West Virginia (PBP) recap, first quarter

OK, we're trying something a little different with the recap this week. With a nod to MGoBlog's UFR and similar associated analytical breakdowns, I'm going to go play-by-play to try and answer various questions from last Thursday's debacle: how well did Burns really play? Where and why did the defense break down so comprehensively? Was there a substantial difference in the offense's success via the I or ace sets vs. the dreaded, flightless Spread Eagle?

Now, I'm neither Type A enough nor well-versed enough in ginuwine nuts-and-bolts football analysis to offer a note-for-note reproduction of Brian's UFR, but I will assign and keep track of pluses and minuses when they're obvious and deserved, at least as best I can (the o-line will receive the cop-out catch-all designation "Line"; sorry, not willing yet to go frame-by-frame to figure out who's most responsible for opening a crease up a logjammed middle, though I'll try to single out good blocks when I find them). We'll have some of the usual recap hijinks as well. So let's see what happens, shall we?

Pregame

--ESPN opens up their coverage with gives shots of both teams de-bussing, the clearcut highlight of which is Sen'Derrick Marks doing his I LOVE PLAYING football dance through the assembled fans, dreads a-flyin' and the biggest smile you could imagine on his face. The little thermometer on my Mancrush-o-Meter? Nearing the top.
--Good news! Craig James and Jesse Palmer have been moved out of their usual Thursday night roles in the broadcast booth to play Talking Head in the studio. But ... oh no. No, no no no no no. Here's your other shoe dropping: Rece, Mark, and Lou are calling the game. Any hope we'd get cogent analysis or, in Holtz's case, sounds recognizable as human speech patterns just went out the window.
--Erin Andrews interviews Bill Stewart pregame, and you would think after she reported in no uncertain terms the chaos enveloping the West Virginia sideline as they went down in flames at Colorado, he might be less than thrilled to see her. You would be so, so wrong, as good ol' genial Coach Stew is clearly just as smitten with the concept of being interviewed on television by the pretty lady as he was when the season started. He caps his last answer for her, I kid you not, by winking at her. He does it. I swear. West Virginia could win the next three national championships, and there's still no way I'd want this kind, good-hearted folksy man coaching my multi-million dollar football team. He should be off somewhere managing Old Joe's Place instead.
--I'm like 65 percent sure he is actually speaking English, but here's what I hear as Holtz attempts to help May preview the game: "LISP LISP lisp lisp lisp, LISP, but lisp lisp LISP LISP!"

First quarter

1. Byrum (-) reassures us all about his fragile psyche by booting the opening kickoff out of bounds. When you're facing a potentially explosive offense like West Virginia's, letting them start the game on the 40 free of charge somehow seems like less than a great idea.

2. White throws a quick out that McFadden (+) dives in and breaks up splendidly.

3. 2nd-10, Auburn blitzes five. and White swings it to a wide, wide open Devine.
Bynes gets picked as he heads into the flat, and WVU picks up the easiest 13 yards they'll ever pick up. Why does Auburn's spread never, ever do this?

4. Devine sweeps right, where McNeil (+) has been quick to react and slows him until he and Bynes can converge on the tackle. Loss of 2.

5. White runs the zone read option to perfection, faking the handoff to Devine up the middle and cutting inside for 22. Auburn was slanting to the other side of the field with Bynes filling on the backside. He took Devine, Johnson covered the pitch man, and the late-arriving and futilely chasing Stevens (-) apparently had White.

6. McFadden is playing way the hell off of wideout/designated jitterbug Jock Sanders, whom White hits with a long handoff. McFadden tackles cleanly, but he's so late in arriving it's still good for 8. Wouldn't we rather force White to beat us deep than give him a free 2nd-and-2 for completing a pass at the line of scrimmage?

7. Johnson tries to pick up a crossing Saunders in zone, and this works as well as you might expect. Pickup of seven, 1st-10 on the Auburn 12. After seven plays, the read on Auburn's defensive effort is somewhere between "helpless" and "hopeless."

8. HOLY CRAP NEVERMIND! Bynes (++) reads the tricky middle screen, steps in front of the intended taregt, and when a blitzing Stevens forces White to throw without looking Bynes makes the interception. May reams White's decision, but thanks to Rhoads's blitz there was no way he could see if his guy was covered and he's not supposed to be. Holtz gives the Auburn D the credit, calling it--this is verbatim--an "outthtanding" read by Bynes. That's one bullet mercifully dodged.

9. The legends were true! Auburn opens in an ace-set with Lester as the TB and Trott lined up on the strongside just off of new starting tight Vance Smith, a faceless true freshman. Smith (-) begins the game by letting his man disengage and tackle Lester for no gain.

10. I-formation this time, Lester behind the ever-so-beefy Tristan Davis at fullback. (Note to any neutral fans reading: Davis is not, in fact, beefy.) Davis (+) gets a nice seal as Lester (-) tries the left side for 2, then fumbles forward as he hits the turf. According to the announcers (though not the PBP) Bosley makes the recovery. Replay shows Lester's knee might have been down, but this is a minus anyway as he's got to hold onto the ball. A second bullet dodged.

11. One-receiver I, 3rd-1. Lester finds a crease over the right side (Line +) as Berry stones the MLB and paves the way for seven yards. First down! Go new offense, go!

12. This time it's a TE-less, three-WR I and Auburn runs a sweep right. Berry (-) this time misreads the LB and allows him to come through untouched whilst blocking no one, allowing Lester to be dropped for a loss of one. Before this play, ESPN gives us the Auburn offense's three "Impact Players": Ben Tate, Robert Dunn, and Tommy Trott. Ladies and gents, if you've been looking for that nutshell in which to fit Auburn's offensive season, this is it.

13. Trips right on Auburn's first spread look of the game. Hawthorne's open on a six-yard out but Burns (-) badly misses on his first throw of the game, short-hopping it. Hawthorne catches on the bounce and, astoundingly, none of the officials notice it's a trap. Unbelievably bad call. Sure, it helps us now, but it's still enough to call the wisdom of bringing SEC officials with us into question.

14. Spread with 3 WR and Trott as a TE. WVU brings a seven-man blitz against Burns (+), who reads quickly and finds a releasing Trott over the middle. Hawthorne (+) makes a nice downfield block for another five yards and Auburn's 1st-and-10 business at the WVU 49.

15. Heavy I-set: two TE, one WR. Fannin carries over the right side for two as no one seems assigned to pick up the trailing WLB coming around the back side of the play.

16. Fannin as the ace-back, Smith as an H-back on 2nd-8. It's your classic "Auburn" waggle action, but the 'Eer WLB isn't buying the play-fake for a nanosecond and forces Burns to throw it away. Burns is exceedingly fortunate not take a grounding call here, since the receiver I think the official is accepting as "intended" is barely in the same zip code as the pass. (Holtz thinks it ought to be flag, arguing that "LISP lisp lisp lisp.")

17. Spread on 3rd-8 and this time WVU rushes three. Burns sees green and bolts, and Fannin and Hawthorne get in the way just enough to give Burns (+) 13 yards and a first down.

18. No-TE I again, and this time Ziemba, Green, and especially a thumping block by Davis (+) plow open a hole on the left side for Fannin to gain four (Line +). Not that it's a surprise, but these guys are indeed blocking better out of the three-point stance.

19. Heavy I, and Fannin runs behind a pulling Green and Pugh for four more (Line +). Tempted to give Fannin a minus here, though, since if he'd stuck closer to Green that lane likely would have given him a first down. Ibstead he gets tripped up in the busier middle-of-the-field crease.

20. 3rd-2, Heavy I. Line (-) fails to get a push, Fannin skips right after finding nothing on the left, and looks for all the world to have been stopped short. Startlingly generous spot gives Auburn yet another first down. Go new offense go go GO!

21. Back to the spread, and it's the zone read. I think with Burns at QB this play has a lot of potential, but the WVU backside DE (the player who gets read) has obviously seen this play a few times in practice and stays at home. Burns hands to Lester and he gains 2.

22. 2-WR ace. Lester takes a long handoff right (the action is similar to toss sweep) behind the pulling Berry and Green. Both make crushing blocks (Line +), Trott (+) holds up nicely at the point of attack, and Lester (+) makes a good cut against the flow of traffic to pick up 8. Solid execution all the way around. 1st-10 at the WVU 15.

23. Lester tries the weak side out of the two-TE ace and gets nothing. (Line -) Maybe this is why ESPN is telling us that Auburn is 118th in the country in red zone efficiency?!?!? I mean, I knew it was bad, but holy hell. (Also: why did I not know this already? I am a bad Auburn Blogger.)

