd still rather have the game on at 8 with Pam Ward on play-by-play and Paul Maguire as the sole color guy rather than 11:30 with the Three Daves. But I'm looking on the bright side. There's nothing else Auburn fans can do this season, is there?
On the one hand: watching Auburn and Georgia--Auburn and Georgia!--take the field at 11:30 a.m. is going to feel, as it did a couple of years ago, positively surreal. This is the one game on Auburn's schedule I feel like should always take place under the lights--whether it's Cox to Aromashadu or the First Overtime or the sprinkler game, the most memorable entries in this series always seem to happen at night. (Last year excepted from the Auburn perspective.) I know when neither team has lived up their preseason expectations (one notably moreso than the other, of course) the game is going feel cheapened. But the pre-noon kickoff--sorry, Raycom, and/or you disgusting morning people--is going to feel like an additional level of cheapening. Bleccch.
On the other: I'd convinced myself the Ole Miss game was Auburn's final rodeo with the Three Daves, our final bittersweet good-bye to a lifetime of lovable incompetence. Now, suddenly: reprieve! And one we'll be more prepared for; it wasn't until the break between the third and fourth quarters that I thought, Hey, this is probably the final time I'll ever these guys mangle up an Auburn broadcast. So it's nice to have one last proper farewell. Relatively speaking.
Parting in this case really is accurately labeled "sweet sorrow."
I do mean the "relatively." I'd still rather have the game on at 8 with Pam Ward on play-by-play and Paul Maguire as the sole color guy rather than 11:30 with the Three Daves. But I'm looking on the bright side. There's nothing else Auburn fans can do this season, is there?
Sunday, November 09, 2008
Blogpollery, Week 11
Figure I can get this out of the way now and focus on Auburn-related things tomorrow. The Week 11 JCCW ballot goes like so:
1-2: There's an argument to be made for Alabama: namely, that top-to-bottom their schedule has been much deeper than Tech's; those close victories over Ole Miss and Kentucky didn't look like a lot at the time but both those teams are going bowling and even the Clemson win is way, way better than anything Tech's got in their pure-frosting nonconference slate. But in the end, 'Bama's beatdown of Georgia and Tech's thumping of Oklahoma St. are worth about the same; Tech can follow that up with a win over the deserving No. 3 team in the country while 'Bama's next-est win is, oh, let's go ahead and call it yesterday's overtime squeaker over a team that's lucky to be in the poll at all. Tech belongs at No. 1.
3-8: As was the case last week, Texas remains well out in front of the rest of the one-loss pack. There's something of a mini-gap between the Sooners at 5 and USC at 6; with that Cincy win looking better all the time and Oklahoma still straight wrecking the various Big 12 fools on their schedule, it's a clear-cut top 5 this week.
Choosing between Penn St. and USC isn't easy; the common opponent comparison works out even, since the Nittany Lions win the "Oregon St." one decisively and USC the "Ohio St." one (albeit less decisively). From there, though, the Trojans still have the Oregon and Cal wins while Penn St. has ... at Wisconsin? So USC goes first. Both are still way out in front of Utah, though; after back-to-back 13-10 wins (the latter of which was utterly undeserved), it's safe to say the Utes are lucky to be this high up the ladder.
9-11: The "down 1" arrow alongside a team--Oklahoma St.--that just lost 59-20 looks like it needs some explaining, doesn't it? So look at it this way: the Cowboys, Buckyeyes, and Dawgs all have their only two losses to teams ranked higher up the poll. The Dawgs weren't competitive in either of those losses and their best win (@LSU) is less impressive than either OSU's, so they go third of these three. Despite their pratfall in Lubbock, Okie St.'s win at Missouri is still more impressive to me than the Bucks' at Michigan St., and besides, I just think the Cowboys are better--compare what both teams did while hosting Troy.
As an aside, the coaches now have both Oklahoma ranked ahead of Texas and Missouri ranked ahead of Oklahoma St. Actual, you know, on-field results would suggest otherwise, but who in the coaches' poll has ever cared about those?
12-14: Missouri doesn't have any particularly good wins, but they don't have any bad losses, either--thus separating them from the rest of the two-loss teams below--and at this point winning 52-17 in Lincoln is every bit as good as edging Oregon or beating Navy by 13 at home. I can't believe they're 12th, but I think it's where they belong.
15-21: On with the two-loss (and USC-beating three-loss) parade! Honestly, these teams could all just about be tossed in a bag and drawn out of a hat. Well, except for Florida St. and Cincinnati; they haven't really done enough to rank ahead of the other teams in this group just yet (unless you think a lot more highly of Virginia Tech or West Virginia than I do). TCU's probably the most interesting case here: their only two losses are on the road to top-10 teams, but their only win of interest came at home to a horrifically overrated BYU team. (By the way, you get one guess as to who the coaches ranked higher, BYU or TCU.) I tried to split the difference as best I could, leaving them in-between two teams with a whole host of "decent" wins, the first (Michigan St.) with understandable losses and the second (Pitt) with non-understandable losses.
22-25: The first glut of three-loss teams finally arrives on the ballot, because there's just not anything better out there. Va. Tech comes first by virtue of a whole bunch of respectable wins: at UNC, at Nebraska, vs. Georgia Tech, vs. Maryland. Cal's got the Michigan St. win to hang their hat on, which is a darn sight better than what any other contender for this slot has. And then comes the SEC two-fer; Carolina's worthwhile road wins over Ole Miss and Kentucky are enough to nudge them into the poll at this point, but they can't go in ahead of LSU, who beat the 'Cocks in Columbia, can they? No, they cannot. And so without any other compelling candidates, they both neak in.
Waitlist: Sorry, until/unless they beat Utah, BYU is this year's Hawaii and nothing more. Alarmingly close call against pathetic Washington team? Check. Alarmingly close call against subpar conference foes, such as UNLV, who they beat 42-35 at home? Check. A win next week against Air Force--who after a 38-17 blitzing of the same fair-to-middling Colorado St. team BYU wheezed by 45-42 now has as much claim to a ballot spot as the Cougars--would probably get BYU into the poll, but there's no reason in the world they should be sniffing the top 15.
And while we're on the topic of overrated mid-majors, how on earth did Tulsa worm their way back into the bottom of the mainstream polls this week? Their best win is home against Rice and in their one opportunity against a BCS foe, they lost to a team currently sitting at 1-5 in the SEC. I'd much, much rather have Ole Miss or Iowa.
| ||
| Rank | Team | Delta |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Tech | 1 |
| 2 | Alabama | 1 |
| 3 | Texas | 1 |
| 4 | Florida | 1 |
| 5 | Oklahoma | 1 |
| 6 | Southern Cal | 1 |
| 7 | Penn State | 4 |
| 8 | Utah | 3 |
| 9 | Oklahoma State | 1 |
| 10 | Ohio State | 1 |
| 11 | Georgia | 1 |
| 12 | Missouri | 3 |
| 13 | Boise State | -- |
| 14 | Ball State | -- |
| 15 | North Carolina | 4 |
| 16 | Michigan State | 2 |
| 17 | TCU | 5 |
| 18 | Pittsburgh | 2 |
| 19 | Oregon State | 2 |
| 20 | Florida State | 6 |
| 21 | Cincinnati | 5 |
| 22 | Virginia Tech | 4 |
| 23 | California | 6 |
| 24 | LSU | 2 |
| 25 | South Carolina | 1 |
Dropped Out: Maryland (#16), Georgia Tech (#23), West Virginia (#24), Northwestern (#25).
1-2: There's an argument to be made for Alabama: namely, that top-to-bottom their schedule has been much deeper than Tech's; those close victories over Ole Miss and Kentucky didn't look like a lot at the time but both those teams are going bowling and even the Clemson win is way, way better than anything Tech's got in their pure-frosting nonconference slate. But in the end, 'Bama's beatdown of Georgia and Tech's thumping of Oklahoma St. are worth about the same; Tech can follow that up with a win over the deserving No. 3 team in the country while 'Bama's next-est win is, oh, let's go ahead and call it yesterday's overtime squeaker over a team that's lucky to be in the poll at all. Tech belongs at No. 1.
3-8: As was the case last week, Texas remains well out in front of the rest of the one-loss pack. There's something of a mini-gap between the Sooners at 5 and USC at 6; with that Cincy win looking better all the time and Oklahoma still straight wrecking the various Big 12 fools on their schedule, it's a clear-cut top 5 this week.
Choosing between Penn St. and USC isn't easy; the common opponent comparison works out even, since the Nittany Lions win the "Oregon St." one decisively and USC the "Ohio St." one (albeit less decisively). From there, though, the Trojans still have the Oregon and Cal wins while Penn St. has ... at Wisconsin? So USC goes first. Both are still way out in front of Utah, though; after back-to-back 13-10 wins (the latter of which was utterly undeserved), it's safe to say the Utes are lucky to be this high up the ladder.
9-11: The "down 1" arrow alongside a team--Oklahoma St.--that just lost 59-20 looks like it needs some explaining, doesn't it? So look at it this way: the Cowboys, Buckyeyes, and Dawgs all have their only two losses to teams ranked higher up the poll. The Dawgs weren't competitive in either of those losses and their best win (@LSU) is less impressive than either OSU's, so they go third of these three. Despite their pratfall in Lubbock, Okie St.'s win at Missouri is still more impressive to me than the Bucks' at Michigan St., and besides, I just think the Cowboys are better--compare what both teams did while hosting Troy.
As an aside, the coaches now have both Oklahoma ranked ahead of Texas and Missouri ranked ahead of Oklahoma St. Actual, you know, on-field results would suggest otherwise, but who in the coaches' poll has ever cared about those?
12-14: Missouri doesn't have any particularly good wins, but they don't have any bad losses, either--thus separating them from the rest of the two-loss teams below--and at this point winning 52-17 in Lincoln is every bit as good as edging Oregon or beating Navy by 13 at home. I can't believe they're 12th, but I think it's where they belong.
15-21: On with the two-loss (and USC-beating three-loss) parade! Honestly, these teams could all just about be tossed in a bag and drawn out of a hat. Well, except for Florida St. and Cincinnati; they haven't really done enough to rank ahead of the other teams in this group just yet (unless you think a lot more highly of Virginia Tech or West Virginia than I do). TCU's probably the most interesting case here: their only two losses are on the road to top-10 teams, but their only win of interest came at home to a horrifically overrated BYU team. (By the way, you get one guess as to who the coaches ranked higher, BYU or TCU.) I tried to split the difference as best I could, leaving them in-between two teams with a whole host of "decent" wins, the first (Michigan St.) with understandable losses and the second (Pitt) with non-understandable losses.
22-25: The first glut of three-loss teams finally arrives on the ballot, because there's just not anything better out there. Va. Tech comes first by virtue of a whole bunch of respectable wins: at UNC, at Nebraska, vs. Georgia Tech, vs. Maryland. Cal's got the Michigan St. win to hang their hat on, which is a darn sight better than what any other contender for this slot has. And then comes the SEC two-fer; Carolina's worthwhile road wins over Ole Miss and Kentucky are enough to nudge them into the poll at this point, but they can't go in ahead of LSU, who beat the 'Cocks in Columbia, can they? No, they cannot. And so without any other compelling candidates, they both neak in.
Waitlist: Sorry, until/unless they beat Utah, BYU is this year's Hawaii and nothing more. Alarmingly close call against pathetic Washington team? Check. Alarmingly close call against subpar conference foes, such as UNLV, who they beat 42-35 at home? Check. A win next week against Air Force--who after a 38-17 blitzing of the same fair-to-middling Colorado St. team BYU wheezed by 45-42 now has as much claim to a ballot spot as the Cougars--would probably get BYU into the poll, but there's no reason in the world they should be sniffing the top 15.
And while we're on the topic of overrated mid-majors, how on earth did Tulsa worm their way back into the bottom of the mainstream polls this week? Their best win is home against Rice and in their one opportunity against a BCS foe, they lost to a team currently sitting at 1-5 in the SEC. I'd much, much rather have Ole Miss or Iowa.
