Aight, before the Bunker tough guys ramrod in here to torture my subject line with a potpourri of smart ass rebuttals or Malzahn insults, it's really a "small-ish" clarifying point I'm making toward perspective. i.e. As a fan base, don't display panic like Gus did in the 3rd quarter Saturday - channel some Auburn cool that maybe, just maybe our share of recruits will also adopt as they have before after bad years.
And in part I also offer the analogy to the idgeots who have posted that "we are now the Vandy or Kentucky of the SEC". I know it was more a gloomy punch line than serious analysis, but I've pondered the "where / who are we" question as this season went from hopeful after the KY win to "abysmal".
Finishing dead last in the SEC West this season, while embarrassing, does not significantly alter the overall strategic strength of Auburn as a top 15 football program. We have the assets, proven history that it's "possible" to win big at AU, recruiting base (albeit lacks a natural "dominant" pipeline like an in-state bammer, UGA, or UF, but we've built enough of a brand that we can "get ours").
That is to say, this season does not remotely drop us to the cesspool of either Mississippi school (with all due respect) much less a cellar-dweller Vandy or Kentucky.
Huge HOWEVER coming here, you knew . . . the same could have been written about the storied Texas Longhorn program back in 2006 or so, and they still managed a FUBAR on coaching, recruiting, and other fronts that has led to essentially a nine-year drought by Longhorn standards following their national championship win over USCw in 2005.
So you can have the strategic "assets" in place, and still experience a miserable long-term run that damages your brand and perpetuates a death spiral of losing. How can that happen in Austin, Texas, with their embarrassment of riches? I'm not smart enough to fully disect the root causes, but you could start with systemic poor judgment in administration, a meddling (and large) big oil money booster gang, each of whom thinks they really know football and coaching hires, and a series of failed coaching hires. Put simply, a leadership culture problem.
The Auburn is Texas analogy most certainly limps, I concede, and I welcome the areas of major disparity to be outlined in replies here. But the thrust of my point is that sooner than later, there must be bold, intelligent, decisive leadership that has absolutely superior judgment if you are to achieve, and then the hard part - SUSTAIN - some level of consistent winning and competing for championships.
Charlie Strong may or may not be "the guy" to turn the 'Horns around, but there is a mob of Orangebloods with torches and pitchforks yelling to go hire Tom Herman, Urban Meyer OC that took down bammer and won it all, and HC of undefeated Houston this season. That mob may or may not be wrong about Strong, and there are risks bailing on Strong prematurely just as there are risks staying the course too long.
Sound familiar?
Gus Malzahn may or may not be "the guy" who can achieve that type of winning, I personally am fine with him getting reasonable time (at least '16 and if visible results are showing, beyond) to right the ship offensively. It appears he'll attempt to do so by returning to a Nick Marshall style attack, which worries me a bit in the SEC. But until we can hardwire an entire top-to-bottom leadership culture that has elite level national credibility, AU football will most certainly cycle in and out of failure with a wildly high "standard deviation" as compared to bammer's tiny standard deviation on wins per year such that a "bad year" is two losses.
For some, that will be just fine, because they'll point to 2010 and 2013 as "above average" for Auburn. But that's not the goal in my mind. In fact, both those seasons required the kind of lightning in a bottle so potent that it could overcome the systemic leadership culture flaws.
With one exception, I'll leave it to those in charge (is someone in charge?) as to who is not fit for duty and what small or large managerial solutions are in order. That exception, from all I've heard almost universally, is Compliance Man Rich McGlynn. Having made our coaching staff's job tougher from the get-go, I'm told he's now (unreasonably) pissing off Bruce Pearl on a few fronts, including Purifoy. So is that good "judgment" on the part of our leadership to imbed such an ultra-conservative compliance leader that the mission practically makes AU a satellite office of the NCAA in Indianapolis? I'll only say we are singularly UNIQUE in going that direction in the SEC and among most every Power 5 contender.
Meanwhile, it at least appears that Trustees may not feel it at ALL their purview to even ask questions about the health and well-being of football, just to name the cash cow. So what would appear normal checks and balances for administration, AD's, etc. is MIA on the basis of SACS, presumably.
Oddly enough, I could make the case that there is an even bigger leadership culture problem at UGA, but that's their problem.
Pass me a funnel cake, this is exhausting.
E5
And in part I also offer the analogy to the idgeots who have posted that "we are now the Vandy or Kentucky of the SEC". I know it was more a gloomy punch line than serious analysis, but I've pondered the "where / who are we" question as this season went from hopeful after the KY win to "abysmal".
Finishing dead last in the SEC West this season, while embarrassing, does not significantly alter the overall strategic strength of Auburn as a top 15 football program. We have the assets, proven history that it's "possible" to win big at AU, recruiting base (albeit lacks a natural "dominant" pipeline like an in-state bammer, UGA, or UF, but we've built enough of a brand that we can "get ours").
That is to say, this season does not remotely drop us to the cesspool of either Mississippi school (with all due respect) much less a cellar-dweller Vandy or Kentucky.
Huge HOWEVER coming here, you knew . . . the same could have been written about the storied Texas Longhorn program back in 2006 or so, and they still managed a FUBAR on coaching, recruiting, and other fronts that has led to essentially a nine-year drought by Longhorn standards following their national championship win over USCw in 2005.
So you can have the strategic "assets" in place, and still experience a miserable long-term run that damages your brand and perpetuates a death spiral of losing. How can that happen in Austin, Texas, with their embarrassment of riches? I'm not smart enough to fully disect the root causes, but you could start with systemic poor judgment in administration, a meddling (and large) big oil money booster gang, each of whom thinks they really know football and coaching hires, and a series of failed coaching hires. Put simply, a leadership culture problem.
The Auburn is Texas analogy most certainly limps, I concede, and I welcome the areas of major disparity to be outlined in replies here. But the thrust of my point is that sooner than later, there must be bold, intelligent, decisive leadership that has absolutely superior judgment if you are to achieve, and then the hard part - SUSTAIN - some level of consistent winning and competing for championships.
Charlie Strong may or may not be "the guy" to turn the 'Horns around, but there is a mob of Orangebloods with torches and pitchforks yelling to go hire Tom Herman, Urban Meyer OC that took down bammer and won it all, and HC of undefeated Houston this season. That mob may or may not be wrong about Strong, and there are risks bailing on Strong prematurely just as there are risks staying the course too long.
Sound familiar?
Gus Malzahn may or may not be "the guy" who can achieve that type of winning, I personally am fine with him getting reasonable time (at least '16 and if visible results are showing, beyond) to right the ship offensively. It appears he'll attempt to do so by returning to a Nick Marshall style attack, which worries me a bit in the SEC. But until we can hardwire an entire top-to-bottom leadership culture that has elite level national credibility, AU football will most certainly cycle in and out of failure with a wildly high "standard deviation" as compared to bammer's tiny standard deviation on wins per year such that a "bad year" is two losses.
For some, that will be just fine, because they'll point to 2010 and 2013 as "above average" for Auburn. But that's not the goal in my mind. In fact, both those seasons required the kind of lightning in a bottle so potent that it could overcome the systemic leadership culture flaws.
With one exception, I'll leave it to those in charge (is someone in charge?) as to who is not fit for duty and what small or large managerial solutions are in order. That exception, from all I've heard almost universally, is Compliance Man Rich McGlynn. Having made our coaching staff's job tougher from the get-go, I'm told he's now (unreasonably) pissing off Bruce Pearl on a few fronts, including Purifoy. So is that good "judgment" on the part of our leadership to imbed such an ultra-conservative compliance leader that the mission practically makes AU a satellite office of the NCAA in Indianapolis? I'll only say we are singularly UNIQUE in going that direction in the SEC and among most every Power 5 contender.
Meanwhile, it at least appears that Trustees may not feel it at ALL their purview to even ask questions about the health and well-being of football, just to name the cash cow. So what would appear normal checks and balances for administration, AD's, etc. is MIA on the basis of SACS, presumably.
Oddly enough, I could make the case that there is an even bigger leadership culture problem at UGA, but that's their problem.
Pass me a funnel cake, this is exhausting.
E5