24. Fannin's in, but otherwise it's the exact same formation and play as the Lester gain two plays ago, and with the exact same aweome result: Trott, Pugh, and Berry completely pwn the 'Eer defensive front and Fannin cuts forward for 11 and 1st-and-goal at the 3.

25. Heavy I, give to Fannin over the weakside. Davis makes his necessary block but Smith (-) gets totally overrun. Gain of 1. Why are we trying to run behind a true freshman on first-and-goal from the 3?

26. No-WR I with Trott as an H-back, a yard behind the right side of the line. Lester has a tiny seam, leaps, and can't clear the wash. 3rd-and-goal at the 1. Come on, Auburn.

27. AAAARRRGGGGHHHHHH. Seriously: aargh. Same formation as the play before, and a nifty sky-cam lets us see all 11 Auburn players: Burns, Davis, and Fannin in the I, Trott in the same H-back spot, and a seven-man front of Berry-Ziemba-Green-Bosley-Bart Eddins-Pugh-Smith. My best guess is that the play is designed to go inside, just behind Bosley's butt at center, with Trott crashing across the hole from the left and Eddins coming across to seal behind Bosley. Two things go wrong: 1. Burns (-) believes the play is going outside, and maybe Davis does, too; the latter blocks outside and the former tried to make the handoff while standing directly in the path Fannin wants to take 2. Bosley fails to get any kind of push (Line -) and the obstacle he and his defender create prevent Trott from getting across to make his block. He stands there uselessly, the hole is filled, Fannin loses a yard, and on comes Byrum. (It's in fast-motion and the song sucks, but you can get a glimpse of this play in this video.)

28. The kick is jarringly low, but Byrum gets it through. 3-0 Auburn.

One the one hand: Auburn's Go New Offense Go! just marched 81 plays in 20 plays--20 freaking plays, are you freaking kidding me--put three precious points on the board, gave the defense the entire first quarter almost to sit on their rumps, and gave us some hope that at least 2007's occasional quasi-competence could be achieved. On the other: 1st-and-goal from the 3 and no touchdown. Sigh. Not to mention Auburn caught a multitude of breaks from the officials to make it that far in the first place.

29. Byrum's kickoff lands at the 12 (-). Better than out-of-bounds, I guess, but it's not good enough.

Commercial break: A Bo Jackson mask on a mooing, subtitled cow standing alongside a pile of random athletic equipment (including a wooden tennis racket) and telling us chicken was to Bo as spinach was to Popeye = Commercial of the Year. I don't think I'm alone in saying that.

30. WVU tries a bubble screen, but Doolittle (+) follows the lineman who brushes by him rather than rushing White. He arrives just in time to snag the receiver by his jersey and haul him down for a loss of a yard. "WR screen broken up by DT" should tell you something of how good a play that was.

31. But McFadden (++) has one to top it, aggressively stepping in front of a WVU receiver on a deep crossing route over the middle, making the pick, and returning it to the WVU 27. YES! Two-score lead here we come! May actually plays Actual Useful Analyst for a moment, noting that White was watching his man the whole way, and I think Holtz even makes a good point by asking why WVU's throwing downfield with White instead of doing their spread-n'-shred thing. At least, I think that's what he said. He may have been discussing Hitler again. It's hard to tell.

32. Auburn comes back in the spread and runs Burns on a QB sweep left. Smith (+) and Billings (+) make secure blocks and allow Burns (+) to slice forward for five.

33. Spread, QB "draw" over the left side goes for a solid six and Ziemba and Green move the line of scrimmage back several yards. (Line +, Burns +.) See, we can run out of the spread. Sort of.

End first quarter

Verdicts: I'll tally up the pluses and minuses at the end of the next installment, but I think Vance "Not a Blocking Tight End To This Point, At Least" Smith appears to have real potential at picking up the "NABTE" mantle Trott abandoned when he moved to WR. And, you know, started blocking. Also safe to say already that with no penalties and some cavernous holes opened up, the run-blocking with this line, at least, is going to be better out of the ace or I.

Feedback: Tell me what you think of this, readers. Is this play-by-play stuff worthwhile--it's time and text-consuming, you'll note--or should I go back to the JCCW's traditional joke-and-random observation recappin' style? Or some sort of mix of the two?

2008 needs shorthand

You know how sometimes you see a good idea, like those damn velcro ball-and-ball-catching-hand-thing sets that exploded about 15 years back, and you think Aw HELL why didn't I think of that? Stupid! I coulda been rich!

Well, I've been sorta letting my brain stew over what would be a good shorthand nickname for Auburn's 2008 season, which, speaking realistically, now sees 7-5 as the wildest dream best-case scenario, 6-6 as a surprising relative success, and 5-7 as its far-and-away most probable outcome. At Rocky Top Talk, they refer to their 5-6 2005 season as the Season of Which We Do Not Speak. MGoBlog coined the now widely-used phrase "Year of Infinite Pain" to describe Michigan's 2005 season. After having it good for quite some time--2003, viscerally disappointing as it was, was still a damn sight better than seasons like these--Auburn fans are now enduring our own Season of Which we Do Not Speak/Year of Infinite Pain, and we need a name for it.

And aw HELL, it coulda shoulda been The Season of Constant Sorrow. Too bad those clever so-and-sos at RTT went and thought of it first:



Speaking as someone who still busts out his OBWAT? soundtrack every once in a while, that's good stuff, and a nice reminder that as awful as things are for us Auburn folk, at least we are--as the Pigskin Pathos's tagline says--united in misery with the team portrayed above. But it doesn't change the fact that Auburn fans need a nickname for this horrible season.

The JCCW's nominees:

1. Season of DEATH and/or 2008(=DEATH), a la this still-wonderful fanpost at TrackEm.
2. the Season of Gnashed Teeth
3. with a nod to RTT and *cough* a certain popular series of books for young adults, the Season Which Must Not be Named
4. the Year of Fail (possibly Year of FAIL, if you prefer the all-caps emphasis, which would certainly be deserved)
5. the Omega Season, since the apocalyptic overtones feel appropriate

Leave your choice and/or other suggestions in the comments. Left to my own devices, the JCCW will begin putting either 1, 4, or possibly 5 into use later this week, but feedback would be appreciated.

Blogpollery, Week 9

Sorry for the delay on content this a.m. Computer access problems.

You would think teams won the fringe of the top 25 would want to be ranked. Georgia Tech, Northwestern, Virginia Tech, and Boston College would disagree with you. The back half of the poll continues to go through more turnover than ... than ...the machine, at McDonald's, that keep the apple turnovers warm.

That was horrible. I apologize. And hate Mondays. Anyway, your weekly JCCW ballot:

Rank	Team	Delta
1	Texas	--
2	Alabama	--
3	Penn State	--
4	Florida	1
5	Oklahoma	2
6	Texas Tech	8
7	Georgia	2
8	Southern Cal	2
9	Oklahoma State	5
10	Utah	--
11	Boise State	--
12	TCU	4
13	Ohio State	5
14	Ball State	5
15	Tulsa	5
16	Minnesota	5
17	Florida State	9
18	Missouri	8
19	Michigan State	5
20	Maryland	5
21	North Carolina	5
22	Oregon State	4
23	Pittsburgh	10
24	Connecticut	2
25	LSU	13

Dropped Out: Georgia Tech (#15), Boston College (#17), South Florida (#18), Northwestern (#22), Virginia Tech (#23).

1-3: Texas is now an unassailable No. 1; they'll have to lose for Alabama to take the top spot. But likewise, Penn St. isn't a threat (in the JCCW's book, at least) to snag No. 3. "Alabama 31, Georgia 0" in Athens remains the most stunning, impressive scoreline of the season and the Nits' schedule--even after the win in Columbus and with Oregon St. on the rise--just doesn't have the juice to overcome it.

4-9: All six of these teams have something substantial to hang their hat on: Florida's LSU beatdown, Oklahoma's TCU win and general blowouterrific excellence, Texas Tech's undefeatedness and legitimizing annihilation in Lawrence last Saturday, Georgia's win in Baton Rouge, Southern Cal's Ohio St. win, and Okie St.'s win in Columbia. With so little to separate them, I basically said "the hell with parsing the resumes" and ranked them in order of how good I think these teams are, with a slight nudge in Tech's favor for being undefeated, even against a schedule that's still quite, quite questionable; it's not like UGA's or Okie St's victims have been terribly impressive aside from their singular big victories anyway.

10-12, 14-15: Honestly, Boise's getting by on their reputation a bit with this vote; Oregon just hasn't accomplished enough to this point to really justify ranking them this high. But the Broncos are also not going to lose again this season, so eh, screw it, I'll just keep them here until the end of the year. Ball ranks ahead of Tulsa by virtue of 1. the Navy win 2. the ever-so-light burnishing of the Indiana blowout 3. having not been seriously challenged once all season whereas Tulsa scraped by SMU. But the Golden Hurricane are still probably a tad underrated by the mainstream polls; no, they haven't beaten anyone of substance, but they've also obliterated teams like New Mexico, Rice, UTEP, and UCF that have on occasion proven to be competitive with larger programs. Besides: who of the motley crew ranked below them would you nominate to move up?

13, 16-17: Man, I wanted to drop the Buckeyes lower. But they've beaten the other two Big 10 teams below them in the poll and their two losses are to top-10 teams. This is where they belong. Minnesota and Florida St. don't have a whole lot in terms of quality victories--The 'Noles home win over a Va. Tech team down two QBs is still probably the best one on either team's resume--but hey, having only one loss this late into the year counts for something.

18-21: Here comes the two-loss parade, finally. With the Illinois victory having lost almost all of its luster over the last few weeks, Missouri still doesn't have any real eye-popping wins to speak of, but whatever, they've been blowing said lesser lights away and the losses are understandable. The order of the other teams here is virtually interchangeable.

22: Yep, Oregon St. Two of their losses are on the road at Penn St. and Utah; the third, yes, is Stanford, but I think a win over USC--miles and miles and miles better than anything any of these other bottom-of-the-poll teams have to offer--is enough to alleviate that.

23-25: If it was just their Big East wins UConn and Pitt would be well out of the poll, but the Huskies still have the Virginia and Baylor wins as well as the freshly-baked thumping of previously one-loss Cincinnati; Pitt still has the W's over Iowa and an underrated Navy team. They belong. As for LSU, their best win is at South Carolina and after that ... at Auburn? vs. Miss. St.? A loss in two weeks to Alabama would knock them out of the poll.

Waitlisted: BYU probably sneaks back into the poll with a win at halfway-decent Colorado St. next week, but to place them above, say, Tulsa right now--when the Cougs' best win is "home to UCLA" and Tulsa pounded their one common opponent (New Mexico) by a substantially greater margin than BYU did--is madness. Cal and Oregon are close, but neither has wins over any of the other "second-tier" Pac-10 teams like, well, each other, Oregon St., Arizona, or even Stanford; W's against Arizona St., UCLA, and Washington don't cut it. South Florida getting into the poll ahead of Pitt is just as stupid as ranking them ahead of the Panthers was last week. Way to go, pollsters!

Auburn content coming soon.

BlogPoll Roundtablin'

I missed the first few of these, but eh, it's Friday afternoon and I want to get something up while I've got a sec. So here we go. Nebraska blog Corn Nation is hosting. And without further ado ...

1. We’re about half way through the season. Has your team met your expectations, wildly exceeded them, or are you about to light the torches and storm your athletic department demanding blood?

The last one, I guess. The blood thing.

2. In an election year, all sorts of promises will be made, few will be kept. What is one promise or item you thought you could count on that hasn’t come to pass yet this season? Is there still a chance?

As an Auburn fan, I've got approximately 1,762 different options with which to answer this question. So rather than force the JCCW's readers to read through another bout of WOE IS US, I'll disclose that I'm fairly disappointed in Oregon, who I had pegged preseason as the eighth-best team in the country. Sure, I had Clemson a notch higher, but when Tommy Bowden is involved in a team-wide collapse, how surprised can you really be? The Ducks, on the other hand, have lost to Boise St., gotten their doors blown off by USC, and had to slog their way past mediocrities like Purdue and UCLA. I know they're working on their 37th-string QB by now and deserve some leniency for it, but still, seven-point home wins over the ragtag Bruins were not what I signed up for. To the extent that I signed up. Which is not very much.

3. Georgia #1... No, USC #1.… No, Oklahoma #1.… No, Texas #1! Who’s the real #1 team, and who do you think will make it to the big BCS National Title game?

Wow, this must be what it's like to be Bruce Feldman or somebody. If by "real No. 1" I'm being asked who deserves to be ranked No. 1, well, we're all pretty well in agreement that's Texas, right? If by "real No. 1" I'm being asked which team is currently the best team in the country, my sneaky suspicion is that it's Florida, who's both looked competent on defense and has started to show the kind of DUCK AND COVER explosiveness their collection of offensive talent is capable of. But if the "real No. 1" is the team that will win the national title, my wager would actually be on Penn St. at this point. Of the current Big Three national title contenders, Alabama is the one who looks most likely to lose and I like Penn St.'s defense better than I do Texas's. Plus, come on: the Big 10 has to get it done one of these years, right?

4. In only a few weeks, college football fans get to be treated with the obligatory and annual “We Need a Playoff” screaming. Well, you don’t get a playoff, but I’ll let you make one change to the BCS (and no, you can’t cop out and have the BCS commit suicide) to make the world a better place. What is your change?

Replace the coaches' poll with the BlogPoll. We have more time to devote to getting ballots right (not that it always helps) and we have enough voters that unlike with the coaches, out biases are largely held in check. The BlogPoll is still far, far from perfect, but it's better than what the coaches are putting out. (Could I have a second change? 'Cause I'd like to go back to just four BCS games and just give the mid-majors one automatic slot. Having a "BCS title game" instead of a Rose Bowl or Sugar Bowl in which the national champion is decided was a bad, bad idea.)

5. Using this year ONLY - no historical references - respond to the statement “The Big 12 is a better conference than the SEC." There’s nothing sillier than conference wars, but then again, there’s nothing sillier than how SEC fans respond to any challenge to their supremacy. Aim, Fire!

Actually, the implication SEC fans aren't rational enough to realize we're in an off-year and that the Big 12 is probably neck-and-neck with us bothers me a heck of a lot more than any implication about the SEC itself. Yes, congratulations, Big 12 fans: your conference has Southeast Missouri Stated and Eastern Washgintoned and Sam Houston Stated its way all the way to the top of the polls, and yes, it's quite possible your teams deserve to be there. But since both our conferences could stand to do more to measure themselves in the nonconference portion of their slates, there isn't any definite statement to be made outside of "The Big 12 has much better quarterbacking" or "the SEC does probably have better defenses." We'll have to wait until bowl season for anything more. Until then, howzabout we assume it's a draw and call a ceasefire on the blanket proclamations, either about the conferences themselves or the fans affiliated, hmm?

The Works, "Auburn"-style

This is the problem. Dr. Saturday on the game:

At halftime, I was ready to gush about Auburn's resilience and return to form off a solid month of pessimism and decline. This really was Tuberville Classic: a run-heavy, 20-play drive to open the game, a massive advantage in time of possession, a crazy-like-a-fox onside kick, and even a touchdown, Kodi Burns' scramble to put the Tigers up 17-6, off the old Auburn standby, the play-action waggle with the shallow tight end cross. You can't get more Auburn than the first quarter and a half.

But aye, there's the rub: that Auburn has had some mighty fine triumphs these last couple of seasons, but it never won a championship. It went a hella-fortunate 11-2 in 2006 and scrambled to 9-4 in 2007. If you want to say this was Auburn in 2002 and 2003, it didn't win so much as a divisional title either of those years, uh, either.

The offense that did win a title for Auburn (and the 2005 version that was one made Vaughn field goal on the bayou from quite possibly doing the same) was not what we saw last night; they may have used some of the same plays, but those teams threw with aggression and effectiveness rather than as a last resort, they tested opponents with the deep ball repeatedly, they ran sweeps and off-tackle plays and went right up the gut and never let the opposing rush defense get into a groove. Obviously, an awful lot of those 2004 and 2005 teams' success was the personnel on hand--an awful, awful lot--but the stereotypical "Auburn" play-calling and offensive design in the first half of last night's game did not bear a whole lot of resemblance to the offenses of 2004 and 2005.

Even if it said schemes did succeed in that first half and even if it had succeeded in the second half, we've already seen the ceiling of that offense. Going forward, Auburn needs to be something besides "Auburn." Whether that's best accomplished by employing a fresh spread-style operation or by recruiting by hook or crook (well, OK, not "crook" please) a second generation of Campbell-McNeill-Cadillac-Brown players that would allow a Borgesesque scheme to re-blossom into the 2004-2005 editions, I don't know. Whatever happens to the offense here in these last four games, it had better just be a stopgap. "Auburn" shouldn't be codeword for "the very opposite of explosive offense"--particularly not when that offense has fallen short of where we want it to finish the last three years.

The usual suspects react. Acid Reign with a point I completely agree with regarding Auburn's problems on defense:

Our corners were generally good, but Auburn's safety play was nearly non-existent. Auburn's two safeties have become nearly invisible, neither covering, nor making tackles. We're really searching for answers, once the play moves past the line of scrimmage up the middle.

Not just on running plays, either; the first WVU touchdown resulted from Mike McNeil just not seeing the receiver who caught the pass and breaking instead on an already-covered receiver several yards in front of him. And where on earth is the battering-ram Zac Etheridge we saw last year?

At TWER Jeremy makes a point I really wish I'd made myself:

A quick thought on a contributing factor, a nauseating trend: The quarterback debate has raged, the Franklin fiasco unfolded, but this anguished season has also been marked with what now, eight games in, appears to be habitually shoddy 4th quarter clock management. For years the dice have been rolled properly against all odds and Tuberville would vanilla the hell out of the 4th quarter and we’d hang on to win or come behind at just the right time. This year, the Plinko is screwed up. Maybe it’s just me, but a strange complacency seems to rule our come-from-behind strategy, as if a 5th quarter will flicker on the scoreboard and eventually make wise an uncalled timeout or a decision not to go for it - only four yards - down two scores with six minutes (or even eight minutes on the possession before!) left and facing a most unpleasant and unstoppable greased midget able to spin broken plays into 30 yard runs at will. There was just no way, no way in the world we were going to score twice the way things were going.

On WVU's final drive, by watching the clock tick-tick-tick away from 4 minutes to 3:15 to 2:30 without even bothering to use one of his timouts, Tubby basically told his team he had given up. Is it any wonder they responded by laying down and letting Devine walk in for that final score?

In one of several choice Grotus Acorn bits, he wishes for the spreads of heaven*:

So when I watched that game... when I watched the play-action screen go for a first down, the zone read run to perfection, simple swing passes rocket through our secondary like Patriot missiles... I thought if only we had done that. And in a bizarre, Stockholm Syndrome-like turn of events, I kind of turned off. It was fun watching West Virginia's plays succeed, because they were good plays and well-executed. Yes, it sucked mightily that it was happening to Auburn, but in West Virginia I saw a shadow of the Spread Eagle and I exhaled.

Like Isaac, who watched his eldest son sell his birthright and himself was deceived, as I watched my Esau of the plains get clobbered by the mountaineers I could only think this is what what I wanted for you.

I wasn't expecting the spread-n'-shred overnight, but ... yeah.It didn't have to be this way.

The MSM didn't have much of interest to say--same-ol' waily-waily about Tubby's job prospects and a few cliched quotes. K-Scar's "2001 all over again LOLZ" column did have one interesting tidbit to pass along:

The defense, which had been a solution most of the time, gave up more points than any Auburn defense to any team not named Georgia in the Past six years.

Yay.

Pollwatch. Before I started voting in the Blog Poll, I took as a given that the AP, Harris, and particularly the coaches' voters (be they the actual coaches or their SID's) were ignorant slack-asses who slapped their ballots together at the last minute based on 1) team reputations forged in the late 1980s 2) win-loss record. Now that I'm filling out my own weekly top-25 and finding it ... um ... not all that difficult, I'm realizing exactly how "ignorant" and "slack-assed" we're talking about here. Exhibit A, your honor, is the Register's Tommy Hicks's "logic" in putting together his Harris Poll ballot:

This week's ballot includes newcomers (for me) Pitt, Florida State, Boston College and Georgia Tech. Still no Tulsa because I don't believe it has played a quality schedule thus far.

Well, Tulsa's been pretty impressive in all but one of their wins, but that's a fair argument. So, if you're a schedule guy, Tommy, then I'm assuming Texas Tech (schedule: 103rd-ranked) and Florida St. (126th, plus a loss to an unranked team) are going to come in for some punishment too, huh?

-- 3. Penn State

-- 4. Oklahoma

-- 5. Texas Tech

-- 6. Florida ...

-- 20. Minnesota

-- 21. Florida State

-- 22. Ball State

If there wasn't so staggeringly much on the line with these stupid things, I might not care. But dammit, there is. Tommy Hicks' ballot matters. It's his responsibility to look past back-loaded joke schedules and meaningless 2007 results (this is a big chunk of Kansas's and Missouri's appeal) to rank teams where they deserve to be ranked. And he, and dozens of his fellow poll voters, just aren't doing it. (While the stakes are lower and they do have the Big 12 impostors lower-ranked than their AP and coaches' poll brethren, Blog Poll voters certainly aren't innocent; when even Stewart Mandel has figured out that Kansas didn't belong in the poll this week and Missouri's only in the bottom five, we can't exactly hold our blogging heads high.)

Etc. The Plainsman confuses malaria with smallpox in this column about the D-Rays dropping the "D," but that doesn't make it any less funny ... Getting a jump on next week's opponent, Red Solo Cup argues Ole Miss isn't as talented as people (specifically Arkansas fans) might have you believe.

Friday Knee-jerk: Whatever

Oh, I should be so, so angry. This is the final year of Brad Lester and Tyronne Green and Robert Dunn and almost certainly Sen'Derrick Marks and a ton of other Tigers who defeated Alabama three times (minimum), took us to 11-2 in 2006, etc., and who I would love to buy a beer. Four of five of our offensive linemen returned, all of our receivers, all but a handful of defenders. The schedule handed us LSU and Georgia at home and replaced Florida with a crippled shadow of Tennessee. And if ever Auburn needed a strong season to turn the--excuse me while I vomit on my keyboard--Tide, this was it. In short: this was supposed to be Auburn's year.

Instead, the odds are now overwhelmingly in favor of Auburn's year ending at 5-7, without a bowl bid, and with fans squabbling angrily amongst themselves about what Auburn ought to do with it. As an Auburn fan, we are living the worst-case scenario, and I should be breaking things as I type this instead of typing.

But now, last night, you know, whatever. The rage is gone. It was there after the Vandy game, when it became obvious the season--as in, the season this team should have had--was over. I tried to keep it away from the blog because EVERYTHING ABOUT THIS TEAM SUCKS UP TO AND INCLUDING THE UNIFORM COLORS AND HELMET MANUFACTURERS rants aren't any fun to read and don't do much for the cause of rational fan enlightenment. But yeah, that night? Pissed. Swearing. Suggesting Chris Todd's throwing arm be amputated since it's obviously of no use to him or any member of society any more. Looking up gypsy curses for use against Tony Franklin and the future generations of Tony Franklin's family. Drinking, heavily. The whole routine.

This West Virginia game, though ... I mean, if you were stunned, shocked, or heartbroken by Auburn giving up a double-digit lead, going backwards offensively in the second half, and eventually losing to a halfway decent team, I'd like to know where you've been for the first seven games of this season. This is what this Auburn team does, this is their raison d'etre, their modus operandi, their fundamental identity: they score early, build a lead, then watch it dissolve and if they're playing an offense quarterbacked by someone more competent than Wesley Carroll or Jonathan Crompton, see it disappear completely.

Sure, I let myself believe otherwise when Byrum recovered that onsides kick and Auburn was one more good drive away from a three-score lead. But I wasn't surprised when that belief trickled away as the half came to a close, either. You could see this game in the microcosm of one play early in the second quarter, when WVU had just taken over and had first down on their own 27. White faked the zone handoff going right, then came back to run the option with Devine going left. Defending on that side were defensive end Gabe McKenzie and weakside linebacker Merrill Johnson, both seniors (albeit in one case a senior who's played tight end for three years). White made a slight tilt upfield, and both McKenzie and Johnson stepped forward towards the quarterback. Simple pitch to Devine, and the easiest 36 yards he'll ever pick up. Remember: this is after a bye week's worth of preparation with a defensive coordinator who's spent the last several years devising strategies to beat WVU plays exactly like this one.

That's how things were going to go in this game, just as that's how things have gone all season. There are reasons to think McKenzie and Johnson could make that play, just as there were reasons to think this would be Auburn's year. For whatever reason--players, coaches, the cruel and unyielding fates--it didn't happen, hasn't happened, isn't going to happen. If this was Playstation NCAA Football, I'd simulate us ahead to the Iron Bowl, see what happened there out of sheer, blinding hope and faith, and then get to recruiting.

As is, I'll keep watching, keep cheering, keep expecting the worst. But get angry? Nope. The rage is all used up, at least until the annual Iron Bowl blood boil. It hurts to say it, but this Auburn team just isn't worth it any more.

Random observations

--Usually I follow a specific script for Knee-jerks, but for some reason, Friday or whatever, I don't wanna. You get bullets.