Friday, November 07, 2008
Friday preview: UT-Martin, sort of
The second half of the Ole Miss recap has been temporarily postponed. Swear to you it will be up at the beginning of next week. Sorry.
After putting together this morning's post, I drove Mrs. JCCW's ailing car to the shop--something's wrong with the fuel injectors, I think, but I know more about African politics than I do the inner workings of automobiles--and took the bus back home.
At one stop, an elderly woman boarded the bus in her motorized wheelchair. Unfortunately, either she's new to the chair or past the point of being able to capably steer it; she bumped first one and then the other side of the bus's entranceway while making her way on board and then spent the next several minutes trying and failing miserably to maneuver into the allotted wheelchair space. Back, forth. Forward, reverse. Crunch. Bonk. Remember that Austin Powers clip where he gets the little service cart stuck while trying to turn around in a narrow tunnel? It was like that, only Magnolia-level depressing instead of funny.
What really caught my attention during this sequence, though, was this 16- or 17-year old Asian kid a few seats back. He seemed to be caught between the impulse to help her and the mandate to not interfere in the business of strangers unless they ask for said interference; again and again he would lean forward or even raise himself up just a bit, then think better of it and sit back down again. Crunch, stand, sit. Bonk, lean forward, lean back. Even as the driver came over to coach her her into the right spot and went through the process of strapping and securing the chair into place, every few seconds he'd seem to be overcome by the drive to do something and he'd lift himself up for a half-second. But he never got himself any further, and eventually the driver took the wheel and drove us all home.
And so it is with we Auburn fans this year. We see our team try and try and try to get things right. They head in one direction. It doesn't seem right. They head in another. That's also not right, but they seem like they're almost there. Then they try to adjust and it somehow ends up worse than before. Crunch. Bonk. And all the while we want to help. We want to take action. We want to make this whole thing stop. But we can't figure out how, because, honestly, there is no way how. It's up to the team itself and the guy in the driver's seat. There's nothing we can do but watch and squirm and feel like it shouldn't be like this, it just shouldn't be like this at all.
So Kid, I don't blame you for that itch to go get yourself involved. But let's face it, a new message board account or withholding your applause as the coach is announced pregame at Jordan-Hare is as involved as you ought to be. We're all just riding the bus together, seeing where it takes us, praying the team can get to to the end of the line without those straps snapping and everything coming apart.
Perhaps the greatest testament we can offer to the soul-destroying power of the Season of DEATH is this: I'm genuinely apprehensive about Auburn's game against I-AA Tennessee-Martin tomorrow.
If events unfold as they logically should, Auburn won't have any second-half problems. Auburn is vastly more talented at virtually every position, will be playing on Homecoming, and might not even have the "just a scrimmage" mentality that would plague them otherwise thanks to it having been so many long weeks since they tasted victory of any kind. Even now, even in 2008 making any sort of detailed analysis or breakdown is to give this opponent more respect than they probably deserve. It's the college football equivalent of a trip to Burger King: Auburn gets something cheap and fast to fill their aching stomachs with, UT-Martin hands that something over with as quickly and sloppily as possible, gets their check, and goes home.
Except that logic and talent so rarely hold sway in college football, and there's some evidence that down-to-down logic could hold less sway tomorrow than it might even usually hold. For starters, that Auburn's offense is so totally moribund means that the outcome could hinge on a single logic-shattering play. When you're ahead 35-7 at halftime, a fumble returned for a touchdown means nothing; when you're ahead 14-3 (as Auburn is more likely to be), a fumble returned for a touchdown means you are less than one score ahead and now you must deal with the insane pressure of potentially losing to a I-AA team for the first time in school history and putting your head coach's neck squarely on the chopping block. With the exception of that singular terrific late-game drive against LSU, Auburn's offense response to any kind of pressure, much less that brand of END IS NIGH-pressure, has not been encouraging. Should that situation occur, talent may not mean a heck of a lot.
Secondly: UTM may be more likely to make that logic-shattering play than most. Back in mid-October they had already set a new I-AA record for fumble returns for touchdown in a season. They won their previous game in part thanks to an ESPN-approved 85-yard touchdown run. The only way UTM will win is by making huge plays. But apparently, they have a tendency to make them. That they're not a bad team by I-AA standards (7-2, No. 20) is just gravy.
So, yes. Apprehensive. I am reminding myself that I was apprehensive before last year's New Mexico St. game, too, a game which looked like world-ending disaster after 20 minutes only to finish with Brandon Cox slingshotting back into competence and eventually into an upset of Florida the following week. I am reminding myself that despite their record, UTM is 160th in Sagarin's predictor ratings, between run-of-the-mill I-AA teams like Missouri St. and Eastern Illinois. I am reminding myself that Auburn will not let their world end Saturday, as it most assuredly would if they lost.
But the very fact that I have to remind myself of those things to maintain the appropriate level of confidence regarding a I-AA team suggests how very badly Auburn's world has already crumbled thus far this season.
Speaking as someone both irredeemably obsessed with Auburn football and trained over the course of six years' worth of secondary education learning to spot symbols, analogies, Deep Hidden Meanings, etc. in just about every damn thing, the Season of DEATH has been more than just disappointing or frustrating. It's been weird.
I presented you with the bus experience-as-metaphor because it's one the saner, better ones. (I think.) But those neurons end up firing all the time these days. For example: the Mrs. JCCW and I have been eating these Stouffer's skillet dinner-thingies for, uh, dinner lately. Most of these have been pleasantly tasty, but a few nights ago we tried the Chicken Teriyaki and came away underwhelmed by the overly sweet sauce and mealy water chestnuts. As I rinsed my plate off, I thought "Hmmm ... solid track record, familiar ingredients, straightforward recipe ... this should have been a better dinner. Just like Auburn should have been a better football team. We'll never buy Chicken Teriyaki again; is the Auburn administration willing to give this coaching staff a second chance, or just scrape them away into the garbage disposal?" And it was shortly thereafter that I realized that I don't need Auburn to win Saturday just to keep Tubby employed or to give the team at least a modicum of confidence; from a personal standpoint, I may need the win to make sure I retain some level of sanity.
It's been a strange, strange year already. I'd really rather not have to deal with it getting any stranger.
Here's the thing about the uniforms: sure, it's a stunning coincidence, but the similarities run even deeper. As mentioned, the Skyhawks aren't going to be able to score reliably or move the ball consistently against Auburn. They'll have to get some big, big plays to pull off the shocker.
So not only will Auburn's visitors on homecoming look like Auburn, but they'll play like Auburn, too. Or at least the way Auburn has to play against D-I teams; after a fashion, for this one game Auburn's opponent will be more Auburn than Auburn will be. Auburn will be more like Alabama playing Auburn, in fact. If Auburn wins, it'll be like a preview of watching Auburn lose the following weeks; if Auburn loses, heaven forbid, it'll be like watching a blueprint of how Auburn could win the following weeks.
Whoever wins, it's safe to say, the winner is irony.
If the effect of watching Auburn this year has indeed been one of confusion and helplessness, this Saturday for yours truly promises more of the same. For the first time all season even Game Plan doesn't have my expatriate back, and I'm not shilling for a single game of radio. So instead it'll be three-and-a-half hours of CSTV's Gametracker, in which tiny computer-generated cone-men representing Kodi Burns and Josh Bynes vie on a Flash-animated playing field for the future of Tommy Tuberville and the Auburn football program.
The chance that they will fail is very, very small, so maybe it's a good thing that I won't be visually connected with my football team. Maybe this will make the stakes seem smaller and the game more routine. But maybe, especially if the roof does begin to cave in, maybe it'll just make me feel even more removed, even more helpless and antsy, even more like the kid on the bus who wants to scream and twitch at how horribly awry everything's gotten. I feel like I can't take anything for granted.
That's 2008, unfortunately. Nothing taken for granted. Not even Tennessee-Martin, not even Homecoming. Straighten things out for me, Auburn. Calm me down, Auburn. Just for a Saturday. Make things make sense again, if only for a little while.
After putting together this morning's post, I drove Mrs. JCCW's ailing car to the shop--something's wrong with the fuel injectors, I think, but I know more about African politics than I do the inner workings of automobiles--and took the bus back home.
At one stop, an elderly woman boarded the bus in her motorized wheelchair. Unfortunately, either she's new to the chair or past the point of being able to capably steer it; she bumped first one and then the other side of the bus's entranceway while making her way on board and then spent the next several minutes trying and failing miserably to maneuver into the allotted wheelchair space. Back, forth. Forward, reverse. Crunch. Bonk. Remember that Austin Powers clip where he gets the little service cart stuck while trying to turn around in a narrow tunnel? It was like that, only Magnolia-level depressing instead of funny.
What really caught my attention during this sequence, though, was this 16- or 17-year old Asian kid a few seats back. He seemed to be caught between the impulse to help her and the mandate to not interfere in the business of strangers unless they ask for said interference; again and again he would lean forward or even raise himself up just a bit, then think better of it and sit back down again. Crunch, stand, sit. Bonk, lean forward, lean back. Even as the driver came over to coach her her into the right spot and went through the process of strapping and securing the chair into place, every few seconds he'd seem to be overcome by the drive to do something and he'd lift himself up for a half-second. But he never got himself any further, and eventually the driver took the wheel and drove us all home.
And so it is with we Auburn fans this year. We see our team try and try and try to get things right. They head in one direction. It doesn't seem right. They head in another. That's also not right, but they seem like they're almost there. Then they try to adjust and it somehow ends up worse than before. Crunch. Bonk. And all the while we want to help. We want to take action. We want to make this whole thing stop. But we can't figure out how, because, honestly, there is no way how. It's up to the team itself and the guy in the driver's seat. There's nothing we can do but watch and squirm and feel like it shouldn't be like this, it just shouldn't be like this at all.
So Kid, I don't blame you for that itch to go get yourself involved. But let's face it, a new message board account or withholding your applause as the coach is announced pregame at Jordan-Hare is as involved as you ought to be. We're all just riding the bus together, seeing where it takes us, praying the team can get to to the end of the line without those straps snapping and everything coming apart.
-----------------------------------
Perhaps the greatest testament we can offer to the soul-destroying power of the Season of DEATH is this: I'm genuinely apprehensive about Auburn's game against I-AA Tennessee-Martin tomorrow.
If events unfold as they logically should, Auburn won't have any second-half problems. Auburn is vastly more talented at virtually every position, will be playing on Homecoming, and might not even have the "just a scrimmage" mentality that would plague them otherwise thanks to it having been so many long weeks since they tasted victory of any kind. Even now, even in 2008 making any sort of detailed analysis or breakdown is to give this opponent more respect than they probably deserve. It's the college football equivalent of a trip to Burger King: Auburn gets something cheap and fast to fill their aching stomachs with, UT-Martin hands that something over with as quickly and sloppily as possible, gets their check, and goes home.
Except that logic and talent so rarely hold sway in college football, and there's some evidence that down-to-down logic could hold less sway tomorrow than it might even usually hold. For starters, that Auburn's offense is so totally moribund means that the outcome could hinge on a single logic-shattering play. When you're ahead 35-7 at halftime, a fumble returned for a touchdown means nothing; when you're ahead 14-3 (as Auburn is more likely to be), a fumble returned for a touchdown means you are less than one score ahead and now you must deal with the insane pressure of potentially losing to a I-AA team for the first time in school history and putting your head coach's neck squarely on the chopping block. With the exception of that singular terrific late-game drive against LSU, Auburn's offense response to any kind of pressure, much less that brand of END IS NIGH-pressure, has not been encouraging. Should that situation occur, talent may not mean a heck of a lot.
Secondly: UTM may be more likely to make that logic-shattering play than most. Back in mid-October they had already set a new I-AA record for fumble returns for touchdown in a season. They won their previous game in part thanks to an ESPN-approved 85-yard touchdown run. The only way UTM will win is by making huge plays. But apparently, they have a tendency to make them. That they're not a bad team by I-AA standards (7-2, No. 20) is just gravy.
