When examining what Auburn football is facing going forward it is easy to see that roster deficiencies are the most obvious problem. Solving that, obviously, requires two things, recruiting and player development. Well, that's where the paradox exists. Recruit better players, that's the battle cry of most wanting to see AU succeed, and it's correct. But how do you get there? The same old cliches and buzzwords are thrown around: bagmen, NIL, etc... Reality there is that Auburn will simply never be able to exceed what programs like OSU, bama, Georgia, Texas A&M, Oregon, or even LSU will be able to offer in those regards. It's simply a matter of longstanding resources networked together. Now that those things aren't policed by the NCAA under the guise of NIL there isn't a bidding war that schools outside of those few can enter and win. So what do you have to offer in place?
-NIL-it is the reality of college football now, and for the players who aren't elite superstars (high 4-5 stars) there has to be a solid baseline of options for them to see potential in. Local businesses, alumni, team sponsors, etc... all have to be present. A plan has to be in place and visible to show where kids can start, and what potential they have to reach. If you land and elite recruit or have a premiere player, his promotion has to be put out front for all to see. (i.e. the way Saban made sure to let everyone know Bryce Young has already made over 1M). Auburn currently does a laughable job with their NIL promotion. The department in charge of that simply seems inept and unmotivated. That can't be in this current reality, or it immediately takes you out of the race with any recruits of notoriety and subjects your current better players to the prospect of transferring out for better options. There needs to a synergized effort to put together a substantial operation here, no excuses.
-Playing time? Yes, that's always appealing, especially in the SEC.
This is the easiest selling point for Auburn right now! Especially at positions of need; OL, WR, DB, LB. What they have to make sure is that they are offering playing time for what has to be conceived as a competitive program. Vanderbilt can offer PT every year, too.
-Player development, yes, but that takes time. You have to show that you can build players up multiple levels from where they begin into high-level winning players and NFL prospects.
This is where it gets tricky, because it takes at least two seasons to fully see this come to fruition. You can see glimpses of it in a single year. Look at guys like Nix, who has noticeably improved, Derrick Hall, John Samuel-Shenker, etc.. conversely the OL hasn't really improved at all. This is an area where I thought Harsin's regime would excel, and still may if he's given/he chooses the time to do so.
-On field coaching? Absolutely! If you show that your schemes, strategies, and implemented fundamentals transfer onto the field on game days and give your team a chance to win at a high level, and compete with everyone you play.
This is the second area where I thought this regime would excel. We have seen some evidence of great strategy, game planning, and schematics at times. However, the PSU, TamU, MSU, and SCar games were tragic in terms of on-field coaching and decision making. Seeing poor results in that volume doesn't inspire faith from recruits-nor current players-and is something that must be addressed, remedied, and shown otherwise in very short order.
- Facilities? An absolute must have in the materialistic society we exist in! Players must know there are the physical and capital resources in place to offer them the best opportunity to progress and train at the highest levels, and exist comfortably during the high-stress life of a student athlete.
Auburn's new FOC brings them into the upper echelon of programs in this regard. It is a HUGE asset, and need to be marketed as such.
-Professional networking? The reality is that very few players make it to the NFL beyond college, and a program has to show they get their players educated, graduated, and plugged in with professionals connected to the university that offer them strong career options once they finish college.
I'm really not sure how well/poorly Auburn does this. It must be somewhere in the middle, as you don't hear positives or negatives in this regard. Don't be in the middle! Make it evident that everyone who signs with your program and sees it through will have great professional options beyond just football. That goes a long way with recruits families!
So, with all that said, where does AU stand? If for some reason Harsin leaves, the program goes in reverse for atleast the next two seasons, and that's if they manage to hire a serviceable coach in the face of one of the busiest off-seasons in recent memory. Which will be hard to do looking at how the last three coaches would have been treated. If Harsin stays, doesn't land a top 15-20 ish recruiting class, and as season similar-or worse- to this one next season, you fall further back or entrench yourself in mediocrity for at least the next few.
Ideally, this staff manages to sign a solid group, plays respectably well to finish the season, and shows a tremendous amount of development going forward. That is what would be best for Auburn. If that happens Auburn can use the factors it can control to recruit well and develop players at a high rate, and win with talented, well-coached and well-developed players. That is what builds a program for longer-term success. Beyond the first four years of Tubs, Auburn has had to rely on catching lightening in a bottle to be anything other than a second tier-SEC team.