--The one truly disheartening thing about this game was the final shattering of any illusions about this being a Classic-Heroic-Vintage-Game-Winning Auburn defense. Blameless, they most certainly were not. West Virginia has fantastic athletes and the scheme they inherited from Rodriguez has baffled many an opposing defense, but 7.7 yards a freaking carry is an out-and-out joke. No one on the Maountaineers' sorry excuse for a schedule-to-date had been worse stopping that run game, a I-AA team and Marshall included. Abysmal.

--Wes Byrum, I know 44 yards isn't exactly a gimme for any college kicker. But when you've already missed four field goals less than 40 yards this season, screwed the pooch on an extra point in a one-point loss, and play for a team that needs every single point it can possibly scrape together, you get no sympathy. Hit your damn field goals, please.

--For the second straight game, Auburn's special teams and defense handed the offense a whole series of short fields--Auburn started drives on WVU's 27, 31, and 38, and once on their own 44--and finished the game with all of 17 points. The Tigers averaged 3.9 yards a play--an improvement on their last three games, but still well short of where they were against Mississippi St. and LSU. After the opening drive, Auburn collected all of 179 yards. Were they better, as expected? Yeah. Are they anywhere near "good" yet? Not even close.

--At least our quarterback play was acceptable, since I'm not sure you could ask a whole lot more from Burns than he gave. He hit several sharp third-down throws, was properly productive on the ground, and didn't turn the ball over. (The one pick on his stat line came on the game's final Hail Mary play.) The lack of throws down the field hurt his final YPA and he was off on a handful of throws, but between the buttoned-down game plan and the exceedingly motley crew of receivers he's working with, I'm not sure how much blame he ought to get for that. That he should have begun the season as the starter only became more obvious, not that I think it would change where Auburn's sitting right now, record-wise.

--So why did the offense struggle so badly? Primarily, because these are the final collective numbers for Auburn's running back firm of Lester, Tate, Fannin, and Smith: 29 carries, 74 yards, 2.55 average-per-carry. Tate, in particular, was a sinkhole: five carries, five yards. He's a solid back, but I just don't see why he's taking carries away from Lester or Fannin. I just don't.

--Has anyone ever seen a punter down his own punt? Ever?

--The tackling problems: due to discouragement? Season-long fatigue? Poor coaching? Just bad form on the part of the players? All or none of the above? It baffles me that something as fundamental as "wrapping up" could be a strength early in the season and a glaring, throbbing weakness just four or five games later.

--Auburn has held the lead at halftime in every game they've played this season and has led by double-digits at one point in all four of their losses. They are 4-4. Is there any other logical explanation for this other than that opposing coaching staffs are making better in-game adjustments and/or that Auburn gets fatigued in second halves? I would love to hear one.

--Four more games, Auburn fans. We'll get through this together, you and I.

Friday Thursday preview: West Virginia

The good news is that this guy almost has to carry their team. The bad news is that he's good enough to carry them and probably two other teams besides.

Man alive, remember how this was supposed to be one of the Games of the Year, not only for the participants but on the national landscape of college football? How this was going to be the game that either took Auburn from potential SEC West winner enjoying a good-but-not-great season to national player or shut up West Virginia's BCS title-game skeptics with a bona fide SEC scalp? How everyone in the country would turn away from the World Series long enough to check out two fast-paced top-15 teams battle it out in a thrilling atmosphere?

Nevermind all that now, obviously. Prepare yourself instead for Disappointment Bowl 2008! Loser gets to play Clemson* next week.

At stake: For Auburn, I more-or-less covered this earlier today. It'd be really, really nice to take another step on the road towards Shreveport (or Birmingham) and from the fan's perspective it'd be wonderful for the vortex of PROGRAM IN CHAOS stories to dissipate for a week-plus, but honestly, that lower-tier bowl bid and the three critical weeks of practice that come with it are about the biggest thing on Auburn's table tonight.

As for West Virginia, there's still time to climb back into the polls and all the way into a New Year's Day (or better) bowl bid if they can continue their phoenix-like rise from the ashes of those two early-season embarrassments at ECU and Colorado. Lose tonight to a reeling, legitimately bottom-third-of-the-SEC team like Auburn at home, however, and I have to think that they're both going to find themselves summarily dismissed from any kind of national consciousness and the heat on Bill Stewart turned up to a seriously uncomfortable degree.

For what it's worth--not much--both teams will also have a chance to strike a blow in the eternal, unending Conference Wars. The Big East probably has a little more to lose here than the SEC has to gain. If you care, and you probably shouldn't.

When West Virginia has the ball: they're not going to throw it much. The 'Eers are a stunning 113th in the country in passing offense and 115th in yards-per-attempt; both marks fall short of even Auburn's hapless passing game, and WVU doesn't even have the excuse of playing a difficult schedule, with their five D-I opponents ranking 58th, 56th, 103rd, 23rd, and 82nd in pass defense despite having gotten to face West Virginia. To be fair a 10-2 TD-INT ratio gives them a spiffy overall QB rating, but even that takes a hit when you realize five of those TDs came against I-AA Villanova. This is a grim, grim picture, and it's not affected much by Pat White's occasional injury-related absence--he's averaging just 5.7 an attempt despite getting the benefit of the Villanova numbers.

Too bad for Auburn the running game's such a decisively different story. Despite the departure of Rodriguez and OC Calvin Magee, the 'Eers ridonkulous backfield and senior-laden offensive line are still rushing at almost their previous clips, ranking 13th in the country with 225 yards a game. Pat White and Noel Devine are both averaging more than six yards a carry, and if you round up just a tad, Rutgers is the only team yet this season who's held WVU to less than five yards a carry as a team. These guys are going to get their yards on the ground as long as the oft-injured White finishes the game; their worst performance of the season came against Syracuse, with White sitting the whole game on the bench with a head injury.

There are a few caveats for the hopeful Auburn fan, however, even if White plays all 60 minutes. First, none of the 'Eers opponents-to-date rate better in rushing defense than ECU at 67th; Auburn currently ranks 25th. Second is that the passing attack has been so feeble that even with the ground attack, WVU ranks only 79th in total offense. Their yard-per-play average ranks about 20 spots better, which would indicate that while they're capable of springing the big play, they're not good at sustaining drives. Thus the 605 yards of combined offense in their two losses that amounted to all of 17 points. If Auburn can avoid handing the home team big plays or short fields to work with, it should be able to keep the game in the teens-to-low-20s and within striking distance.

When Auburn has the ball: who the hell knows?

Well, actually, we do know that we're going to both a) see plenty of Kodi Burns, and likely an entire game's worth b) see many more three-point stances and run-first formations. Betwene these two moves, I'm expecting Auburn's rushing attack to be much improved. Like, those first two drives against Vandy-improved.

Even with that improvement, though, it's questionable how much Auburn's going to accomplish on the ground against a surprisingly stout WVU D ranked 37th in the country. The 'Eers only returned one member of their three-man front, but the linebackers (led by leading tackler Mortty Ivy) are one unit that's lived up to Stewart's preseason gushing. Syracuse and Colorado are the only teams that have even approached four-yards-a-carry against the 'Eers thus far.

But ah, again there's some good news: even for all of Auburn's ground-game difficulties, they rank about the same as the aforementioned Orange and Buffaloes. With a better commitment to the ground game, the bye week preparation, Burns playing the whole game, and Brad Lester allegedly healthy again, Auburn should be a much better rushing team than those numbers indicate. It's not going to be 2004-2005 party time again, but this should be a decent game on the ground for Auburn.

In the air, though ... Eh. WVU's stats aren't as impressive as on the ground--they're 59th--but they've improved as the season has gone along (Rutgers is the only team to make even 6.0 yards an attempt in their last four) and of course 105th-ranked Auburn has yet to accomplish anything via the pass outside the LSU game. And we're tossing a guy into the fire who through two seasons has yet to prove himself remotely consistent as a passer.

The forecast from here is for Auburn to dial up a 2007-esque heavy dose of the ground game with the occasional surprise Burns pass. If Auburn can get some push up front against the 'Eers three-man line and if Burns can find his receivers and if Auburn can finish the drives they tossed away against Arkansas--the 0-to-3 TD-to-INT ratio is the stat that cost them that game--Auburn could reach that same teens-to-low-20s scoring plateau. But that's a lot of ifs, and expecting anything more is hoping for the moon.

When special teams are on the field: For God's sake Auburn, keep theb all away from Devine and Jock Sanders as best you can. Because if we don't, this will be a sore spot--they've got a very good punter and it seems unlikely Davis is going to break a big one two games running. As always, Byrum has to be ready to get points out of Auburn's precious few scoringish drives, not that I have any faith any more he will be.

Intangible reason for worry: SEC teams, if you haven't noticed, have not had much luck at all against these guys the last couple of years and if that's because conference pride matters to them, well, it's still going to matter more to them than it will to Auburn. Of course, maybe things will change thanks to Auburn's ...

Intangible reason for confidence: Paul Rhoads. Actually, this is more a tangible thing. If WBGV is right and the offense is going to stick closer to Rodriguez's schemes, Auburn should be even more ready for that than they would be otherwise.

Three Wishes: 1. No WVU run longer than 25 yards; Auburn must make them drive the field. 2. No more than one three-and-out when backed up inside Auburn's own 20; Auburn must make them drive the field. 3. Auburn wins the turnover battle; Auburn must make them drive the field.

Success is / failure is: A win / a loss. This item should be retired at this point, actually, save for the UT-Martin game.

Your bottom line: Flip a coin. WVU's season-to-date has shown that when facing any kind of competent defense, they're not going to explode for the points-a-lanche that buried so many other opponents over the past couple of years. At the same time, at home, expecting them to get held to 3 again (as against ECU) seems to be asking too much. At home, I'd peg them for either 17 or 20 points.

As for Auburn, even as bad as the offense has been, they've still found a way (thanks, defense and special teams!) to score two TDs or more in every game save the Miss. St. debacle, and I do honestly believe the Vandy/Arkansas fiascoes were the rock bottom. Between that slight tick of improvement and some defensive and special teams help, I'd peg them for either 17 or 20 points.

In short, this will be yet another game for Auburn that comes down to the fourth quarter, the final possession, a single play. (Have you realized that Auburn's last five games have been decided by a total of 12 points?) If Auburn makes that play, they win. They don't, they lose. Is there any point in actually predicting the outcome of a single play? It seems like Auburn's due, and Lord knows I hope they are, but ...

And so, in one final attempt to look spectacularly wrong ...



Auburn 20, West Virginia 17; or West Virginia 20, Auburn 17. Ask your coin which one.

*The only other unranked team from the AP preseason top 10.

Franklin

WVU preview still to come, but dadgummit I suppose I can't really get away with ignoring the Franklin thing until tomorrow, since by then we'll have a game to talk about.

Anyways: as you undoubtedly are already aware of, the long-awaited "Franklin Comes Alive" media blitz kicked off yesterday, as detailed in a dozen places including here, here, here, here, etc.

And from this Auburn's fan's perspective, the only real developments out of all the interviewin' and newsprintin' and Internet-typin' are these:

1. Franklin's not bitter. Given his whistle-blowing history and tendency to shoot straight from the hip, it was fair to think Franklin might feel he'd been grievously wronged by Tubby or stabbed in the back by "his" assistants, and would subsequently unload both barrels as soon as he started talking. This was not the case in the least:

"He probably did the best thing. Because if it was either me or three or four guys, it's a lot easier to fire one guy than three or four. Especially when you've got guys you've been with a long, long time" ...

"I think in the beginning they [the offensive assistants] all tried to do what was asked of them. I think it was human nature that they all reverted back when it wasn't working" ...

"Shoot, it was a unique experience," Franklin said. "I'm glad I had the opportunity. Sorry it didn't work."

This sentiment is likely airbrushed a little for public consumption, but regardless this just doesn't paint a picture of a guy who's sworn he'll get back at those bastards one day, they'll pay for what they've done to him, how could those fools throw away what they had, etc. Franklin might not quite be wearing tie-dye and love beads, but he's cool with what happened, man. Peace.

2. The portrayal of his last day as Franklin goin' medieval on everyone's ass was mostly accurate. Back once again to Forde:

"I had a George Patton speech of more modern times, with all the players and coaches there," Franklin added. "There were some things the players and coaches needed to hear about being responsible. I had owned up to my responsibility and publicly tried to take the blame every time I was asked. It was time for them to do the same.

"Some of them hated me for it, I'm sure, but it worked. I made an attempt that I either won the football team and got them back in my hands, or I lost them. I wasn't going to sit and watch it all sink with my thumb in my mouth. I was going to take every approach I knew to make it work. And I really think it worked."

Yeah, safe to say on a staff where friction had already piled up a ton of straw on the proverbial camel's back, this probably broke it.

And that's it. Everything else--the disconnect between Franklin and his staff, the suddenness of the firing, Franklin's regret at having accepted the job without bringing on at least one of his own assistants, even Tubby's hands-off and spread-resistant game day approach--we knew with some degree of certainty already.

Franklin also confirmed one other detail that is, unfortunately, worth pointing out. I don't buy at all Ray Melick's attempt to twist Franklin's words into a "something's rotten in the state of Denmark" screed--

"The biggest thing is, I don't think it's all Tommy's fault," Franklin said. "The pressure at Auburn is incredible. The standards are such that you don't just win, you have to win every game. What they've done in winning 50 games in five years is remarkable, beating Alabama six times in a row.

"It's an amazing job those guys have done."

--but Franklin's insistence that the problems go beyond him or beyond his predecessor tells us another thing we already knew: the offensive changes this offseason have to go beyond hiring another random OC as a facelift. "This wasn't working. You fired a really good football coach. And you had a good coach before me and you fired him. It's not like it was perfect before me and everything went bad," Franklin said.

And though I'm still far from convinced he's the "really good football coach" he claims to be, the rest of this is accurate. It wasn't working. Borges was a good coach. Everything didn't go bad just because Franklin arrived. The bottom line really is, as Franklin points out, that substantial change is needed to make Auburn into a successful offensive team again.

Special Guest Enemy: West By God Virginia

Non-conference games and the fact that the teams involved haven't appeared on Raycom Sports at 11:30 a.m. Saturday for your perusal always bring with them a greater sense of "Who are these guys?" uncertainty. So the JCCW is particularly happy to continue its Special Guest Enemy Q&A series, this week featuring Charley West of leading Mountaineer blog West By God Virginia, who was kind enough to take time out of consorting with our enemies to answer a few questions about the 'Eers in advance of tonight's game. As always, the JCCW's Q's are in bold, Charley's A's in quotes. Enjoy.



1. With the Marshall, Rutgers, and Syracuse wins (somewhat) righting the ship, is Bill Stewart positioned for another year at the helm despite his early-season, um, difficulties? What would it take for him to lose his job just a year into it?

"Well, if he had lost to Marshall, I'm not 100% sure he would have made it outside the stadium, let alone keep his job for another year. Outside of the team totally imploding over the next few months, I think that would have been the only thing to get him fired in year #1. Kind of the same thing with Kragthorpe last year at Louisville. But we all know the honeymoon is long over, and he'll need at least 8 wins next year to see year #3."

2. We heard a lot of talk about the changes in the West Virginia offense in the offseason, but other than just the general downturn in effectiveness, how has the offense you've seen over these first six games actually changed in terms of scheme and/or play-calling?

"We seem to run around a lot before the ball is snapped, so that's exciting. I don't think the opposing defense scares, but at least our players are staying warm during the games. It's obvious that you can't teach senior players new tricks. Our quarterback and offensive line were very good at what they did for the past few years. It was silly to believe that they could just change overnight (see: Auburn's offense, circa Tony Franklin) (Hey! That's ... kind of accurate I guess. Sigh.--ed.)"

3. WVU's passing offense is currently, uh, I won't mention where they're ranked but it's below Auburn, which sort of blows my mind given how bad our quarterbacking has been. Is this simply due to Pat White being unable to throw the ball at this level or is there more to it? And how important an issue is this to you given the 'Eers' success on the ground?

"I have a feeling we'll rely more and more on zone running for the rest of the year. It's our bread and butter and it's what made us a national power. Worry about throwing the ball in years to come, sure. But if Stewart wants to keep his job, he'll run the ball."

4. With only three returning starters, the WVU defense was expected to be a relative sore spot coming into this season, but they're currently 38th overall nationally. How would you rate their play so far this season?

"Pretty damn good, actually. They've kept us in every ballgame this year. Losses to ECU and Colorado were only because our offense failed to get off the bus. I mean, any other year, the 17 points Colorado scored would have been good for a 30 point win. This year? Not so much."

5. What are the defense's weaknesses? What are its strengths?

"Weaknesses: bending. Strengths: not breaking. Seriously, we'll give up a TON of 8-10 yard pass plays, but we'll stop teams in the redzone and even pull a turnover or two out of our ass at some point. I think we just like to toy with teams. Let them get close, but then block a field goal."

6. Real quickly: what we can expect from your special teams?

"With Jock Sanders and Noel Devine potentially returning kicks, I hope you can hold your breath for long periods of time. We also like to fumble punts occasionally, which keeps everyone on their toes. I mean, games can get boring sometimes, why not keep fans on the edge of their seats?"

7. Aaaaaand finally, the state of West Virginia is responsible for unleashing Nick Saban upon the world. I totally dig John Denver, the New River bridge, and coal, but I think Saban alone almost sort of cancels all of that out. On behalf of the state, do you feel any need to apologize for Saban and his later crimes against all that is fair and good in this world?

"Not only do I not apologize for him, I am willing to cut a nice check to see him on the sidelines in Morgantown. After the Bill Stewart experiment, I have a feeling a lot of my Mountaineer brethren would do the same."

Thanks again to Charley and check out WBGV for all your Mountaineer blogging needs.

Feedback, 10/23

Here on the Blogger digs the JCCW doesn't have all the fancy reader-related bells and whistles some of the other guys do, which is fine. But it also makes me wonder how many people wind up reading the often-thought provoking stuff we get here in our comments section, and the conclusion I've reached is "not enough." So occasionally, starting ... now, I'm going to start spotlighting and responding to various comments and e-mails here on the "main page." It'll be like Stewart Mandel's famous Mailbag columns, but with less barking stupidity. Hopefully.

In response to Tez Doolittle's second-hand tale of Tyronne Green's displeasure with trying to "get push" out of a two-point stance, tiger7_88 writes:

I hope Tyrone and all his mates on the OL that want to one day play at the next level make sure to cry to the NFL scouts that they get to meet and interview with about the two-point stance and how they "can't get push and stuff like that".

Then we'll sit back and see how it improves their draft prospects.

Anyone wanna lay a bet that if it improves their chances to make a team in the NFL that somehow, someway they'd learn how to block out of the two-point stance and "get push and stuff"?

Yeah... me too.

This might be a tad harsh--a senior who's spent his entire career in a three-point stance is probably going to have some adjustment problems to lining up in a two-point stance the whole game, as opposed to, say, a Missouri lineman who's done it from Day 1--but yeah, I'm not buying it as an out-and-out excuse, either, especially after we all heard over and over again in the preseason about how firing off from a two-point stance wasn't going to be an issue. I'm not blaming Green or his linemates, mind you; the obvious offensive coaching discord did them no favors in the switch into a two-point stance. But I seriously doubt it's impossible to run-block successfully from a two-point stance and find it more than a little disingenuous to say it's not the issue right up until the moment the guy who implemented the switch is gone, then say it is. (Though to be fair, Green didn't actually tell the media that; Doolittle did it for him.)

After I cited the consistency of Tubby's desire to beat 'Bama as something that marked him as "an Auburn man" Tuesday, an anonymous commenter left the following:

Tuberville cares first and foremost about beating Bama because he knows that's all it takes for Auburn fans to let him pocket their 3M each year. AU could be 6-6 every season but as long as they get that one win, they couldn't care less about losing to Vandy or Arkansas or never sniffing the Georgia Dome. This theory will get the litmus test this year if he finishes with 5 or 6 losses but manages to pull off #7.

Hey, I can admit there might be something to this, but I think there are two quality counterarguments:

1. Tubby hasn't just been "happy" to beat 'Bama; he's taken an almost perverse joy in it, with the raised fingers and donning the "Fear the Thumb" shirt and even the brusque "No comment" reaction to the implication 'Bama might have passed him by already. In short, Tubby sure seems to feel the same way about the Iron Bowl the fans do, and I'm not sure that's something he could successfully project for this long if it's not genuine.

2. We don't really know how Auburn fans would react to having a string of 7-5, 6-6 season with Iron Bowl wins because that's not what's happened. The only season of his entire tenure that fits that description is 2003, and whatever honest reaction Auburn fans might have had was irreparably distorted by Jetgate. My guess is that Auburn fans wouldn't actually be all that pleased; in the "litmus test" event of an Iron Bowl win to cap a 6-6 season this year, I'll frankly say that a carbon-copy "litmus test" season in 2009 would probably be enough for me to expect Tubby to move on. But again, this is all hypothetical; accusing Auburn fans of being happy with mediocrity when we haven't had the chance to experience mediocrity (until now) is, quite honestly, hogwash.

A friend of mine named Rick who attended Troy briefly but grew up a lifelong Alabama fan e-mailed me this brief but potentially cogent point about Tony Franklin:

When the only two people that speak out for you are Larry Blakeney and Rush Propst, you're probably a scumbag.

To be fair, Tubby kinda sorta spoke up for him too in absolving him of blame. But yeah, you'd have expected some of those other high school coaches or old college coaching colleagues to have stood up for him, too. The bottom line is that in the great Assistants vs. Franklin meltdown of 2008, it's just not reasonable to assign all the blame to one side or the other. Everyone here failed.

Two worthwhile comments to this recent Works post bemoaning the influx of JUCOs on the men's hoops team and and Tray Blackmon's 2008 demise. The first, from jdinmacon in regards to Lebo's strategy:

Don't knock Lebo bringing in JUCO players. Auburn's best basketball player since Charles Barkley was a JUCO transfer...Chris Porter anyone?

I think Lebo's strategy is to get some success in the SEC and to do that he needed some big guys to bang away down on the blocks - help rest Barber. If we can show some SEC success + a fancy new arena, this will help with recruiting.

Vot, Robertson and Barrett will form the core of this years team. All 3 have loads of experience. Vot was dominating until he broke his hand last year. Q is one of the more underrated guards in the league IMO. Barrett has had his moments, but would ride the bench on most SEC teams.

I responded in that thread and won't repeat myself here, but suffice it to say the JUCO route is, indeed, about the only thing Lebo could do to save his job this year; it's much more a symptom of Lebo's prior failures than a cause of whatever might befall the team this season. That alone is reason enough to grumble about it, but that it also hampers the potential next head coach's potential rebuilding job makes it worse.

And lastly, frequent commenter Sullivan013 responded to the Blackmon news with the following trip down Auburn's memory lane, which you might enjoy:

Your post on Tray Blackmon's Auburn career of half-seasons brought back memories of other fan-favorite players who either had games but not seasons or incredible Auburn seasons, but short or non-existent pro careers.

Maybe it's my love of the underdog, but I always look back with great affection for these players. They will never be known outside of a few diehard fans like me, but they once thrilled the crowd at Jordan Hare if only for a few moments over the years.

Pat Sullivan - While well known in the state, he never really got a chance in the NFL to show what made him great at Auburn: the ability to roll out of the pocket and find the receiver who slipped past his man into the open field. He played for Norm van Brocklin at Atlanta, who never let Sullivan leave the pocket. With Atlanta's laughably porous line at the time, it meant that Sullivan was destined to get sacked time and again.

Terry Beasley - Sullivan's favorite target. His elusiveness and ability to eventually shed his cover, given time dovetailed perfectly with Sullivan's rollout skills. It was nearly an unbeatable combination, and the statistics show it.

Joe Sullivan - lesser know little brother of Pat Sullivan, I remember seeing him engineer an 80 yard drive to clinch a win over LSU in 1981, our first over the Bengals since 1942.

Tre Smith - who could forget the hero of the 2002 Iron Bowl and the touchdown after the blocked punt against Florida in 2006? Yet for all his ability, he was a good back behind two great ones: Ronnie Brown and Carnell Williams.

Aundray Bruce - The terror of the conference, the first of a series of blistering fast defensive ends that seem to gravitate into Auburn's orbit.

Brandon Johnson - How can you not like a guy who played fullback and mike linebacker with equally brutal intensity? Undersized in body but never in heart, he played every down at Auburn like it was the Super Bowl. That intensity may be why he never played in the NFL - a series of self inflicted concussions ended his career.

Dameyune Craig - one of the best broken play quarterbacks I ever saw. When Auburn absolutely positively needed a first down or a touchdown in a game, he was the man. In game after game, he would engineer a late drive that would catch your breath, and whether he made it or not, he always gave you hope that he could pull it off by shear will. More often than not, he did.

Brandon Cox - Should have been nicknamed 'Iceman' for his unflappability. Even being benched during a game in his senior season didn't faze this kid. He would quietly win his way back into the lineup, and our hearts with his gutsy, gritty play, and his uncanny ability to make 1 or two yards on a qb sneak, every time, no matter how many opposing players were 'in the box'. One word describes his career at Auburn: Toughness.

Carl Stewart - One of the best blocking fullbacks I ever remember watching at Auburn (and I've seen quite a few). I don't think I ever saw him miss a block, or fail in his assignment. Slightly undersized, he made up for it by his uncanny precision.

Tray Blackmon - When he gets a chance to play? Breathtaking. But half-seasons of achievement and undersized, it is doubtful he will ever make it in the NFL, no matter how hard he hits. But he will live on in our memory for hits like the one in the clip. Let's hope his senior season is complete and he is able to leave Jordan Hare with the roar of the crowd still echoing in his memory.

There are many, many more, some of whom I barely remember, who once carried my hope on their shoulders through nailbiter games in the past. War Damn Eagle, fellas. It was fun watching you play.

West Virginia preview coming soon.

Wrong

Mike Svetitz recycles a meme started by a certain Mobile Register columnist--or, I'm assuming he started it based on the headline in my feed reader; per previous stipulations, I didn't actually read the thing--that Tubby's coaching for his coaching life tonight:

But what about your vote? Did Tuberville say enough during his (Monday) rant to sway you one way or the other?

Well, if this was the real election, you’d have two more weeks to make up your mind. Unfortunately, Auburn’s D-Day is today.

The Tigers’ game against West Virginia tonight in Morgantown is the biggest Auburn will face all season. No, it’s not the national championship, but it’s close. About as close as this team can get to one.

Seriously. It’s that big.

No, seriously, it's not.

I daresay Auburn fans--many of us, anyway--aren't still under any kind of illusion that this team is going to suddenly rise up and sweep its way to 9-3. We watched the Vanderbilt game. We watched the Arkansas game. We know what this team is already, or at least what kind of season this team has produced. A loss in Morgantown tonight, yes, would make a lost season all the more lost. A loss would cut the wounds just a little bit deeper. But the wound's already been made. The season, in terms of any meaningful non-Shreveport or non-Iron Bowl goals Auburn might have had, is already lost. Tonight changes none of that.

This is not to say that there isn't hope for at least 6-6, 7-5, maybe even 8-4 if Tubby has a Fairy Godmother of Offense who visited during the bye week. This is not to say I won't see winning in Bryant-Denny as a possibility right up until the very moment the final zeroes hit the scoreboard. It's sure as hell not to say Auburn doesn't have a very, very good chance tonight against an offense as aerially-challenged as West Virginia's and a defense that should, theoretically, give up some yards.

But there's only one game remaining on Auburn's schedule* that genuinely has a direct impact on Tubby's potential employment status, and it will be played in Tuscaloosa on Nov. 29. When it comes to a decision as momentous as "Who will be Auburn's head football coach?", I have a hard time believing 6-6 with a win over West Virginia is any different from 5-7 with a loss to West Virginia; if Auburn does lose the Iron Bowl, I can't see how in Tubby terms 7-5 with a victory in Morgantown is any different from 6-6 with a loss.

Yes, I'll be screaming bloody murder at my television tonight as always and yes, in the unfortunate event of an Auburn defeat I'll settle into a funk similar to the ones that gripped us all after Vandy, after Arkansas. But to pretend that a nonconference game against a 4-2 Big East team in a season where Auburn is already 4-3, unranked, and out of the SEC race is "as close as this team can get" to a national championship game is absurd, mindless hot air for the sake of hot air. To call this game "D-Day" wen the Iron Bowl still waits on the schedule is 100 percent USDA-approved nonsense.

Tonight matters--they all matter--but at the JCCW, at least, what matters most if Auburn looks like a team that's put the Vandy and Arkansas losses behind them and is ready to salvage whatever they can out of 2008, or like a team that's ready to put the entire sorry mess behind them and move on to next year. Tubby's die just won't be cast tonight.

The Works, Rhoads? Where we're going, yes, we do actually need Rhoads-style

Country (?) Rhoads, take us home. One of the nice things about the hire of Paul Rhoads was that he wasn't only familiar with West Virginia's offense, he put together a game plan last year that stopped it dead in its SEC-defense-chewin' tracks. (Yes, Pat White's thumb injury probably didn't hurt. Well, it hurt for him, yeah. You know what I mean.) So it's time to just trot out the same game plan this year, sit back, and watch the tide of victory wash in, right?

Maybe. There's two hiccups: the Mountaineers changed up a lot of their offensive schemes, and Rhoads isn't able to just transplant the 2007 scheme into Auburn's defense with nary a seam showing. His explanation:

"This (game) is under completely different circumstances," Rhoads said. "New program here. Doing new things here, and them the same way.

"I had a brief look at their offense with the new coordinator and the way they're doing things, there's some similarity but it's far from being the same thing."

So that's the bad news. The good news is that 1. Rhoads is always going to downplay how much he knows to these needling reporter types 2. It's not like the changes on offense have exactly set the world alight (No. 79 overall as of this typing.) So no, Rhoads won't know exactly what's coming the way he might have if Rodriguez had stuck around. But yes, Auburn and Rhoads should still have a pretty good shot at stopping whatever does happen to come at them.

Internet polls blow. Not that you didn't know that, but it's worth mentioning when Charles Goldberg offers Auburn's fans the chance to pick from the following options for their new, bye-week improved offense:



How exactly is "the Tony Franklin System" different from "Variation of the spread, mostly passing"? When three of the choices are specific kinds of offenses (even if two of those are the same), why is the fourth "power football," which could mean anything from Rodriguez's WVU spread-n'-shred to the single wing? Would you really expect to learn anything from a poll where only option offers any semblance of balance? Wouldn't it be more interesting from a polling perspective to ask fans to choose between "I-Formation, 50-50" and "Oklahoma St.-style Spread, 50-50" so we could find out if it's really the formation that's bothering people so much? Right? Right? For the record, voters went with "balanced" over "not-balanced," if you can believe that.

And oh, Auburn's players are SUPER-EXCITED over their new old offense, which they will be until it gains 45 yards in the second half tomorrow night, at which they point they will grumble into the offseason until a new OC is hired at which point they will be SUPER-EXCITED again. (This is my exceedingly cynical way of saying "I'll believe it when I see it.")

Breathe easier? Ray Cotton, Auburn's Great QB Hope if Kodi Burns ends up not being the Great QB Hope, reaffirmed his commitment recently, as you very likely already know. There's more thoughts on the recruiting situation here, where Tom Luginbill says no one's jumped from Auburn's careening ship yet, but that the OC hire will be key. Stunner! This next item will have information you didn't know, I promise.

Grotus is skeptical, for instance. He remains generally unimpressed by the recent defense:

In our four most recent games, the defense has given up an average of 19 points via 303 total yards (153 through the air and 150 on the ground.) If we were to take our team over those four games and give it independent rankings, it would be #35 in points per game, #21 in total yards, and #41 in rushing defense*.

There's something to this--as you'll recall, the LSU game in particular was not a bright shining moment for the Auburn D--but virtually all of those 20 teams who would rank above Auburn in total defense, for instance, would do so partially on the backs of cupcakes whic hthe "last four games" requirement denies Auburn. Besides, 303 yards and 21st in the country's still nothing to sneer at; 19 points is a makeable hurdle for all but the most incompetent offenses. Not to disagree with Grotus's basic point--the defense still has room for improvement--but I've got so much worry invested in the offense I just can't bring myself to spare any for the other side of the ball.

Also out there in the blAUgosphere: J.M. at TWER puts up part 2 of his must-read report from Tubby's visit to watch Cotton, in which he meets (and discusses the weather with) the man himself; Pigskin Pathos engages in a little pot-meets-kettle fun at West Virginia's expense; and the Auburner offers a photorealistic artist's rendition of Josh Bynes.

Please retain some level of sensibility, please. I think I took about as much delight in Florida and LSU's undressing of the Buckeyes the last two Januaries as anyone, but let's be honest, that second edition wasn't really all that intimidating and I bet if you ask one of these impartial media types they'll tell you the same thing. Chris Low, your thoughts?

I just think there's a level of defense played in the SEC with the speed, athleticism and power that is unmatched anywhere else in the country. And, yes, the last time I checked, SEC defenses were too much for an Ohio State team supposedly brimming with offensive playmakers in the past two BCS National Championship Games.

Yes, because when I think of that 2007 Ohio State squad, with the explosive Todd Boeckman firing passes to only-hope-to-contain-them talents like Brian Hartline and Brian Robiskie, the phrase that always springs to mind is "brimming with offensive playmakers."

Cripes. To give some credit to ESPN's cadre of bloggers when it's due, however, I'll direct you to this takedown of the Big 12's scheduling policies from a Pac-10 writer who wants his conference to wave the light flag. Of course, Blutarsky's summation of the situation is even better. And honestly, rather than everyone playing pansy schedules, you know what would be even better? If pollsters would just punish teams that did so accordingly instead of buying in.