So, yes. Apprehensive. I am reminding myself that I was apprehensive before last year's New Mexico St. game, too, a game which looked like world-ending disaster after 20 minutes only to finish with Brandon Cox slingshotting back into competence and eventually into an upset of Florida the following week. I am reminding myself that despite their record, UTM is 160th in Sagarin's predictor ratings, between run-of-the-mill I-AA teams like Missouri St. and Eastern Illinois. I am reminding myself that Auburn will not let their world end Saturday, as it most assuredly would if they lost.
But the very fact that I have to remind myself of those things to maintain the appropriate level of confidence regarding a I-AA team suggests how very badly Auburn's world has already crumbled thus far this season.
------------------------------------
Speaking as someone both irredeemably obsessed with Auburn football and trained over the course of six years' worth of secondary education learning to spot symbols, analogies, Deep Hidden Meanings, etc. in just about every damn thing, the Season of DEATH has been more than just disappointing or frustrating. It's been weird.
I presented you with the bus experience-as-metaphor because it's one the saner, better ones. (I think.) But those neurons end up firing all the time these days. For example: the Mrs. JCCW and I have been eating these Stouffer's skillet dinner-thingies for, uh, dinner lately. Most of these have been pleasantly tasty, but a few nights ago we tried the Chicken Teriyaki and came away underwhelmed by the overly sweet sauce and mealy water chestnuts. As I rinsed my plate off, I thought "Hmmm ... solid track record, familiar ingredients, straightforward recipe ... this should have been a better dinner. Just like Auburn should have been a better football team. We'll never buy Chicken Teriyaki again; is the Auburn administration willing to give this coaching staff a second chance, or just scrape them away into the garbage disposal?" And it was shortly thereafter that I realized that I don't need Auburn to win Saturday just to keep Tubby employed or to give the team at least a modicum of confidence; from a personal standpoint, I may need the win to make sure I retain some level of sanity.
It's been a strange, strange year already. I'd really rather not have to deal with it getting any stranger.
---------------------------------------
Here's the thing about the uniforms: sure, it's a stunning coincidence, but the similarities run even deeper. As mentioned, the Skyhawks aren't going to be able to score reliably or move the ball consistently against Auburn. They'll have to get some big, big plays to pull off the shocker.
So not only will Auburn's visitors on homecoming look like Auburn, but they'll play like Auburn, too. Or at least the way Auburn has to play against D-I teams; after a fashion, for this one game Auburn's opponent will be more Auburn than Auburn will be. Auburn will be more like Alabama playing Auburn, in fact. If Auburn wins, it'll be like a preview of watching Auburn lose the following weeks; if Auburn loses, heaven forbid, it'll be like watching a blueprint of how Auburn could win the following weeks.
Whoever wins, it's safe to say, the winner is irony.
-------------------------------------
If the effect of watching Auburn this year has indeed been one of confusion and helplessness, this Saturday for yours truly promises more of the same. For the first time all season even Game Plan doesn't have my expatriate back, and I'm not shilling for a single game of radio. So instead it'll be three-and-a-half hours of CSTV's Gametracker, in which tiny computer-generated cone-men representing Kodi Burns and Josh Bynes vie on a Flash-animated playing field for the future of Tommy Tuberville and the Auburn football program.
The chance that they will fail is very, very small, so maybe it's a good thing that I won't be visually connected with my football team. Maybe this will make the stakes seem smaller and the game more routine. But maybe, especially if the roof does begin to cave in, maybe it'll just make me feel even more removed, even more helpless and antsy, even more like the kid on the bus who wants to scream and twitch at how horribly awry everything's gotten. I feel like I can't take anything for granted.
That's 2008, unfortunately. Nothing taken for granted. Not even Tennessee-Martin, not even Homecoming. Straighten things out for me, Auburn. Calm me down, Auburn. Just for a Saturday. Make things make sense again, if only for a little while.
The Works, awesome-style
It's Friday. I need something awesome, you need something awesome. Jeremy of TWER has a new blog, fearless and true, and he helps us all out by indeed bringing the awesome:
That picture--post tag "outstandingness," please--is part of Jeremy's tale of visiting Dean Foy's home to discuss, amongst other matters, streaking at Auburn. Glomerata boobies, the phrase "panty raid," and Dean Foy are all prominently involved. Awesome quota: filled.
That 'undefeated in so many games wearing white' thing is over, remember? But Auburn will wear white on homecoming anyway, which I'm fine with, since UT-Martin's orange jerseys should give us a nice preview of what Auburn would look like wearing orange. Maybe this is why we scheduled them in the first place?
I wish I had your confidence, but I'm unsure I wish you had your confidence. Greg Knox on if he believes he'll be returning to coach Auburn's receivers in '09:
United in misery. Mike Herndon brings the irony:
Caution: Jimmy Sexton at work. Give the man credit: it can't be easy trying to bump up a coaching stock as flagging as Tubby's, but he's still just as committed to it as ever, unless you think the blow-up of idle Tony Barnhart speculation into full-blown rumor is just happenstance.
YES. "Red zone efficiency" is one of the dumbest football stats around, seeing as how it operates under the basic assumption that 3=7. (How many hundreds of times better would "points-per-red zone possession" be? Seriously.) Still, this remains pretty mindblowing:
Really? Tristan Davis on his nagging foot issues:
Byrumwatch. He's back. At least until he misses a 36-yarder on Saturday.
Sigh. WEA on Tubby's postgame responses:
Etc. Tommy Hicks gets spared his weekly browbeating despite ranking Texas behind Oklahoma, since he does have Pitt ranked on the back end ... Georgia readers debate moving the Cocktail Party out of Jacksonville, which, like, dude, you don't throw your sacred traditions overboard just because Florida's hired a couple of really good coaches ... Auburn paintball shines at Paintball World Cup, so that's cool ... Evan Woodberry has a concise summary of how Tubby's buyout wound up so costly.
That picture--post tag "outstandingness," please--is part of Jeremy's tale of visiting Dean Foy's home to discuss, amongst other matters, streaking at Auburn. Glomerata boobies, the phrase "panty raid," and Dean Foy are all prominently involved. Awesome quota: filled.
That 'undefeated in so many games wearing white' thing is over, remember? But Auburn will wear white on homecoming anyway, which I'm fine with, since UT-Martin's orange jerseys should give us a nice preview of what Auburn would look like wearing orange. Maybe this is why we scheduled them in the first place?
I wish I had your confidence, but I'm unsure I wish you had your confidence. Greg Knox on if he believes he'll be returning to coach Auburn's receivers in '09:
I do. I have no doubt.False bravado or an actual assurance from the current-and-possibly-future head man? I'd very much like it to be the former, please. But either way you slice it, Reason No. 4,137 the Season of DEATH blows: feeling it necessary to parse six-word quotes from the wide receivers coach. You suck, 2008.
United in misery. Mike Herndon brings the irony:
The assessment was frank and insightful. It was given by a beleaguered SEC coach who had brought in a new offensive coordinator this season, changed the makeup of his offense and then watched it flounder: "We had a personality that obviously fit us well and we won a lot of football games. I made a conscious effort to look around and make a decision and I had no idea it'd be this hard in transforming systems. Our coaches here are good coaches and they're knowledgeable and everything. We just kind of lost our personality offensively and it's been a struggle and complicated because we haven't played particularly well at quarterback."I'm honestly surprised more hasn't been made of the similarities between the Vols and Tigers this year. I mean, yeah, it's been noted a handful of places ... but as the Fulmer quote illustrates, it kind of goes beyond "similar" to "yeah, more than a bit on the eerie side." (Read the rest of the column; some good stuff from Fulmer about why he felt the need to shake things up at OC.)
That could have been Auburn's Tommy Tuberville speaking, but it wasn't. It was Tennessee's Phillip Fulmer.
Caution: Jimmy Sexton at work. Give the man credit: it can't be easy trying to bump up a coaching stock as flagging as Tubby's, but he's still just as committed to it as ever, unless you think the blow-up of idle Tony Barnhart speculation into full-blown rumor is just happenstance.
YES. "Red zone efficiency" is one of the dumbest football stats around, seeing as how it operates under the basic assumption that 3=7. (How many hundreds of times better would "points-per-red zone possession" be? Seriously.) Still, this remains pretty mindblowing:
STAT OF THE WEEK: Auburn's offensive performance in the red zone is tied for the worst in the nation. The Tigers have scored on 18 of their 29 possessions inside the opponents' 20-yard line, a 62 percent rate that is tied with Tulane for 118th in the country.Meaning that the Auburn offense is neither capable of sustaining drives nor opportunistic! What a combo! It's like the roast beef combo at Arby's, but instead of thin-sliced roast beef you get moldy sardines and instead of savory curly fries--damn, could I go for some curly fries--you get fried twigs.
Really? Tristan Davis on his nagging foot issues:
Davis has had chronic foot and toe problems for much of his career, necessitating a special kind of shoe. To get the extra-wide cleats, Davis had to do battle with Under Armour, the company that has the exclusive contract for Auburn apparel.So you're saying we could have had the 2006 Tristan Davis, Kickoff Return Terror, back several games earlier if Under Armor hadn't gotten their panties in a wad about one Auburn player wearing someone else's cleats? Really? Is that what we're saying? Beccause if so, that's just that's just ... well, it's just 2008, is what it is.
"That was a big issue," Davis said last month. "They didn't want me to go back to New Balance because we made all these (contractual) promises. When it was all said and done, I had to get back into a New Balance shoe. My foot problems are pretty much gone."
Byrumwatch. He's back. At least until he misses a 36-yarder on Saturday.
Sigh. WEA on Tubby's postgame responses:
I record the Auburn Football Review each week, but admittingly, I don't watch the whole show if we lose. I can't bear to. I only watch the beginning when Tuberville addresses the team. At first, his speeches after losses were very motivational. The one after LSU was top-notch. He had me wanting to go suit up for the next one. But gradually, the length of the speech and it's message has diminished after each successive loss. Granted, a lot of these have been on the road and the only thing you want to do after a road loss is get cleaned up and get on the bus, but I think I see the competitive fire waning quite a bit. It has to filter down to the players.Is there anything to add? No, there is not.
Etc. Tommy Hicks gets spared his weekly browbeating despite ranking Texas behind Oklahoma, since he does have Pitt ranked on the back end ... Georgia readers debate moving the Cocktail Party out of Jacksonville, which, like, dude, you don't throw your sacred traditions overboard just because Florida's hired a couple of really good coaches ... Auburn paintball shines at Paintball World Cup, so that's cool ... Evan Woodberry has a concise summary of how Tubby's buyout wound up so costly.
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Ole Miss recap: half the first
Yes, this will be quite enjoyable and not at all the college football equivalent of this*. I'm sure.
A quick change to previous plus/minus ratings system: in addition to the offensive linemen ("line") I'll also be treating non-kicker special teamers ("ST") and the secondary in pass coverage ("cover") as collectives.
First quarter
1. Byrum's kickoff reaches the 6, where it gets bobbled and returned only to the 15. The 6 isn't great, but it's better than where Byrum's been landing them.
2. Ole Miss opens in an I and goes play-action. Snead fires towards Shay Hodge on a sideline route, but he's being run with step-for-step by D'Antoine Hood and Etheridge is lurking as well; perhaps a good thing for Ole Miss the pass is well out of reach. (Hood +, cover +)
3. 5-man front for Auburn, but there's not much chance for pressure when Snead can take a three-step drop and fire left to a wide-open Hodge, who's been given a massive cushion and only has to run eight yards, stop, and look up. Nice to see one of the schematic decisions that hurt us so badly against WVU has been resolved.
4. 3rd-2. Trips right, Dexter McCluster the middle receiver of the three. Auburn's playing a deep zone (yes, on 3rd-2) and when the other two WRs go deep no one's anywhere near McCluster. He's nine yards downfield before anyone makes contact with him. Auburn's current defensive alignments leave them with no chance at stopping short passes like these.
5. Marks (-) and Blanc (-) are shoved back, opening a crease right up the middle that Auburn is fortunate only yields 3 yards; Cordera Eason inexplicably runs smack into a blocker and falls over.
6. Coleman (+) slices through on a stunt and forces Snead to throw way the hell over the head of his intended receiver.
7. Auburn unnecessarily interferes on an errant Snead pass, but an illegal formation call bails them out. Offsetting.
8. Interesting call here from Rhoads--a three-man line backed by a blitz by Etheridge off the edge and another LB. The blitz fails and Snead has a pocket to step into, but he doesn't see Evans sitting on the curl route. Evans (+) deflects the ball away. (cover +)
9. Punt, Slaughter has no room in which to even attempt a return, which seems to have been standard operating procedure for Auburn the last several weeks. What happened to this unit?
10. Auburn opens--hooray--in the ace-shotgun formation they used for big chunks of the second half against WVU, chunks in which Auburn generally struggled to move the ball. This first play works, though--Burns maintains the underneath accuracy he showed vs. WVU, hitting Smith on a curl route for 6.
11. Ace, 3 WR, handoff to Lester over the strong side. I'm not sure if the backside DE is supposed to be unblocked or not, but he is, and he tackles Lester from behind for an easy loss of 1. If Trott gets a better push on his guy at the point of attack (rather than "none") and the DE keeps contain on the possibility of Burns running the waggle, yeah, this play doesn't have to block the DE ... but if those things don't happen, it's automatic toast. (Line -)
12. 3rd-5, spread. The line (+) cuts down any potential ball-batters and Burns (+) hits Smith on the slant for seven quick yards and a first. Just the way you draw it up.
13. I. Another off-tackle run to the strong side with Lester, another failed set of blocks--Pugh can't get across Jerry, who crashes into Berry, who wrecks Davis's effort to get a solid block in the hole--and it's another run that goes nowhere. (Line -)
14. Spread. Smith slants from the outside, Burns (+) hits him, seven more yards. Five plays in, the scouting report that Ole Miss would be hard to run against but easy to complete passes against has proven to be hella accurate.
15. 3rd-4, spread. The line (+) provides time, Burns is maybe a hair late but puts the ball right in Dunn's hands on the crossing route, and Dunn (-) flat drops it. He was maybe a yard short and running directly into the sideline, but it's my guess that if he makes the grab he'll have time to tun up just enough for the first. Auburn gives away a first down on a drop at least once every single game. And it makes me want to break things.
16. Durst (-) drops a perfectly good snap, forcing him to rush the punt, which only travels 31 yards. Ugh.
17. Goggans get sealed inside--or possibly held, it's hard to tell when Raycom returns from an exciting shot of Houston Nutt with the ball already well-snapped--on a sweep left, giving McCluster a crease for 5.
18. Rebels line up in the I and try the middle, but a cut block on Blanc fails, leaving him to engage the blocker meant for Marks (+), who's now free to first watch the fullback dash past him and then clobber McCluster as he reaches the LOS.
19. 3rd-5. Snead has time and an open receiver in Hodge, who's corner route has him between the corners and safeties. Snead takes advantage by throwing the ball 10 feet over everybody's head. Sweet.
20. Punt, same result as before with the gunners on top of Slaughter before he even makes the catch, even after a relatively low 40-yard punt. This time it's (ST -).
21. Ace-shotgun. Option left, Trott, Ziemba and even Slaughter all make fine blocks and Lester has a nice seam for nine yards. (Line +)
22. Ace-shotgun, zone read handoff left for Lester. Bosley basically just escorts his man down the line (line -) but Lester (+) makes a nifty cutback to escape a couple of tacklers and hops forward for the first.
23. Spread. Screen to Tate, and Berry (line -) and Hawthorne (-) both have a chance to block this onrushing dude from the secondary. Neither do. Loss of a yard.
24. Spread, ZR handoff to Tate going right, and this play looks like it's actually going to pick up real yards for the first time since, oh, the ULM game. Tate's got both Pugh and Bosley in front of him and only two potential tacklers--one an LB on the inside, the other a corner on the outside--on that side of the field. Unfortunately, both Bosley and Pugh decide to cut the linebacker, leaving the corner free to tackle unmolested. %&*@. (line -) Tate falls forward for 3.
25. Spread, Rebels blitz, Tate (-) looks way too passive in his pickup block and gets shoved far enough back into Burns that he can't step into the throw. The result is an overthrow towards the downfield Slaughter that's in danger of getting picked.
26. Wow, what a great punt! For starters, a rusher comes through and nearly gets the block. So Durst's punt only goes 28 yards. And then we find out there's been a 15-yard facemask on Etheridge (-)! It's a net of 13 yards! Whoopee!
27. Rebels in the I, handoff right, Clayton gets a solid push to string the play further outside, and when a closing Pybus (+) tears through his block the blocker holds him rather than give up the big loss.
28. 1st-20. Snead drops back and Marks (+) just abuses his man on the inside, forcing Snead to scramble right into Carter. Sack.
29. Mmmm, 2nd-28. Rebels call a "Well, now that we've seen what your offense can 'do', we'll just avoid handing you the ball on this side of the 50, thanks" sort of play, a draw that Evans smothers with relative quickness. Would you like something notable to happen on this play, though? Sure: Coleman can get banged in the head by his own teammate while falling on top of the pile and leave the game. Yay!
30. 3rd-23, Snead has time but doesn't like his downfield odds (cover +) and tries to check down, except that he throws the ball, like, into the turf five feet out in front of him. Not the best sequence for the Rebels, to say the least.
31. Punt. Still no return, although this one was at least only 36 yards.
32. Ace-shotgun, this time with 3 WRs and Trott and an H-back. QB keeper left, and Burns misreads Tate's (admittedly sloppy-looking) block, cutting it outside just as Tate starts pushing him in that direction. Burns pulls forward for 2.
33. Ace-shotgun, again the line (+) gets the necessary cuts and again Burns makes the easy throw, this time to Slaughter on a curl. Gain of five.
34. Spread. This is awful, awful stuff from the line (--): the Rebels rush four against six blockers and still get a guy in untouched to clobber Burns and force a fumble that could very, very easily be returned for a TD; Auburn dodges a massive bullet when the Rebels fail to pick it up and let Bosley steal the recovery away. How'd it happen? Bosley, Berry, and Pugh took on the two guys on the right and Ziemba blocked down on Green's guy, leaving Tate one-on-one with the end. That's a pretty tough assignment, but Tate (-) still managed to not slow the guy up at all. Hideous.
35. Punt. Durst sends it out-of-bounds 39 yards downfield. Could be worse.
36. Rebels in an ace set, Auburn moves McNeil up to play what's essentially a 4-4. Eason runs smack up the middle, and you would think a 4-4 would be a good set against this. You would be wrong: the Rebels' left guard blocks down on Blanc while Carter (-) lets the TE seal him outside, opening a huge hole and allowing Oher to move to the next level and wipe out Bynes. Johnson can't flow around this block, leaving only Stevens (-) between Eason and the secondary--too bad he seemed to think the play was headed towards the other side of the line and took two pointless steps in that direction, meaning all he can do is wave his arms as Eason flies past him. Etheridge (-) misses a tackle at the sticks and Eason is off for 28 yards. Blecch.
37. Rebels try a reverse, McFadden sniffs it out, and he's rewarded for it by having a lineman dive into the back of his left leg. Yes, it's 15 yards for the clip, but sweet merciful heavens at this point I'd much, much rather have a healthy McFadden--who stays down for a while--than the yardage.
38. 1st-25. Goggans (+) shoots his way into the backfield, forcing Eason to bounce it outside, where Stevens cleans up.
39. Snead drops back, can't find anyone (cover +), and takes off for 17 when Carter gets caught inside and loses contain. Not all his fault, though; when he sees what's happening he tries to pop back outside and gets held. No call. C'est la vie.
40. 3rd-8. Auburn drops eight and Snead's forced to check down to Eason, who gets tripped up by the turf monster after a yard. (Cover +) That trip was a nice break--even if Eason doesn't make the first, he could have easily gotten the Rebels into field-goal range.
Second quarter
41. Punt. Downed at the 5. Dammit.
42. Ace-shotgun. This sorta looks like a zone read but I wonder if Burns really has the option to keep here--he didn't seem to be looking at the DE in question. So it's handoff to Tate (+), who runs through an arm-tackle after Green lets a linebacker by him unblocked and finds room behind Bosley, Pugh, and Trott for 4.
43. Spread, QB lead draw, and Burns finds plenty of room over the right side; Bosley's block is especially good as he gets a good shove on the DT and then releases downfield to make another block Burns cuts behind for a few extra yards (line +). Honestly, I wonder if Burns couldn't have gotten more than seven here if he sticks closer to his blockers' butts instead of wandering in open space in the middle of the field.
44. 1st-10. Ace-shotgun, 3-WRs. There's all kinds of problems with the Revel DTs here: one knifes into the backfield to slow Tate, while Ziemba's cut on the other fails miserably and allows him to tackle after a gain of 2. (line -)
45. Holy crap is this play U-G-L-Y. Believe me, it ain't got no alibi. For starters, it's a two-TE ace-shotgun set, but the five down linemen are in a two-point stance--gee, you think that's a bit of a tip a pass is coming? Second, it's only a two-man route, so there's eight blockers, and somehow Tate still winds up blocking a blitzer one-on-one. (He does do a better job, at least.) And then to cap it off, Burns (-) tries to find Billings on a curl and throws it a mile over his head. Sorry, but this is not what a well-coached offense looks like. At all.
46. 3rd-8. Bosley gets shoved into Burns's face by Jerry (line -), Burns is a hair late in stepping through the line into open space, and in the end he has to make a bailout flip to Tate for 2.
47. Durst (+) finally gets a hold of one, booting it 48 yards and getting a fair catch on the other end.
48. ZR handoff, Marks (+) completely owns his man and forces McCluster to start improvising. Coleman comes in to clean up.
49. Ole Miss in the spread now, Snead has time and finds his man ... if his man is a guy standing on Auburn's sideline 20 yards downfield and 10 yards outside the field of play.
50. 3rd-10. Second verse, same as the first, although on the positive side this time Snead just gets it low enough that his receiver (running a well-covered out route at the sticks) can get his hands on it. On the negative side, it's not so low he can catch it and Snead catches a huge break when the deflection bounces off of McFadden's hands. I hate to give McFadden (-) a demerit when his leg is still probably bothering the hell out of him ... but he could see the ball the whole way and it hits him directly in the hands. He's got to make this play.
51. Punt, a line drive that it sure seems like Slaughter (-) could get his hands on if he's quick. Instead he lets it bounce and the next thing you know it's cost Auburn 20 yards of field position. Sigh. I know this is a long-deceased and thoroughly-flogged horse, but Auburn's offense is just not good enough to win games where the defense drops picks are and the special teams give up 20 yards for no reason.
52. 1st-10 Auburn on their own 11. Ace-shotgun, handoff over the right side. Trott loses his guy just as Lester approaches the hole, causing to him to try and hop-skip around them to the outside. It takes too long and he's swamped; loss of 4. (line -)
53. Ace-shotgun, 3 WRs. Option right, disaster. Burns (-) doesn't hold the pitch long enough, Pugh whiffs on a linebacker, Green gets discarded almost immediately. Lester (+) does very, very well to cut back and get to the LOS.
54. 3rd-13. Spread. Burns gets a solid pocket (line +), but there's no one open (I'm assuming) and he checks down to Trott for 6. Auburn will punt from inside their own goal line. This is fun!
55. Punt. Durst (+) is feeling it now; this one goes for 53.
56. I'm not exaggerating; Ole Miss's outside WR has a 12-yard cushion when the ball is snapped. Pitch, catch, no one touches him til he's got the first.
57. Auburn lines up in what's almost a 5-3, with one LB standing up over one DE and Etheridge walked up into the box on the weakside. It works; when the Rebels run to Etheridge's side the pulling guard ignores him to seal off the LB towards the inside and Etheridge (+) tackles securely for a gain of 2.
58. False start. Teehee.
59. More formation weirdness and this time it's not so good; McNeil lines up at the LOS with the LBS shifted left. The Rebels run Bolden on a draw to the opposite side, and when Coleman gets caught pass-rushing and Marks (-) gets stood up, there's no one else out there. Pybus (-) rushes up from what I guess was something like a safety position (honestly, he wasn't even in the screen on the snap ... why is McNeil on the line and Pybus playing centerfield?) only to miss a tackle, and then a tentative-looking Etheridge (-) misses another tackle to take on five more. Gain of 20.
60. Hey, its the Wild Rebel. All three of Auburn's LBs follow the motion of the fullback across the middle, meaning that when McCluster keeps and heads over the right side instead of behind the FB, it's only the extended big paw of Blanc (+) that trips McCluster up as he goes by that keeps this from being a huge gain. It's worth eight anyway.
61. 2nd-2, Auburn brings six guys up to the LOS. The DTs are both shoved well to the strongside as Eason cuts in behind them, but Evans (+) makes a textbook tackle to keep the gain at 2.
62. 3-step drop for Snead, quick throw on the out is off-target. Again.
63. Similar kind of play, this time with two guys going deep and McCluster running the out underneath. Snead throws quickly--the gameplan is clearly to not let Auburn have a chance to get pressure if they can help it--and again the coverage is too deep to even have a hope of stopping this (cover -). Gain of 8.
64. Play-action out of the I, and this time Stevens (+) is sitting on the quick middle curl route Snead clearly expects to be open. He pulls it down and then airmails one in the general direction of the RB just before the blitzing Bynes arrives (cover +). Well done, Auburn.
65. Field goal good, 3-0. It's no less than the Rebels deserve at this point--they have three drives longer than Auburn's longest.
66. Kickoff, Davis bobbles for a moment and returns to the 22.
67. Spread. Whoops--Burns (-) tries the short slant again and hits Billings in the feet with it.
68. Ace. This play looks awfully strange--Burns fakes the hand off to Fannin but instead of running the waggle in the opposite direction, turns around and drifts in the same direction Fannin just went in. The result is that the backside DE is in free and breathing down Burns's neck, though one of those patented Burns shimmies buys him just enough time to find Fannin eight yards downfield. Fannin (-) appears to make the catch and then fumble, but after a lengthy review it turns out he never got control of the ball and it's ruled incomplete. Either way: not a positive play.
69. Spread. A pretty pocket built by the line (+) and Burns (+) steps into it and nails Trott on a deep slant. 16 yards, a first down, and Auburn's longest play of the day. Que bueno.
70. Ace-shotgun, 3 WRs. It's a sweep right on which Pugh whiffs his block entirely; fortunately for him Fannin (+) breaks the tackle and the rest of the play is well-blocked. Somehow Auburn winds up with seven yards out of it.
71. Berry false starts (line -).
72. Spread, QB draw. Bosley's got the shove-and-get-to-the-next-level blocks on these plays down; he pulls off another good one and gives Burns a nice seam. Fannin's and Billings's downfield blocks are merely OK, though, and Burns--again, just not looking quite as aggressive as I'd like him to--gets edged out of bounds after just 5.
73. 3rd-3 on the Auburn 45. Big play here. Ace, 3 WRs: now, is this the formation you would choose to try a straight-ahead power run out of to pick up 3 yards? Knowing that Tommy Trott left the game earlier this drive and that your TE is currently the same true freshman (Vance Smith) who struggled repeatedly with his run-blocking assignments last week, would you choose to run behind him? No matter! Handoff to Fannin behind Smith, he and Berry get no push, the pulling Green just sort of stops in the alleged "hole" and Fannin is buried for a loss (line -).
74. 42-yarder by Durst (+), fair caught inside the 20. I'll take that. Surely after their half of sloppiness and error, the Rebels will not drive 86 yards in 2:02. Surely.
75. McNeil (+) is in his "fake linebacker" mode and bounces off an attempted block by the fullback into the intended hole, gumming up the Rebel works. Blanc tackles; he's been consistently active.
76. I dunno, maybe having the secondary set up their zone a mile off of the LOS is OK when there's this little time left in the half ... but you know, I still doubt it. Mike Wallace stops eight yards downfield, Snead hits him, he goes for 13, lather, rinse, repeat. After the play, Dave Archer informs the viewer that "the play-action froze the front seven." After listening to Dave Archer, my DVR informs me that there was no play-action, and that the tackle was made by "frozen" Craig Stevens 13 yards downfield.
77. Eh, this is one of those plays I don't know if there's anything to be done about. Snead throws the sideline route off a three-step drop to Hodge, who again has Hood step-for-step with him. Etheridge close by in support. The throw has to be high enough that Hood has no play and quick enough that Etheridge can't get there in time. Snead puts it where it needs to be and Hodge gets up just in time to make the play. Damn them.
78. Snead drops back, no one open, tries a check down McFadden's all over (cover +). I wish they'd completed that; the short gain would have kept the clock moving.
79. Again, good coverage and Snead wings one downfield that's well out of bounds (cover +).
80. 3rd-10, midfield. Auburn lines up in a rare 3-3-5 and ... oh boy. The Rebels run McCluster on a draw, and the cavernous hole over the right side allows not only McCluster free passage but passage for blockers who take out Evans and Bynes (-, for a rather sad attempt at resistance and general lack of impact). Hood and Mike Slade each have unblocked beads on him 10-12 yards downfield, but Slade (-) takes a bad angle, not only opening up a cutback into the middle of the field but cutting off Hood's ability to close. 28 yards.
81. Bynes and Stevens drop into zone coverage and Snead hits McCluster on a slant in the narrow window between them; 20 more yards, to the Auburn 2. Not sure if that's on them or just a good play by Snead; I'm going to lean towards the latter. Most of Snead's throws have been after short drops and released quickly, but still, Auburn's got to get more pressure from their four-man rush.
82. Touchdown. Snead connects with Hodge on the play where the receiver runs five yards into the end zone while the QB throws it intentionally behind him; when he turns, it's impossible for the CB to make a play without interfering. If it's executed properly, it's awful hard to stop and the Rebels execute it properly. That said, there are two officiating questions, the first being whether Hodge pushed off. It kind of looks like it on the replay and the Daves are convinced he did, but Hodge doesn't extending his arms much if at all and McFadden doesn't respond with the typical "He pushed off! He pushed off!" hand gestures at the refs. (He may have skipped them, however, out of the mistaken belief the flag he'd just received for his own grab of Hodge's jersey was for Hodge.) It's 50/50; if Auburn has been the receiving team I'd do some bitching if it had been called. The bigger question in my mind is that the left side of the Rebel line jumps a split-second before the rest of the line; I think the officials missed a false start.
83. Squib. Auburn starts on their own 38. Three timeouts. Will they try to accomplish something?
84. No, no they will not. Ace-shotgun, Fannin takes a handoff over the right side of the line for 7; for what it's worth the line (+) blocks this play well. Maybe now that they're at their own 45 they will call timeout and air it out a bit? They only need 20 yards to give Byrum a shot.
85. No, they will do the least explainable thing off all, which is to not call timeout and let the clock run all the way down before calling a pass play that does not appear to be a Hail Mary. What the hell is going on? I think that's probably the players' reaction, too, and in the resulting confusion a blitzer comes in unblocked and levels Burns. Either try to get into field goal position or don't.
In a stunner, Auburn has just finished turning in a terrible half of offensive football.
Halftime verdicts: This ace-shotgun thing as Auburn's primary offensive formation--which it was this half--just doesn't seem reasonable to me; it's like they decided they still sorta wanted to run the Spread Eagle, but do it with a TE on the line and the linemen in three-point stances. Nevermind that there's probably a reason that the Spread Eagle was designed for two-point stances and no TEs. Like everything else Auburn has done this year, it's half of one thing and half of another and substantially less than the sum of either part.
On defense, I dunno; these deep coverages kept Snead from completing a single pass longer than the 20-yard slant to McCluster at half's end. But they also gave the Rebels 10 yards whenever they wanted it. Other problems: the linebacking is still MIA (Bynes played the entire half and didn't receive a single +) and poor tackling repeatedly turned 10-yard gains on the ground into 20-yard gains on the ground. I feel bad complaining too much about a half in which a genuinely explosive offense punted five straight times to open the game and only scored 10 points ... but if Snead isn't off and Ole Miss stuck more consistently with the underneath stuff, I wonder if it would have been so successful.
Second half tomorrow.
*1,224 clips at Hulu and no rake sequence? Come on.
A quick change to previous plus/minus ratings system: in addition to the offensive linemen ("line") I'll also be treating non-kicker special teamers ("ST") and the secondary in pass coverage ("cover") as collectives.
First quarter
1. Byrum's kickoff reaches the 6, where it gets bobbled and returned only to the 15. The 6 isn't great, but it's better than where Byrum's been landing them.
2. Ole Miss opens in an I and goes play-action. Snead fires towards Shay Hodge on a sideline route, but he's being run with step-for-step by D'Antoine Hood and Etheridge is lurking as well; perhaps a good thing for Ole Miss the pass is well out of reach. (Hood +, cover +)
3. 5-man front for Auburn, but there's not much chance for pressure when Snead can take a three-step drop and fire left to a wide-open Hodge, who's been given a massive cushion and only has to run eight yards, stop, and look up. Nice to see one of the schematic decisions that hurt us so badly against WVU has been resolved.
4. 3rd-2. Trips right, Dexter McCluster the middle receiver of the three. Auburn's playing a deep zone (yes, on 3rd-2) and when the other two WRs go deep no one's anywhere near McCluster. He's nine yards downfield before anyone makes contact with him. Auburn's current defensive alignments leave them with no chance at stopping short passes like these.
5. Marks (-) and Blanc (-) are shoved back, opening a crease right up the middle that Auburn is fortunate only yields 3 yards; Cordera Eason inexplicably runs smack into a blocker and falls over.
6. Coleman (+) slices through on a stunt and forces Snead to throw way the hell over the head of his intended receiver.
7. Auburn unnecessarily interferes on an errant Snead pass, but an illegal formation call bails them out. Offsetting.
8. Interesting call here from Rhoads--a three-man line backed by a blitz by Etheridge off the edge and another LB. The blitz fails and Snead has a pocket to step into, but he doesn't see Evans sitting on the curl route. Evans (+) deflects the ball away. (cover +)
9. Punt, Slaughter has no room in which to even attempt a return, which seems to have been standard operating procedure for Auburn the last several weeks. What happened to this unit?
10. Auburn opens--hooray--in the ace-shotgun formation they used for big chunks of the second half against WVU, chunks in which Auburn generally struggled to move the ball. This first play works, though--Burns maintains the underneath accuracy he showed vs. WVU, hitting Smith on a curl route for 6.
11. Ace, 3 WR, handoff to Lester over the strong side. I'm not sure if the backside DE is supposed to be unblocked or not, but he is, and he tackles Lester from behind for an easy loss of 1. If Trott gets a better push on his guy at the point of attack (rather than "none") and the DE keeps contain on the possibility of Burns running the waggle, yeah, this play doesn't have to block the DE ... but if those things don't happen, it's automatic toast. (Line -)
12. 3rd-5, spread. The line (+) cuts down any potential ball-batters and Burns (+) hits Smith on the slant for seven quick yards and a first. Just the way you draw it up.
13. I. Another off-tackle run to the strong side with Lester, another failed set of blocks--Pugh can't get across Jerry, who crashes into Berry, who wrecks Davis's effort to get a solid block in the hole--and it's another run that goes nowhere. (Line -)
14. Spread. Smith slants from the outside, Burns (+) hits him, seven more yards. Five plays in, the scouting report that Ole Miss would be hard to run against but easy to complete passes against has proven to be hella accurate.
15. 3rd-4, spread. The line (+) provides time, Burns is maybe a hair late but puts the ball right in Dunn's hands on the crossing route, and Dunn (-) flat drops it. He was maybe a yard short and running directly into the sideline, but it's my guess that if he makes the grab he'll have time to tun up just enough for the first. Auburn gives away a first down on a drop at least once every single game. And it makes me want to break things.
16. Durst (-) drops a perfectly good snap, forcing him to rush the punt, which only travels 31 yards. Ugh.
17. Goggans get sealed inside--or possibly held, it's hard to tell when Raycom returns from an exciting shot of Houston Nutt with the ball already well-snapped--on a sweep left, giving McCluster a crease for 5.
18. Rebels line up in the I and try the middle, but a cut block on Blanc fails, leaving him to engage the blocker meant for Marks (+), who's now free to first watch the fullback dash past him and then clobber McCluster as he reaches the LOS.
19. 3rd-5. Snead has time and an open receiver in Hodge, who's corner route has him between the corners and safeties. Snead takes advantage by throwing the ball 10 feet over everybody's head. Sweet.
20. Punt, same result as before with the gunners on top of Slaughter before he even makes the catch, even after a relatively low 40-yard punt. This time it's (ST -).
21. Ace-shotgun. Option left, Trott, Ziemba and even Slaughter all make fine blocks and Lester has a nice seam for nine yards. (Line +)
22. Ace-shotgun, zone read handoff left for Lester. Bosley basically just escorts his man down the line (line -) but Lester (+) makes a nifty cutback to escape a couple of tacklers and hops forward for the first.
23. Spread. Screen to Tate, and Berry (line -) and Hawthorne (-) both have a chance to block this onrushing dude from the secondary. Neither do. Loss of a yard.
24. Spread, ZR handoff to Tate going right, and this play looks like it's actually going to pick up real yards for the first time since, oh, the ULM game. Tate's got both Pugh and Bosley in front of him and only two potential tacklers--one an LB on the inside, the other a corner on the outside--on that side of the field. Unfortunately, both Bosley and Pugh decide to cut the linebacker, leaving the corner free to tackle unmolested. %&*@. (line -) Tate falls forward for 3.
25. Spread, Rebels blitz, Tate (-) looks way too passive in his pickup block and gets shoved far enough back into Burns that he can't step into the throw. The result is an overthrow towards the downfield Slaughter that's in danger of getting picked.
26. Wow, what a great punt! For starters, a rusher comes through and nearly gets the block. So Durst's punt only goes 28 yards. And then we find out there's been a 15-yard facemask on Etheridge (-)! It's a net of 13 yards! Whoopee!
27. Rebels in the I, handoff right, Clayton gets a solid push to string the play further outside, and when a closing Pybus (+) tears through his block the blocker holds him rather than give up the big loss.
28. 1st-20. Snead drops back and Marks (+) just abuses his man on the inside, forcing Snead to scramble right into Carter. Sack.
29. Mmmm, 2nd-28. Rebels call a "Well, now that we've seen what your offense can 'do', we'll just avoid handing you the ball on this side of the 50, thanks" sort of play, a draw that Evans smothers with relative quickness. Would you like something notable to happen on this play, though? Sure: Coleman can get banged in the head by his own teammate while falling on top of the pile and leave the game. Yay!
30. 3rd-23, Snead has time but doesn't like his downfield odds (cover +) and tries to check down, except that he throws the ball, like, into the turf five feet out in front of him. Not the best sequence for the Rebels, to say the least.
31. Punt. Still no return, although this one was at least only 36 yards.
32. Ace-shotgun, this time with 3 WRs and Trott and an H-back. QB keeper left, and Burns misreads Tate's (admittedly sloppy-looking) block, cutting it outside just as Tate starts pushing him in that direction. Burns pulls forward for 2.
33. Ace-shotgun, again the line (+) gets the necessary cuts and again Burns makes the easy throw, this time to Slaughter on a curl. Gain of five.
34. Spread. This is awful, awful stuff from the line (--): the Rebels rush four against six blockers and still get a guy in untouched to clobber Burns and force a fumble that could very, very easily be returned for a TD; Auburn dodges a massive bullet when the Rebels fail to pick it up and let Bosley steal the recovery away. How'd it happen? Bosley, Berry, and Pugh took on the two guys on the right and Ziemba blocked down on Green's guy, leaving Tate one-on-one with the end. That's a pretty tough assignment, but Tate (-) still managed to not slow the guy up at all. Hideous.
35. Punt. Durst sends it out-of-bounds 39 yards downfield. Could be worse.
36. Rebels in an ace set, Auburn moves McNeil up to play what's essentially a 4-4. Eason runs smack up the middle, and you would think a 4-4 would be a good set against this. You would be wrong: the Rebels' left guard blocks down on Blanc while Carter (-) lets the TE seal him outside, opening a huge hole and allowing Oher to move to the next level and wipe out Bynes. Johnson can't flow around this block, leaving only Stevens (-) between Eason and the secondary--too bad he seemed to think the play was headed towards the other side of the line and took two pointless steps in that direction, meaning all he can do is wave his arms as Eason flies past him. Etheridge (-) misses a tackle at the sticks and Eason is off for 28 yards. Blecch.
37. Rebels try a reverse, McFadden sniffs it out, and he's rewarded for it by having a lineman dive into the back of his left leg. Yes, it's 15 yards for the clip, but sweet merciful heavens at this point I'd much, much rather have a healthy McFadden--who stays down for a while--than the yardage.
38. 1st-25. Goggans (+) shoots his way into the backfield, forcing Eason to bounce it outside, where Stevens cleans up.
39. Snead drops back, can't find anyone (cover +), and takes off for 17 when Carter gets caught inside and loses contain. Not all his fault, though; when he sees what's happening he tries to pop back outside and gets held. No call. C'est la vie.
40. 3rd-8. Auburn drops eight and Snead's forced to check down to Eason, who gets tripped up by the turf monster after a yard. (Cover +) That trip was a nice break--even if Eason doesn't make the first, he could have easily gotten the Rebels into field-goal range.
Second quarter
41. Punt. Downed at the 5. Dammit.
42. Ace-shotgun. This sorta looks like a zone read but I wonder if Burns really has the option to keep here--he didn't seem to be looking at the DE in question. So it's handoff to Tate (+), who runs through an arm-tackle after Green lets a linebacker by him unblocked and finds room behind Bosley, Pugh, and Trott for 4.
43. Spread, QB lead draw, and Burns finds plenty of room over the right side; Bosley's block is especially good as he gets a good shove on the DT and then releases downfield to make another block Burns cuts behind for a few extra yards (line +). Honestly, I wonder if Burns couldn't have gotten more than seven here if he sticks closer to his blockers' butts instead of wandering in open space in the middle of the field.
44. 1st-10. Ace-shotgun, 3-WRs. There's all kinds of problems with the Revel DTs here: one knifes into the backfield to slow Tate, while Ziemba's cut on the other fails miserably and allows him to tackle after a gain of 2. (line -)
45. Holy crap is this play U-G-L-Y. Believe me, it ain't got no alibi. For starters, it's a two-TE ace-shotgun set, but the five down linemen are in a two-point stance--gee, you think that's a bit of a tip a pass is coming? Second, it's only a two-man route, so there's eight blockers, and somehow Tate still winds up blocking a blitzer one-on-one. (He does do a better job, at least.) And then to cap it off, Burns (-) tries to find Billings on a curl and throws it a mile over his head. Sorry, but this is not what a well-coached offense looks like. At all.
46. 3rd-8. Bosley gets shoved into Burns's face by Jerry (line -), Burns is a hair late in stepping through the line into open space, and in the end he has to make a bailout flip to Tate for 2.
47. Durst (+) finally gets a hold of one, booting it 48 yards and getting a fair catch on the other end.
48. ZR handoff, Marks (+) completely owns his man and forces McCluster to start improvising. Coleman comes in to clean up.
49. Ole Miss in the spread now, Snead has time and finds his man ... if his man is a guy standing on Auburn's sideline 20 yards downfield and 10 yards outside the field of play.
50. 3rd-10. Second verse, same as the first, although on the positive side this time Snead just gets it low enough that his receiver (running a well-covered out route at the sticks) can get his hands on it. On the negative side, it's not so low he can catch it and Snead catches a huge break when the deflection bounces off of McFadden's hands. I hate to give McFadden (-) a demerit when his leg is still probably bothering the hell out of him ... but he could see the ball the whole way and it hits him directly in the hands. He's got to make this play.
51. Punt, a line drive that it sure seems like Slaughter (-) could get his hands on if he's quick. Instead he lets it bounce and the next thing you know it's cost Auburn 20 yards of field position. Sigh. I know this is a long-deceased and thoroughly-flogged horse, but Auburn's offense is just not good enough to win games where the defense drops picks are and the special teams give up 20 yards for no reason.
52. 1st-10 Auburn on their own 11. Ace-shotgun, handoff over the right side. Trott loses his guy just as Lester approaches the hole, causing to him to try and hop-skip around them to the outside. It takes too long and he's swamped; loss of 4. (line -)
53. Ace-shotgun, 3 WRs. Option right, disaster. Burns (-) doesn't hold the pitch long enough, Pugh whiffs on a linebacker, Green gets discarded almost immediately. Lester (+) does very, very well to cut back and get to the LOS.
54. 3rd-13. Spread. Burns gets a solid pocket (line +), but there's no one open (I'm assuming) and he checks down to Trott for 6. Auburn will punt from inside their own goal line. This is fun!
55. Punt. Durst (+) is feeling it now; this one goes for 53.
56. I'm not exaggerating; Ole Miss's outside WR has a 12-yard cushion when the ball is snapped. Pitch, catch, no one touches him til he's got the first.
57. Auburn lines up in what's almost a 5-3, with one LB standing up over one DE and Etheridge walked up into the box on the weakside. It works; when the Rebels run to Etheridge's side the pulling guard ignores him to seal off the LB towards the inside and Etheridge (+) tackles securely for a gain of 2.
58. False start. Teehee.
59. More formation weirdness and this time it's not so good; McNeil lines up at the LOS with the LBS shifted left. The Rebels run Bolden on a draw to the opposite side, and when Coleman gets caught pass-rushing and Marks (-) gets stood up, there's no one else out there. Pybus (-) rushes up from what I guess was something like a safety position (honestly, he wasn't even in the screen on the snap ... why is McNeil on the line and Pybus playing centerfield?) only to miss a tackle, and then a tentative-looking Etheridge (-) misses another tackle to take on five more. Gain of 20.
60. Hey, its the Wild Rebel. All three of Auburn's LBs follow the motion of the fullback across the middle, meaning that when McCluster keeps and heads over the right side instead of behind the FB, it's only the extended big paw of Blanc (+) that trips McCluster up as he goes by that keeps this from being a huge gain. It's worth eight anyway.
61. 2nd-2, Auburn brings six guys up to the LOS. The DTs are both shoved well to the strongside as Eason cuts in behind them, but Evans (+) makes a textbook tackle to keep the gain at 2.
62. 3-step drop for Snead, quick throw on the out is off-target. Again.
63. Similar kind of play, this time with two guys going deep and McCluster running the out underneath. Snead throws quickly--the gameplan is clearly to not let Auburn have a chance to get pressure if they can help it--and again the coverage is too deep to even have a hope of stopping this (cover -). Gain of 8.
64. Play-action out of the I, and this time Stevens (+) is sitting on the quick middle curl route Snead clearly expects to be open. He pulls it down and then airmails one in the general direction of the RB just before the blitzing Bynes arrives (cover +). Well done, Auburn.
65. Field goal good, 3-0. It's no less than the Rebels deserve at this point--they have three drives longer than Auburn's longest.
66. Kickoff, Davis bobbles for a moment and returns to the 22.
67. Spread. Whoops--Burns (-) tries the short slant again and hits Billings in the feet with it.
68. Ace. This play looks awfully strange--Burns fakes the hand off to Fannin but instead of running the waggle in the opposite direction, turns around and drifts in the same direction Fannin just went in. The result is that the backside DE is in free and breathing down Burns's neck, though one of those patented Burns shimmies buys him just enough time to find Fannin eight yards downfield. Fannin (-) appears to make the catch and then fumble, but after a lengthy review it turns out he never got control of the ball and it's ruled incomplete. Either way: not a positive play.
69. Spread. A pretty pocket built by the line (+) and Burns (+) steps into it and nails Trott on a deep slant. 16 yards, a first down, and Auburn's longest play of the day. Que bueno.
70. Ace-shotgun, 3 WRs. It's a sweep right on which Pugh whiffs his block entirely; fortunately for him Fannin (+) breaks the tackle and the rest of the play is well-blocked. Somehow Auburn winds up with seven yards out of it.
71. Berry false starts (line -).
72. Spread, QB draw. Bosley's got the shove-and-get-to-the-next-level blocks on these plays down; he pulls off another good one and gives Burns a nice seam. Fannin's and Billings's downfield blocks are merely OK, though, and Burns--again, just not looking quite as aggressive as I'd like him to--gets edged out of bounds after just 5.
73. 3rd-3 on the Auburn 45. Big play here. Ace, 3 WRs: now, is this the formation you would choose to try a straight-ahead power run out of to pick up 3 yards? Knowing that Tommy Trott left the game earlier this drive and that your TE is currently the same true freshman (Vance Smith) who struggled repeatedly with his run-blocking assignments last week, would you choose to run behind him? No matter! Handoff to Fannin behind Smith, he and Berry get no push, the pulling Green just sort of stops in the alleged "hole" and Fannin is buried for a loss (line -).
74. 42-yarder by Durst (+), fair caught inside the 20. I'll take that. Surely after their half of sloppiness and error, the Rebels will not drive 86 yards in 2:02. Surely.
75. McNeil (+) is in his "fake linebacker" mode and bounces off an attempted block by the fullback into the intended hole, gumming up the Rebel works. Blanc tackles; he's been consistently active.
76. I dunno, maybe having the secondary set up their zone a mile off of the LOS is OK when there's this little time left in the half ... but you know, I still doubt it. Mike Wallace stops eight yards downfield, Snead hits him, he goes for 13, lather, rinse, repeat. After the play, Dave Archer informs the viewer that "the play-action froze the front seven." After listening to Dave Archer, my DVR informs me that there was no play-action, and that the tackle was made by "frozen" Craig Stevens 13 yards downfield.
77. Eh, this is one of those plays I don't know if there's anything to be done about. Snead throws the sideline route off a three-step drop to Hodge, who again has Hood step-for-step with him. Etheridge close by in support. The throw has to be high enough that Hood has no play and quick enough that Etheridge can't get there in time. Snead puts it where it needs to be and Hodge gets up just in time to make the play. Damn them.
78. Snead drops back, no one open, tries a check down McFadden's all over (cover +). I wish they'd completed that; the short gain would have kept the clock moving.
79. Again, good coverage and Snead wings one downfield that's well out of bounds (cover +).
80. 3rd-10, midfield. Auburn lines up in a rare 3-3-5 and ... oh boy. The Rebels run McCluster on a draw, and the cavernous hole over the right side allows not only McCluster free passage but passage for blockers who take out Evans and Bynes (-, for a rather sad attempt at resistance and general lack of impact). Hood and Mike Slade each have unblocked beads on him 10-12 yards downfield, but Slade (-) takes a bad angle, not only opening up a cutback into the middle of the field but cutting off Hood's ability to close. 28 yards.
81. Bynes and Stevens drop into zone coverage and Snead hits McCluster on a slant in the narrow window between them; 20 more yards, to the Auburn 2. Not sure if that's on them or just a good play by Snead; I'm going to lean towards the latter. Most of Snead's throws have been after short drops and released quickly, but still, Auburn's got to get more pressure from their four-man rush.
82. Touchdown. Snead connects with Hodge on the play where the receiver runs five yards into the end zone while the QB throws it intentionally behind him; when he turns, it's impossible for the CB to make a play without interfering. If it's executed properly, it's awful hard to stop and the Rebels execute it properly. That said, there are two officiating questions, the first being whether Hodge pushed off. It kind of looks like it on the replay and the Daves are convinced he did, but Hodge doesn't extending his arms much if at all and McFadden doesn't respond with the typical "He pushed off! He pushed off!" hand gestures at the refs. (He may have skipped them, however, out of the mistaken belief the flag he'd just received for his own grab of Hodge's jersey was for Hodge.) It's 50/50; if Auburn has been the receiving team I'd do some bitching if it had been called. The bigger question in my mind is that the left side of the Rebel line jumps a split-second before the rest of the line; I think the officials missed a false start.
83. Squib. Auburn starts on their own 38. Three timeouts. Will they try to accomplish something?
84. No, no they will not. Ace-shotgun, Fannin takes a handoff over the right side of the line for 7; for what it's worth the line (+) blocks this play well. Maybe now that they're at their own 45 they will call timeout and air it out a bit? They only need 20 yards to give Byrum a shot.
85. No, they will do the least explainable thing off all, which is to not call timeout and let the clock run all the way down before calling a pass play that does not appear to be a Hail Mary. What the hell is going on? I think that's probably the players' reaction, too, and in the resulting confusion a blitzer comes in unblocked and levels Burns. Either try to get into field goal position or don't.
In a stunner, Auburn has just finished turning in a terrible half of offensive football.
Halftime verdicts: This ace-shotgun thing as Auburn's primary offensive formation--which it was this half--just doesn't seem reasonable to me; it's like they decided they still sorta wanted to run the Spread Eagle, but do it with a TE on the line and the linemen in three-point stances. Nevermind that there's probably a reason that the Spread Eagle was designed for two-point stances and no TEs. Like everything else Auburn has done this year, it's half of one thing and half of another and substantially less than the sum of either part.
On defense, I dunno; these deep coverages kept Snead from completing a single pass longer than the 20-yard slant to McCluster at half's end. But they also gave the Rebels 10 yards whenever they wanted it. Other problems: the linebacking is still MIA (Bynes played the entire half and didn't receive a single +) and poor tackling repeatedly turned 10-yard gains on the ground into 20-yard gains on the ground. I feel bad complaining too much about a half in which a genuinely explosive offense punted five straight times to open the game and only scored 10 points ... but if Snead isn't off and Ole Miss stuck more consistently with the underneath stuff, I wonder if it would have been so successful.
Second half tomorrow.
*1,224 clips at Hulu and no rake sequence? Come on.
Feedback, 11/6
Working on the first half of the Ole Miss recap after dealing with some Real Life things the past couple of days, but just so you don't have to wait too long for some content, thought I'd respond to some of the stuff in my comment- and/or in-box.
Gene wrote Oct. 27 to say ...
I guess you noticed half the top ten run some version of the spread offense.
... which, to be honest, I hadn't, but it's worth noting that since then the rankings are even more dominated by spread teams: with Utah joining the party, five of the top six and seven of the AP top 10 run some variety of the spread, with only Alabama and USC continuing to run something approaching traditional QB-under-center-and-two-wideouts offenses. (I'm classifying Boise's unique hodgepodge as "unclassifiable," although it has a lot more in common with the spread teams than with 'Bama/USC.) The total offense rankings--as I've noted previously--are even more spread-centric, with 15 of the top 16 outfits (USC is the only interloper) going spread-first.
As I said, I've made this point, and an accompanying one--that many of these teams are not equipped with substantially more talent than Auburn is--before. But after watching West Virginia carve up yet another roasted SEC victim, after seeing Florida convert every opportunity the Dawgs gave them into a touchdown, after seeing Tulsa essentially continue their murderous offensive rampage in Fayetteville last weekend (just without the points ... the Hurricane gained more yards against the Hogs than any other team this year), I think it's safe to say this "can't work in the SEC" canard needs to be put to bed. The spread can work in the SEC. It may even work better in a league where it's still a relative novelty as opposed to the spread-happy Big 12, Big 10, etc.
Given that many of our current class of recruits were promised a spread offense and that it doesn't require a massive amount of talent to run, yeah, I'm still very much on board with hiring a spread-first, spread-second guy. Find one with better people skills than Franklin, let him build his own staff, and let's see what happens. Tubby saying he wants someone who "fits into what we'd like to do" and that Auburn's offense "is still going to be multiple" doesn't sit entirely comfortably with me. I guess we'll see.
I'll give you a sneak preview of the Ole Miss recap: there's a lot of ace-shotgun and there's a lot of failed runs. So it's worth noting this comment from Acid in the wake of the West Virginia recap:
Running the ball out of the I set is easier than that hybrid shotgun/ace. Snap, drop, back already at full sprint taking the handoff. No tosses, all sprint handoffs, with a guy like Burns threatening to bootleg/waggle out the back side. On a shotgun handoff, it's awkward, and guys are two-stepping it trying to avoid bumping into one another on the exchange. In short, the timing on those things is tricky. WVA had a LOT better success containing in the second half, because of how slow those shotgun running plays develop.
I concur, and wonder if the ace-gun set is a concession to Burns, who--if I'm not mistaken--took nothing but shotgun snaps in high school and perhaps prefers them. As for the defense, Acid added the following:
.....Bynes had the B gap. Bynes would end up over the left tackle, phantom chasing White to the outside, because Powers was lining up with a 15 yard cushion to that side. I know Powers was hurt, and they had to play him off, and he wasn't going to be much help against the run. But against the (zone read), the middle linebacker has GOT to be able to fill the B gap. (for the novice, that's the gap between the center and left guard.) Some might say that this is defensive tackle responsibility, but our scheme has the left DE responsible for outside contain, and the tackle has to slide over and get the guard-tackle gap. We're getting a double-team on SenDerrick Marks, so Bynes HAS to shut down that inside B-gap give. HAS TO!
.....----- on Bynes, or on the scheme, one.
I figured I'd been too lenient on Bynes; this sort of confirms it. However you slice it, the point is this: the linebacking, one of Auburn's biggest strengths over the past several years, is not getting the job done. Blackmon is hurt and never seemed to really get up to speed. Evans hasn't been the same playing on the outside as inside. Bynes and Stevens are sophomores. Johnson might be a senior, but he hasn't been able to claim a regular job over either Evans or Stevens. As with the running backs, the 2008 crew just hasn't been as good as we've been led to expect.
Speaking of talent, performances, expectation levels, etc., there was some minor disagreement in this comment thread regarding the defensive line, which Jason called "very average" and Grotus responding thusly:
(T)he D-line? Coleman? Doolittle? Marks? If that's average then sheesh. I think we're just playing banged up and poorly conditioned. Rhoads has to take some of the blame for that.
I'd fall between these two viewpoints, myself. Coleman has been every bit as good as advertised and if I think there's been one or two games (WVU included) where Marks hasn't made as much of an impact as perhaps he should have, I'd stop well short of having any complaints. The other tackle spot--Doolittle, Blanc, Clayton, etc.--has been manned ably, I'd say.
The problem is that Coleman has been the only defensive end who's accomplished much of anything. It's one thing to move a senior who hasn't played defense since high school from tight end to DE just a handful of weeks before the season starts. It's another for him to be handed a major spot in the rotation. I admire McKenzie's dedication and effort, but it was always impossible for him to become an impact player there in such a short period of time. Goggans has been alternating between being hobbled and being generally ineffective. The same goes for Carter. I realize injuries have played a big, big role in the failures here, but you're looking at a d-line that's half brilliance, 1/4 capable, and then 1/4 a glaring weakness. That's just not how it works for truly elite defenses.
In the wake of this post on Tubby, I received the following comment taking issue with my statement that Tennessee and Auburn were programs of "approximately equal stature":
Nice article, but Auburn is nowhere near the same level as Tennessee. Tennessee has more history and tradition (more than twice as many conference titles, more than twice as many national titles, far more bowl wins/appearances, etc.) than Auburn, and it has a bigger budget. Its facilities are larger, and no expense was spared on the UT football program (and with its budget, that's saying something). Plus, Tennessee is the only football power in the whole state. I am neither a UT fan nor an Auburn supporter, but face the facts: Auburn is not on-par with Tennessee. Clemson, yes. Tennessee, no.
Hmmm ... not a Vol fan, not an Auburn fan, but intimately familiar with the histories of both and more than eager to assure us Auburn's history is the one that's lacking? Please, sir, give me one guess which team it is you do support.
Snark aside, I won't argue that for some of the reasons mentioned ($$$, primarily) Tennessee might be, perhaps probably is, the more desirable job (as I mentioned here as well). But I did say approximately equal. Tennessee's job might be slightly better than Auburn's, but based on the factors just mentioned and the potential recruiting base, the facts are that both Tennessee and Auburn have a little ways to go to catch Florida, Georgia, LSU, and (*sigh*) a rejuvenated 'Bama in desirability. The Vols' job remains, in the JCCW's totally unbiased and perfectly neutral viewpoint, substantially more similar to Auburn's than to the SEC's current upper crust's. Thus: "approximately equal."
And that's the last time this month I talk about the opening in Knoxville, I swear.
Gene wrote Oct. 27 to say ...
I guess you noticed half the top ten run some version of the spread offense.
... which, to be honest, I hadn't, but it's worth noting that since then the rankings are even more dominated by spread teams: with Utah joining the party, five of the top six and seven of the AP top 10 run some variety of the spread, with only Alabama and USC continuing to run something approaching traditional QB-under-center-and-two-wideouts offenses. (I'm classifying Boise's unique hodgepodge as "unclassifiable," although it has a lot more in common with the spread teams than with 'Bama/USC.) The total offense rankings--as I've noted previously--are even more spread-centric, with 15 of the top 16 outfits (USC is the only interloper) going spread-first.
As I said, I've made this point, and an accompanying one--that many of these teams are not equipped with substantially more talent than Auburn is--before. But after watching West Virginia carve up yet another roasted SEC victim, after seeing Florida convert every opportunity the Dawgs gave them into a touchdown, after seeing Tulsa essentially continue their murderous offensive rampage in Fayetteville last weekend (just without the points ... the Hurricane gained more yards against the Hogs than any other team this year), I think it's safe to say this "can't work in the SEC" canard needs to be put to bed. The spread can work in the SEC. It may even work better in a league where it's still a relative novelty as opposed to the spread-happy Big 12, Big 10, etc.
Given that many of our current class of recruits were promised a spread offense and that it doesn't require a massive amount of talent to run, yeah, I'm still very much on board with hiring a spread-first, spread-second guy. Find one with better people skills than Franklin, let him build his own staff, and let's see what happens. Tubby saying he wants someone who "fits into what we'd like to do" and that Auburn's offense "is still going to be multiple" doesn't sit entirely comfortably with me. I guess we'll see.
I'll give you a sneak preview of the Ole Miss recap: there's a lot of ace-shotgun and there's a lot of failed runs. So it's worth noting this comment from Acid in the wake of the West Virginia recap:
Running the ball out of the I set is easier than that hybrid shotgun/ace. Snap, drop, back already at full sprint taking the handoff. No tosses, all sprint handoffs, with a guy like Burns threatening to bootleg/waggle out the back side. On a shotgun handoff, it's awkward, and guys are two-stepping it trying to avoid bumping into one another on the exchange. In short, the timing on those things is tricky. WVA had a LOT better success containing in the second half, because of how slow those shotgun running plays develop.
I concur, and wonder if the ace-gun set is a concession to Burns, who--if I'm not mistaken--took nothing but shotgun snaps in high school and perhaps prefers them. As for the defense, Acid added the following:
.....Bynes had the B gap. Bynes would end up over the left tackle, phantom chasing White to the outside, because Powers was lining up with a 15 yard cushion to that side. I know Powers was hurt, and they had to play him off, and he wasn't going to be much help against the run. But against the (zone read), the middle linebacker has GOT to be able to fill the B gap. (for the novice, that's the gap between the center and left guard.) Some might say that this is defensive tackle responsibility, but our scheme has the left DE responsible for outside contain, and the tackle has to slide over and get the guard-tackle gap. We're getting a double-team on SenDerrick Marks, so Bynes HAS to shut down that inside B-gap give. HAS TO!
.....----- on Bynes, or on the scheme, one.
I figured I'd been too lenient on Bynes; this sort of confirms it. However you slice it, the point is this: the linebacking, one of Auburn's biggest strengths over the past several years, is not getting the job done. Blackmon is hurt and never seemed to really get up to speed. Evans hasn't been the same playing on the outside as inside. Bynes and Stevens are sophomores. Johnson might be a senior, but he hasn't been able to claim a regular job over either Evans or Stevens. As with the running backs, the 2008 crew just hasn't been as good as we've been led to expect.
Speaking of talent, performances, expectation levels, etc., there was some minor disagreement in this comment thread regarding the defensive line, which Jason called "very average" and Grotus responding thusly:
(T)he D-line? Coleman? Doolittle? Marks? If that's average then sheesh. I think we're just playing banged up and poorly conditioned. Rhoads has to take some of the blame for that.
I'd fall between these two viewpoints, myself. Coleman has been every bit as good as advertised and if I think there's been one or two games (WVU included) where Marks hasn't made as much of an impact as perhaps he should have, I'd stop well short of having any complaints. The other tackle spot--Doolittle, Blanc, Clayton, etc.--has been manned ably, I'd say.
The problem is that Coleman has been the only defensive end who's accomplished much of anything. It's one thing to move a senior who hasn't played defense since high school from tight end to DE just a handful of weeks before the season starts. It's another for him to be handed a major spot in the rotation. I admire McKenzie's dedication and effort, but it was always impossible for him to become an impact player there in such a short period of time. Goggans has been alternating between being hobbled and being generally ineffective. The same goes for Carter. I realize injuries have played a big, big role in the failures here, but you're looking at a d-line that's half brilliance, 1/4 capable, and then 1/4 a glaring weakness. That's just not how it works for truly elite defenses.
In the wake of this post on Tubby, I received the following comment taking issue with my statement that Tennessee and Auburn were programs of "approximately equal stature":
Nice article, but Auburn is nowhere near the same level as Tennessee. Tennessee has more history and tradition (more than twice as many conference titles, more than twice as many national titles, far more bowl wins/appearances, etc.) than Auburn, and it has a bigger budget. Its facilities are larger, and no expense was spared on the UT football program (and with its budget, that's saying something). Plus, Tennessee is the only football power in the whole state. I am neither a UT fan nor an Auburn supporter, but face the facts: Auburn is not on-par with Tennessee. Clemson, yes. Tennessee, no.
Hmmm ... not a Vol fan, not an Auburn fan, but intimately familiar with the histories of both and more than eager to assure us Auburn's history is the one that's lacking? Please, sir, give me one guess which team it is you do support.
Snark aside, I won't argue that for some of the reasons mentioned ($$$, primarily) Tennessee might be, perhaps probably is, the more desirable job (as I mentioned here as well). But I did say approximately equal. Tennessee's job might be slightly better than Auburn's, but based on the factors just mentioned and the potential recruiting base, the facts are that both Tennessee and Auburn have a little ways to go to catch Florida, Georgia, LSU, and (*sigh*) a rejuvenated 'Bama in desirability. The Vols' job remains, in the JCCW's totally unbiased and perfectly neutral viewpoint, substantially more similar to Auburn's than to the SEC's current upper crust's. Thus: "approximately equal."
And that's the last time this month I talk about the opening in Knoxville, I swear.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
SECond look: the SEC has nothing to fear from the polls except fear of the polls itself
Don't worry, folks, he's harmless. Well, except for the whole brain-eating thing.If we're applying the whole trend-watching "In" / "Five Minutes Ago" / "Out" designations to SEC poll paranoia, it's safe to say that "Ohio St. makes another BCS title game" is safely Out; "The Big 12 champ is perfect and undefeated Penn St. leapfrogs an undefeated Alabama team," an idea that rather inexplicably picked up some steam in a handful of places recently, is now Five Minutes Ago; and your new hottness, the current In debate, is "What happens if newly rampant Florida and the eventual Big 12 champion both emerge with one loss?" Tony Barnhart tackled that one today and concluded his look at it by ... washing his hands of any sort of prediction and asking his readers what would happen.
Lord knows the the world doesn't really need more BCS title game analysis--I think the only topic more cliched I could write would be about why we need a playoff, and I want to hold off on that until next week--but for the record, unless Florida or 'Bama take the pipe on the run-up to Atlanta or Texas Tech manages to run the table, SEC fans can stop worrying about what's going on with the polls.
Why? The biggest reason is the one Dr. Saturday detailed earlier this week: No. 1 Alabama going against No. 4-at-worst Florida--who seem likely to finally wrest away USC's crown as the designated late-season "playing the best football in the country right now" media darling--is going to be the new Game of the Year. It's going to be hyped beyond hype. In contrast, the Big 12 will offer up most likely the South's megawattage winner against Missouri--obviously not a bad team, but also a team who had two chances to beat one of the South division elites and let one slip away at home while getting flat annihilated in the other. Especially falling outside of the blinding glare of the SEC title game, the Big 12's event just won't have the same kind of impact on voters. If Florida (or quite possibly even a one-loss Alabama) wins by any score other than 3-2, they ride the spotlight into the BCS title game, no questions asked.
Well, maybe one question asked. Though the Harris Poll and the computers have Florida already out in front of Oklahoma, the Sooners are (incredibly) fourth in the coaches' poll, meaning that there might be some mild outcry not to jump the Gators over a team that didn't lose, even if they did just hypothetically beat the No. 1 (or at least top-5) team in the country. This is especially true if Oklahoma (as almost expected) beats Texas Tech for their first major scalp of the year and wins the tiebreak for the South; they might even jump back over the Gators in two weeks if they beat the Raiders handily enough.
But that's the only scenario in the JCCW's opinion in which one-loss Florida even hypothetically fails to reach the big stage, and even in it the glamour and Florida's still-intact 2006 reputation as national-title worthy would win out. As broad as the fanbases for the Big 12 powers-that-be are, consider that Oklahoma had a pretty much equally viable case as LSU for the BCS title game last year: a 10-2 record (same as LSU), a BCS conference title (same), two upset losses to halfway-decent if not great teams (same), and a win over the country's No. 1 team in their conference championship game that even LSU couldn't quite match. Did LSU's much more difficult schedule over the course of the season mean they were the better choice if you had to pick one? Yep. But should a 10-2 Big 12 champ really be just summarily dismissed when compared to a 10-2 SEC champ? Not really. But they were. Because they entered that championship game No. 9, no one made a peep about the slight save for a handful of Sooner fans. The media climate is obviously a little different this year, but I don't think things have changed so dramatically that Florida (and possibly one-loss Alabam) won't again get the benefit of the doubt.
Meaning, again, that unless Texas Tech runs the table, the SEC winner should be safe. And if the Red Raiders do happen to pull it off, well, Florida would be S.O.L. but the Tide would be fine; it's Penn St. that will be facing the ax. For all the talk about how much the pollsters luuuuurve Joe Paterno, they neither hesitates to jump Mike Leach;s team over his after their very first quality victory no took the Nits even within striking distance of the No. 2 Tide after PSU's biggest victory of the season. There's a point at which even the mawkish sentimentality of a LIVING LEGEND only holds so much sway.
On with this week's SECPP ballot.
1. Alabama. Well, the Tide took a half to get going against Arkansas St. But they never got going against Tulane and you see how accurate a picture that was, so yeah, I'm not reading anything into it this go-round.
2. Florida. Can't put the Gators into the top spot when a) they lost a game b) turnovers and missed FGs mean they weren't quite as dominant against the Dawgs as it appeared on the scoreboard.
3. Georgia. Strangely enough, the red zone problems that didn't cost them against Vandy or Tennessee did against Florida. Who knew?
4. LSU