Tuberville Forced Out At Auburn

[NT80]

85-40 in 10 years and he is forced out. This season 5-7 was their worst under him. Wouldn't we be giddy at 5-7 this year??

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/foo...uberville_N.htm

[UNT_playmaker]

1-11 season and people on this board are saying that Dodge should still ride out his contract and we should look into giving him an extension.....

What I don't understand is why does our AD give a five- year contract to Dodge right off the bat.... 3 year would be the more logicial option. I think RV thought that Dodge would turn it around right away and have some successful time at NT and five years would be beneficial from that standpoint.

[Green Dozer]

1-11 season and people on this board are saying that Dodge should still ride out his contract and we should look into giving him an extension.....

What I don't understand is why does our AD give a five- year contract to Dodge right off the bat.... 3 year would be the more logicial option. I think RV thought that Dodge would turn it around right away and have some successful time at NT and five years would be beneficial from that standpoint.

I know for a fact RV did not think Dodge would turn it around right away. I personally asked him. He knew the cupboard was bare, he worked here with Dickey, remember? Again, this program is being built from nothing, starting from scratch. Unlike some who have recently built programs, and not fielded teams the first couple of years into it, we are. And by the way, nobody has said anything about an extension on this board. But we don't have anything to lose by seeing this to the end of the contract. We were at the bottom when he started. Funny how you, Lonnie, and Shaft seemed to be resident experts. How many Div. 1 programs have you built lately?

[GreenBat]

85-40 in 10 years and he is forced out. This season 5-7 was their worst under him. Wouldn't we be giddy at 5-7 this year??

That's an average of 4 losses a year. That don't cut it at Auburn. While at NT, we'd be thrilled if a coach averaged just 4 losses a year over a 10-year span. Hell, I'd be happy if we could hire a coach that I wanted to keep 10 years. Oh well, there's another coach out there that NT can't afford.

[NT80]

That's an average of 4 losses a year. That don't cut it at Auburn. While at NT, we'd be thrilled if a coach averaged just 4 losses a year over a 10-year span. Hell, I'd be happy if we could hire a coach that I wanted to keep 10 years. Oh well, there's another coach out there that NT can't afford.

An average of 9-4 per season. I'd take that any year!

[NT80]

I know for a fact RV did not think Dodge would turn it around right away. I personally asked him. He knew the cupboard was bare, he worked here with Dickey, remember? Again, this program is being built from nothing, starting from scratch. Unlike some who have recently built programs, and not fielded teams the first couple of years into it, we are. And by the way, nobody has said anything about an extension on this board. But we don't have anything to lose by seeing this to the end of the contract. We were at the bottom when he started. Funny how you, Lonnie, and Shaft seemed to be resident experts. How many Div. 1 programs have you built lately?

The cupboard was not exactly bare. We returned many seniors with experience in 2007. The most concerning thing is 2007's worth of experience in Dodge's system has produced less results in all areas in 2008.

[GoMeanGreen1999]

Have we made any coaching changes yet? I realize it is less than a week after the last game, but areas like the sprecial teams really don't need much evaluation to determine a change is needed.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

The cupboard was not exactly bare. We returned many seniors with experience in 2007. The most concerning thing is 2007's worth of experience in Dodge's system has produced less results in all areas in 2008.

And, further, the concerning thing about 2009 is the graduation of the only two consistently productive wide receivers in our spread scheme. So, we get to start from scratch in finding targets. That will be fun times to watch. Offensive growing pains.

Neither of the two graduating receivers were recruited by Dodge. It still remains to be seen if he can even spot collegiate wide receiver talent. In two classes of about a dozen and a half WRs, we've gotten nothing close to consistency. Walk-ons are passing up his recruits on the depth chart.

[UNTLifer]

In two classes of about a dozen and a half WRs, we've gotten nothing close to consistency. Walk-ons are passing up his recruits on the depth chart.

His two classes would be freshmen and sophmores right now. Don't you think they deserve some time to develop just a little?

[Green Dozer]

And, further, the concerning thing about 2009 is the graduation of the only two consistently productive wide receivers in our spread scheme. So, we get to start from scratch in finding targets. That will be fun times to watch. Offensive growing pains.

Neither of the two graduating receivers were recruited by Dodge. It still remains to be seen if he can even spot collegiate wide receiver talent. In two classes of about a dozen and a half WRs, we've gotten nothing close to consistency. Walk-ons are passing up his recruits on the depth chart.

Walk-ons passing up recruits on the depth chart is not a bad thing. Worked pretty good for a little school in Lincoln, NE for a couple of decades. When Callahan stopped it, there program went down from there.

[LongJim]

His two classes would be freshmen and sophmores right now. Don't you think they deserve some time to develop just a little?

They SHOULD BE redshirt freshmen, and redshirted right now. But noooooo--TD's recruits should be making a difference NOW. "Either you're ready for D1 football, or your not." (see: Dodge, R.)

Edited December 4, 2008 by LongJim

[greenminer]

His two classes would be freshmen and sophmores right now. Don't you think they deserve some time to develop just a little?

Counterpoint:

Skill positions are the least likely to need developing. You usually either have the speed or you don't. Mostly, you creep up the depth chart of receiver thanks to comfort within the schemes, and some footwork. And, last I recall, our scheme came straight out of high school.

For every senior running back that gets considered for the Heisman, there are 3 Vick's, Tebows, Crabtrees, Slatons/Whites...that are dominating away from the line before they are even juniors.

But you know just as well as I do that the freshman lineman are rarely in the running for their respective awards.

Do you know why those kids dominated behind the lines? Because their coaches are playing the seniors at the most important positions on the field: the trenches.

Dodge has elected to bench Rose, Miller, etc...in favor of youth on the lines. Whether you were in favor of that or not, that's just what we dealt with this year and put our skill positions in a track race for their lives out there.

I can tell you're at least somewhat determined to shoot Lynch down. I'm not going to stand in the way, but I do think if he wasn't so abrasive or cynical to you guys you would probably, without even realizing it, be more receptive. Instead, you guys (in general, not necessarily Life) get your feathers all ruffled.

See past his tone, and you might be able to appreciate an intelligent voice around here.*

Roberson, Dibrell, King, etc were the most athletic and incredible wideouts we have seen since Ja'amel (sp) Branch was running around the Belt as a junior and senior. Casey and Stickler were beating them out because they understand the value of footwork, balance, and route precision.

Who taught them that? Stupid previous regime. And here we are, trying to justify why these newbies are not taking over.

_{*not my roll, no sirs!}

Edited December 4, 2008 by greenminer

[UNTLifer]

I'm making the assumption that "Lynch" in TFLF. If this is correct, my problem is his arguement either contradicts statements he made a couple of months ago, or he ignores the entirety of the situation only picking out the parts to make his arguements seem valid (good lawyer training).

I don't know why Rose was benched, or Menard and Bailey either, but Miller played until his knee injury. I would question why a medical redshirt is not being pursued unless they think the injury is serious enough that his rehab would be lengthy and it would be worth tieing up his scholarship when healthy kids are available.

[FirefightnRick]

Casey and Stickler were beating them out because they understand the value of footwork, balance, and route precision.

Who taught them that?

Brandon Jackson would be in the top 3 had he been available one more season.

Rick

[Mean Green 93-98]

Counterpoint:

...Dodge has elected to bench...Miller...in favor of youth on the lines.

When did this happen? Did I miss something?

[Green Dozer]

Counterpoint:

Skill positions are the least likely to need developing. You usually either have the speed or you don't.

_{*not my roll, no sirs!}

Yes, I agree, either you have speed or you don't. But, I do not think you can say these skill players don't have to adjust to the speed of everybody else (linebackers, db's, even the timing of the throws "if" from a college level qb, db's adjusting to the speed of receivers. In high school, the speed of these guys could help them recover from a mistake pretty quick, but not so much at this level. So, there is some form of development.

[Charlie NT 73]

A friend of mine, who lives in B'ham, emailed me to say Mike Leach

was going to Auburn, and that this deal had been in the works

for some time.

[UNTLifer]

Counterpoint:

Skill positions are the least likely to need developing. You usually either have the speed or you don't. Mostly, you creep up the depth chart of receiver thanks to comfort within the schemes, and some footwork. And, last I recall, our scheme came straight out of high school.

I'm confused by the point above. First you state that skill positions are the least likely to need developing and then you describe how they move up the depth chart by developing comfort and footwork.

Regarding the speed of Dodge's wide receiver recruits, have you seen Rucker, Barnett, Brigham, or Taylor run? I wouldn't call any of our recent recruits or graduating seniors burners.

[greenminer]

I'm confused by the point above. First you state that skill positions are the least likely to need developing and then you describe how they move up the depth chart by developing comfort and footwork.

Regarding the speed of Dodge's wide receiver recruits, have you seen Rucker, Barnett, Brigham, or Taylor run? I wouldn't call any of our recent recruits or graduating seniors burners.

You like to discredit others by bringing up the most minute contradictions in a statement...yet all that's really happening is you give us Captain Facepalm because our overall point still stands.

Dickey did not recruit well!

No, Dickey recruits are great!

My intended point: skill positions, moreso than any other spot on the field, have the best bet at getting playing time right away. They don't necessarily need the extra 20 - 40 lbs of muscle they'll have later, because they aren't fighting it out in the trenches on every play like the lineman are. Not as physical. I suppose on a more general sense, 'athleticism' would be more apropo than 'speed'.

Dodge recruited, what, 17 Wideouts (*possible over-estimation there*, I know) for an offense that demands an 8-deep rotation of players..and apparently more are on the way. For an 8 deep rotation! Even after some defections, I'm thinking "WTF"?

50% of Vizza's completions are leaving: Fitz (35%) and Stickler (15%). Two guys (not even Dodge's) carried half the workload that 8 guys should have shared. Before I go on making any more knee-jerk worries, it would probably be useful to get an idea of the distribution of this offense when it was clicking in Southlake. Maybe this is the norm and we should expect this year-in-and-out.

I'm going to bow out on this one. There's no way to prove/disprove either side: you can't quantify this. Except make some generalizations I think all of us can agree on: skill positions are the most likely place for freshman to get PT (or least needy of development, depending on how you choose to see it), and we need quality linemen.

I really hope Dodge starts winning next year. And gets/develops the linemen we're going to need. I have not been led to believe that either will happen.

And I miss Booger.

Edited December 5, 2008 by greenminer

[UNTLifer]

I really wasn't trying to discredit your post, I was just trying to understand you point. I do agree with you now, except I just have a hard time questioning the athleticism of players that none of us have seen take the field yet.

I just hope they live up to the "recruiting gurus" rankings. If they do, we should be okay.

[NT80]

I really wasn't trying to discredit your post, I was just trying to understand you point. I do agree with you now, except I just have a hard time questioning the athleticism of players that none of us have seen take the field yet.

I just hope they live up to the "recruiting gurus" rankings. If they do, we should be okay.

I don't pin a great deal of hope for a turnaround on our recruiting prowess. Not all results these past two seasons were from the efforts of players or on-field play. Many coaching decisions, play designs, etc. led to missed scoring opportunities or poor field position for the defense. Coaching has to improve as well as play on the field. I just don't see the great buildup to a fantastic 2009 season coming down the road.