The problem with any of this is Auburn being on the same page. Opinions that matter have to matched by their contributions. Sadly, those that have the ability to make those contributions don't have the proper mindset to provide the necessary opinions that matter, or they are apathetic to the situation as a whole. Great programs are defined by singular driven purposes. Auburn won't ever get there for more than one season at a time until there is unity in the overall purpose.
-NIL-it is the reality of college football now, and for the players who aren't elite superstars (high 4-5 stars) there has to be a solid baseline of options for them to see potential in. Local businesses, alumni, team sponsors, etc... all have to be present. A plan has to be in place and visible to show where kids can start, and what potential they have to reach. If you land and elite recruit or have a premiere player, his promotion has to be put out front for all to see. (i.e. the way Saban made sure to let everyone know Bryce Young has already made over 1M). Auburn currently does a laughable job with their NIL promotion. The department in charge of that simply seems inept and unmotivated. That can't be in this current reality, or it immediately takes you out of the race with any recruits of notoriety and subjects your current better players to the prospect of transferring out for better options. There needs to a synergized effort to put together a substantial operation here, no excuses.
-Playing time? Yes, that's always appealing, especially in the SEC.
This is the easiest selling point for Auburn right now! Especially at positions of need; OL, WR, DB, LB. What they have to make sure is that they are offering playing time for what has to be conceived as a competitive program. Vanderbilt can offer PT every year, too.
-Player development, yes, but that takes time. You have to show that you can build players up multiple levels from where they begin into high-level winning players and NFL prospects.
This is where it gets tricky, because it takes at least two seasons to fully see this come to fruition. You can see glimpses of it in a single year. Look at guys like Nix, who has noticeably improved, Derrick Hall, John Samuel-Shenker, etc.. conversely the OL hasn't really improved at all. This is an area where I thought Harsin's regime would excel, and still may if he's given/he chooses the time to do so.
-On field coaching? Absolutely! If you show that your schemes, strategies, and implemented fundamentals transfer onto the field on game days and give your team a chance to win at a high level, and compete with everyone you play.
This is the second area where I thought this regime would excel. We have seen some evidence of great strategy, game planning, and schematics at times. However, the PSU, TamU, MSU, and SCar games were tragic in terms of on-field coaching and decision making. Seeing poor results in that volume doesn't inspire faith from recruits-nor current players-and is something that must be addressed, remedied, and shown otherwise in very short order.
- Facilities? An absolute must have in the materialistic society we exist in! Players must know there are the physical and capital resources in place to offer them the best opportunity to progress and train at the highest levels, and exist comfortably during the high-stress life of a student athlete.
Auburn's new FOC brings them into the upper echelon of programs in this regard. It is a HUGE asset, and need to be marketed as such.
-Professional networking? The reality is that very few players make it to the NFL beyond college, and a program has to show they get their players educated, graduated, and plugged in with professionals connected to the university that offer them strong career options once they finish college.
I'm really not sure how well/poorly Auburn does this. It must be somewhere in the middle, as you don't hear positives or negatives in this regard. Don't be in the middle! Make it evident that everyone who signs with your program and sees it through will have great professional options beyond just football. That goes a long way with recruits families!
So, with all that said, where does AU stand? If for some reason Harsin leaves, the program goes in reverse for atleast the next two seasons, and that's if they manage to hire a serviceable coach in the face of one of the busiest off-seasons in recent memory. Which will be hard to do looking at how the last three coaches would have been treated. If Harsin stays, doesn't land a top 15-20 ish recruiting class, and as season similar-or worse- to this one next season, you fall further back or entrench yourself in mediocrity for at least the next few.
Ideally, this staff manages to sign a solid group, plays respectably well to finish the season, and shows a tremendous amount of development going forward. That is what would be best for Auburn. If that happens Auburn can use the factors it can control to recruit well and develop players at a high rate, and win with talented, well-coached and well-developed players. That is what builds a program for longer-term success. Beyond the first four years of Tubs, Auburn has had to rely on catching lightening in a bottle to be anything other than a second tier-SEC team.
The problem with any of this is Auburn being on the same page. Opinions that matter have to matched by their contributions. Sadly, those that have the ability to make those contributions don't have the proper mindset to provide the necessary opinions that matter, or they are apathetic to the situation as a whole. Great programs are defined by singular driven purposes. Auburn won't ever get there for more than one season at a time until there is unity in the overall purpose.
Last edited:
