JessN: Auburn wrap-up: Another miracle finish, because Alabama couldn’t finish

[TideFan in AU]

I understand the love for "The Process," and to a large degree, I share it. But I also worked in sales for a few years and at some point you have to deliver no matter what your process is. Understand that we're talking about a relatively narrow issue -- the "delivery" problem here is limited to just one team. The problem there, is if you don't beat that team, the thing you've established as your end goal (NC) is probably out the window. The last time Alabama lost that game and still either advanced to the SEC Championship Game or the main SEC bowl, pre-SECCG, was 1989 when Alabama lost to Auburn and still went to the Sugar. If it ever happened a second time, I wasn't alive for it.

The fact it's against your chief rival, though, obviously magnifies the effect.

A couple of follow-ups: I included the LSU numbers mostly just for the sample size, in case anyone thought the Alabama figures were too limited. And the 2007 Auburn team was only one game better than Alabama at the time the game was played (7-4 AU, 6-5 UA), so I wouldn't say they were better by a "WIDE margin."

We were a team on a 3-game losing skid going into that game that had just lost to Louisiana Monroe. I'd argue that they were quite a bit better than we were at that point. They finished 9-4 and ranked #14 and beat #15 Clemson in their bowl. We finished 7-6 and barely edged out a 7 loss Colorado team in the Independence Bowl. I was there, I saw how inept both teams were! -lol

 

[TideEngineer08]

I understand the love for "The Process," and to a large degree, I share it. But I also worked in sales for a few years and at some point you have to deliver no matter what your process is. Understand that we're talking about a relatively narrow issue -- the "delivery" problem here is limited to just one team. The problem there, is if you don't beat that team, the thing you've established as your end goal (NC) is probably out the window. The last time Alabama lost that game and still either advanced to the SEC Championship Game or the main SEC bowl, pre-SECCG, was 1989 when Alabama lost to Auburn and still went to the Sugar. If it ever happened a second time, I wasn't alive for it.

The fact it's against your chief rival, though, obviously magnifies the effect.

A couple of follow-ups: I included the LSU numbers mostly just for the sample size, in case anyone thought the Alabama figures were too limited. And the 2007 Auburn team was only one game better than Alabama at the time the game was played (7-4 AU, 6-5 UA), so I wouldn't say they were better by a "WIDE margin."

I didn't really remember the records from 2007, so I'll concede it wasn't a vast gulf as I made it out to be, but I do believe they were a better program and team at that point.

And I know you've got a great point here, about how important this game is and how necessary it is and always will be to take care of business against Auburn. But I'm just having a difficult time getting upset about what we've seen Alabama accomplish, even with the 4-3 record against the barn. Going forward, if we see more games like this past weekend against them, then I'm going to be concerned. IMO, this year has been the only year in which I've felt before, during and after the game that we should have won it and didn't.

One other point I'd like to make, concerning emotion. We're always going to be at an emotional disadvantage against Auburn, because of how they view the rivalry. It is the be all end all for them, from the president down to the last fan. Alabama has never viewed Auburn that way and I'm not sure we ever will, considering how precious we regard championship hardware. That's not me trying to be condescending to Auburn. It's just the way things are and I'm not sure how we do much better against them than we have, except to focus even deeper on the little things that win games.

 

[JessN]

We were a team on a 3-game losing skid going into that game that had just lost Louisiana Monroe. I'd argue at that point that they were quite a bit better than we were at that point. They finished 9-4 and ranked #14 and beat #15 Clemson in their bowl. We finished 7-6 and barely edged out a 7 loss Colorado team in the Independence Bowl. I was there, I saw how inept both teams were! -lol

Brief reflection on AU's 2007 season, for the sake of nostalgia...

AU opened the season 1-2 with losses to South Florida and Mississippi State. State finished 7-5, with its best win coming over one of Rich Brooks' ranked Kentucky teams the week before they beat Alabama 17-12 off the fluke pick-6 off John Parker Wilson. South Florida, unranked at the time of the Auburn game, opened the season 6-0 before losing three straight to Rutgers, UConn and Cincinnati, dropping out of the rankings at that point. They re-entered the top 25 prior to the bowl season but then lost 56-21 to Oregon in the Sun Bowl and finished the year unranked.

Auburn then beat New Mexico State before getting its best win that year over Florida, which was ranked in the top five at the time. Auburn played two other ranked teams in the regular season and lost both games, to LSU and to Georgia. Auburn then beat #15 Clemson in OT in the Peach Bowl. Thus, both Alabama and Auburn finished 2-2 against ranked teams that year (Alabama beat Arkansas and Tennessee, lost to LSU and Auburn).

Alabama was obviously in some kind of spiral at the time of the game, the worst of it not being just the fallout from ULM, but Saban's hesitance to kick a few bad seeds off the team -- something he later admitted was a mistake. But UA wasn't alone in off-field distractions. Tommy Tuberville would probably have been fired had he lost to Alabama that year. Auburn was in a panic about Saban being at Alabama. AU didn't fire Tuberville, but they forced him to change offensive coordinators and that's how AU ended up with the Tony Franklin debacle in 2008.

 

[Atl Joe]

I honestly don't know. I think Saban is eminently more equipped to figure that out than me. My only fear regarding this is, in my experience when dealing with highly successful people who have a system (process) that works the overwhelming majority of the time, that on the rare occasion when it doesn't work, their answer is to just do what they've been doing "better."

The only specific suggestion I have is to quit scheduling D-1AA teams the week before Auburn and take the week off. I feel the problem is emotional in nature. I think the team is being forced into the same mold that is in place for the other 11 games -- businesslike, almost robotic. I love to see that against Arkansas, Ole Miss, Chick-fil-A games, bowl week, etc. I don't think it works against Auburn. I don't know whether Saban likes it or not, but emotion/passion is such a key component in college football that I think you have to leverage off that point sometimes. The coaches that try to do it every week too often end up over-doing it, or losing a game in one of the "non-emotional" weeks, but once a year is certainly fine. What I wonder is if Saban simply isn't able to be the rah-rah guy on demand. And if he can't, I don't know what he can do differently.

Wow, this is exactly correct ans perfectly stated, Jess. Having a process is great and leads to consistency. Sometimes though, you have to be able to throw some gas on the fire and meet your opponent's emotional level. They were certainly displaying this type of swagger before and during the LSU and Notre Dame championship games, so why not for their rivalry game? It is not like they can't do this. Choosing not to do it for Auburn makes no sense. If there is one team that Alabama should be itching to knock the crap out of, it should be AU. It is rather helpful to be angry when in a fight.

They used to say the only person who could hold Michael Jordan under 20 points a game was Dean Smith. As a coach, you have to recognize the ability your players have and let them use their talent to get the job done from time to time.

 

[Atl Joe]

So you think that Auburn is winning because they want it more - are more fired up? Did you watch the game on Saturday? Did you watch the game in 2010? Neither of those games was lost beacuse Auburn was more fired up. Alabama beat itself in both of those games.

You are right. Alabama beat themselves but Auburn did win both of those games because they wanted it more. They took those games away through more aggressive play. In 2010 they were down by 24 points late in the second. They saw their NC slipping away and fought to get it back. To come back from that deficit, you better want it desperately.
This year, Alabama was emotionally void from the opening kick off. Again, they let Auburn take the game away after they had a 14 point lead. There was no urgency in their performance. With so much on the line, they needed a little anger to swing the pendulum and take control of the game. They certainly had the talent to do so but lacked the conviction to take what they wanted.
Jeez, I even thought Cochran looked a little flat and that guy is ALWAYS cranked up.

 

[JDCrimson]

A perfect example is right before the half we had enough to make a drive to get a fg or better hut we chose take the air out of the ball. All while knowing they would get ball to start the second half.

Sent from my LG-P930 using Tapatalk

 

[B1GTide]

You are right. Alabama beat themselves but Auburn did win both of those games because they wanted it more.

No, they did not win because they wanted it more. Did they want it more when Alabama stopped them on 4th and 1 in their own territory in the 4th? Did they want it more when Alabama, on their next possession, forced them to punt from their own end zone and took over with 4:26 to go in the game, up by 7, at the Auburn 25? No, they did not want it more.

You guys are looking in all the wrong places for answers. You want to attribute disconnected losses that occured in very different circumstances to some similar cause, so you grasp at the only similar thing that you can find. Causation vs coorelation...

 

[JessN]

No, they did not win because they wanted it more. Did they want it more when Alabama stopped them on 4th and 1 in their own territory in the 4th? Did they want it more when Alabama, on their next possession, forced them to punt from their own end zone and took over with 4:26 to go in the game, up by 7, at the Auburn 25? No, they did not want it more.

You guys are looking in all the wrong places for answers. You want to attribute disconnected losses that occured in very different circumstances to some similar cause, so you grasp at the only similar thing that you can find. Causation vs coorelation...

Well, it's not because Auburn has more talent than Alabama, that much is certain. Either look in the past to the recruiting guides, or forward to NFL drafts for your proof there.

So if it's not a raw talent issue, it's either a preparation issue, in-game adjustment issue, execution issue or emotional ("want-to" for lack of a better way to put it) issue. Two of those four rest solely on a coaching staff and one is mostly on the coaching staff. And if you blame everything on player execution, where's the limit to that? If the coach calls a triple-reverse pass from his own end zone and it gets picked off, is it the players' fault for not executing the call, or was the call bad? What if it was just a double-reverse pass? Is there a book out there that will tell me what's the acceptable line of demarcation between blame to Group A and blame to Group B?

 

[B1GTide]

Well, it's not because Auburn has more talent than Alabama, that much is certain. Either look in the past to the recruiting guides, or forward to NFL drafts for your proof there.

So if it's not a raw talent issue, it's either a preparation issue, in-game adjustment issue, execution issue or emotional ("want-to" for lack of a better way to put it) issue. Two of those four rest solely on a coaching staff and one is mostly on the coaching staff. And if you blame everything on player execution, where's the limit to that? If the coach calls a triple-reverse pass from his own end zone and it gets picked off, is it the players' fault for not executing the call, or was the call bad? What it was just a double-reverse pass? Is there a book out there that will tell me what's the acceptable line of demarcation between blame to Group A and blame to Group B?

I am saying that every game has a life of its own, and that there is nothing bridging the losses in previous years to this year's loss. That's it. This year's loss included too many failures to count on Alabama's side, on all fronts. Everything from untimely penalties to dropped passes, to undisciplined defensive play in spots. And I am not even getting into the missed FGs. None of those mistakes were the result of "Auburn wanting it more".

Do I put this loss on the coaching staff? Yes, but only as much as I put it on the players - no more. It was a collosal failure.

Remember this - Alabama had no less that 10 different opportunities to win this game - to put it away. Auburn only had one chance to win the game. They got it done. A statistical anomaly, but they happen.

I can see that this game still pains you, and I get it, but I think that you have it in your head that the answer is tied to some greater problem, and it just isn't. You have had some of the greatest head coaches in the history of the game at Alabama. Their approach works. Certainly Saban's approach works. Yet, somehow the numbers across generations have allowed Auburn to keep the series close and has allowed them to win games that they shouldn't.

Notre Dame did this to the entire country for decades. It wasn't because other teams didn't want to beat their brains in, and in many years it wasn't because they had more talent or better coaching. They just seemed to have every bounce in close games go their way. It happened in my back yard, so I watched it seemingly every weekend. Crazy stuff, like the stuff that you have seen with Auburn. What they were experiencing wasn't a failure by other teams - it was just Notre Dame being Notre Dame. Many people began to wonder if God was really helping them, so inexplicable were some of the things that happened, and across so many games and years. But eventually it evens out. Two decades of really poor coaching finally killed the mystique (for the most part).

What it boils down to for me is simply this: You can put your faith in what you can see and touch (you can see and touch those trophies), or you can put it in some sort of "mythical" factor. Is it possible for emotion to win a single game? Absolutely. Is it likely that Auburn's wins in this series can be attributed to that factor over any other? Not in my opinion. Why? Because every game has a life of its own, with its own reasons for success and failure. No two Alabama/Auburn games that I have watched have looked the same. The better team usually wins. But when luck is required, Auburn generally seems to pull it out. I don't know why, but I don't think that God cares, and I don't think that it can be attributed to emotions.

 

[257WBY]

Is there a point where players from Ohio, Utah, Iowa, etc don't really get in to the rivalry as much as the fans would like? I read the other day that Alabama has an overall out of state enrollment of 61%. It just seems strange that Alabama isn't as much "Alabama" as it used to be. It might not matter it all, just a thought.

 

[B1GTide]

Is there a point where players from Ohio, Utah, Iowa, etc don't really get in to the rivalry as much as the fans would like? I read the other day that Alabama has an overall out of state enrollment of 61%. It just seems strange that Alabama isn't as much "Alabama" as it used to be. It might not matter it all, just a thought.

Are you asking if the fans would prefer a more jacked up Alabama team. I bet that they would. If only because that would reflect how they feel.

 

[257WBY]

I'd like for Bama to have an open week before Auburn. That would give the players a couple more days rest and more prep time for Auburn. I see that as more important than an early season open date before aTm. Auburn had their 2 weeks to prepare for Bama.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with you, however, the schedule was a very winnable one. I'm not sure Alabama will have an SEC schedule this easy for a while.

 

[257WBY]

Are you asking if the fans would prefer a more jacked up Alabama team. I bet that they would. If only because that would reflect how they feel.

When you grow up in the rivalry, you get it because you live it. I grew up in the Florida panhandle and have lived in Mississippi for a long time. I don't "get it" like my relatives that spent their life in Alabama. Now Alabama is starting to have a team and a student body that isn't "one of them". I wonder if some of the intensity is lost because of that?

 

[B1GTide]

I agree with you, however, the schedule was a very winnable one. I'm not sure Alabama will have an SEC schedule this easy for a while.

And remember that most seasons you only get one bye. Would you really want Alabama to play 11 games in a row, most of them in the SEC, without a week off? If Auburn wants it that way because they care more about beating Alabama than winning championships, fine - but that isn't what Alabama has been about.

 

[JessN]

I am saying that every game has a life of its own, and that there is nothing bridging the losses in previous years to this year's loss. That's it. This year's loss included too many failures to count on Alabama's side, on all fronts. Everything from untimely penalties to dropped passes, to undisciplined defensive play in spots. And I am not even getting into the missed FGs. None of those mistakes were the result of "Auburn wanting it more".

Do I put this loss on the coaching staff? Yes, but only as much as I put it on the players - no more. It was a collosal failure.

Remember this - Alabama had no less that 10 different opportunities to win this game - to put it away. Auburn only had one chance to win the game. They got it done. A statistical anomaly, but they happen.

I can see that this game still pains you, and I get it, but I think that you have it in your head that the answer is tied to some greater problem, and it just isn't. You have had some of the greatest head coaches in the history of the game at Alabama. Their approach works. Certainly Saban's approach works. Yet, somehow the numbers across generations have allowed Auburn to keep the series close and has allowed them to win games that they shouldn't.

Notre Dame did this to the entire country for decades. It wasn't because other teams didn't want to beat their brains in, and in many years it wasn't because they had more talent or better coaching. They just seemed to have every bounce in close games go their way. It happened in my back yard, so I watched it seemingly every weekend. Crazy stuff, like the stuff that you have seen with Auburn. What they were experiencing wasn't a failure by other teams - it was just Notre Dame being Notre Dame. Many people began to wonder if God was really helping them, so inexplicable were some of the things that happened, and across so many games and years. But eventually it evens out. Two decades of really poor coaching finally killed the mystique (for the most part).

What it boils down to for me is simply this: You can put your faith in what you can see and touch (you can see and touch those trophies), or you can put it in some sort of "mythical" factor. Is it possible for emotion to win a single game? Absolutely. Is it likely that Auburn's wins in this series can be attributed to that factor over any other? Not in my opinion. Why? Because every game has a life of its own, with its own reasons for success and failure. No two Alabama/Auburn games that I have watched have looked the same. The better team usually wins. But when luck is required, Auburn generally seems to pull it out. I don't know why, but I don't think that God cares, and I don't think that it can be attributed to emotions.

Our principal disagreement is over the issue of trends -- whether looking at a game or opponent across multiple years means anything.

I didn't say anything when it was first brought up, but you had the be-all, end-all embodiment of such a trend in your own backyard with Cooper and the Michigan series. All games might have a life of their own, but 2 wins in 13 tries is what scientists call a reliable sample size. OSU finally decided the trend wasn't going to reverse.

Obviously Saban isn't close to that, but he is 6-6 against this one particular opponent and, arguably, has never beaten a "good" Auburn team. If Auburn hits 9 wins in a season, Saban has never won. I don't believe you can look at that and say a pattern isn't there. So either they're exposing something he does from a systematic standpoint -- meaning, Tuberville, Chizik and Malzahn found something vulnerable in the 3-4 over/under defensive scheme -- or they've out-cornered him on the preparation/adjustment side. Either way, he has to change something for this one week a year, which was the umbrella point of the original article.

The poster under you hit on something that I kind of mentioned regarding Saban himself, the factor of knowing what the game actually means. It's almost like one team equates losing with "aw shucks," while the other team thinks losing means a trip to the gallows afterwards. Part of that, I do believe, comes from familiarity with the rivalry. Most big-time rivalries are separated by state lines (OSU-Michigan, Texas-Oklahoma), but this one isn't. I tried to think of another purely in-state rivalry of similar magnitude contested in a state that had no NFL/MLB/NBA team to "rally around" and came up with just one, Clemson-South Carolina. If you throw out NBA, the Civil War (Oregon/Oregon State) comes into play. It does create a different atmosphere, and I don't expect guys like the Kouandjio brothers or Isaac Luatua or Cyrus Jones to fully get it. They have to be taught it. Auburn's recruiting seems to be more regionally concentrated, although probably not by as much some might think, but enough that Alabama is working from behind.

Whatever the cause or the cure, there have been two many games now to say it's OK to keep going down the current road and not at least change lanes once in a while.

 

[B1GTide]

When you grow up in the rivalry, you get it because you live it. I grew up in the Florida panhandle and have lived in Mississippi for a long time. I don't "get it" like my relatives that spent their life in Alabama. Now Alabama is starting to have a team and a student body that isn't "one of them". I wonder if some of the intensity is lost because of that?

Maybe. The OSU/Michigan rivalry has really dipped in intensity recently, and it has hurt the schools and conference. Meyer and Hoke both think that this rivalry is what kept those two programs at the top of the conference for decades, so they are trying to bring it back. I don't get the sense that the Alabama/Auburn rivalry will ever get there, if for no other reason than Auburn fans really seem to be fixated on Alabama.

 

[JessN]

And remember that most seasons you only get one bye. Would you really want Alabama to play 11 games in a row, most of them in the SEC, without a week off? If Auburn wants it that way because they care more about beating Alabama than winning championships, fine - but that isn't what Alabama has been about.

There are now two bye weeks. Even if you schedule one for Week 13 you have another one. Alabama broke prior to LSU and again back in Week 2 (Sept. 7).

And taking a breather at Week 13 didn't stop Auburn from winning the division title. Additionally, this is the first year for the two-bye schedule but I want to say one of Bama's three titles came in a year Alabama didn't break until the week before Auburn. I'd have to check. I know one of Saban's seasons here was a straight burn to Week 13 but I can't remember which off the top of my head.

 

[Snuffy Smith]

There are now two bye weeks. Even if you schedule one for Week 13 you have another one. Alabama broke prior to LSU and again back in Week 2 (Sept. 7).

And taking a breather at Week 13 didn't stop Auburn from winning the division title. Additionally, this is the first year for the two-bye schedule but I want to say one of Bama's three titles came in a year Alabama didn't break until the week before Auburn. I'd have to check. I know one of Saban's seasons here was a straight burn to Week 13 but I can't remember which off the top of my head.

Jess - Is the 2 bye week schedule something that will continue or was it an calendar anomaly because there were 14 weekends between labor day and Thanksgiving this year?

 

[B1GTide]

Our principal disagreement is over the issue of trends -- whether looking at a game or opponent across multiple years means anything.

I didn't say anything when it was first brought up, but you had the be-all, end-all embodiment of such a trend in your own backyard with Cooper and the Michigan series. All games might have a life of their own, but 2 wins in 13 tries is what scientists call a reliable sample size. OSU finally decided the trend wasn't going to reverse.

Obviously Saban isn't close to that, but he is 6-6 against this one particular opponent and, arguably, has never beaten a "good" Auburn team. If Auburn hits 9 wins in a season, Saban has never won. I don't believe you can look at that and say a pattern isn't there. So either they're exposing something he does from a systematic standpoint -- meaning, Tuberville, Chizik and Malzahn found something vulnerable in the 3-4 over/under defensive scheme -- or they've out-cornered him on the preparation/adjustment side. Either way, he has to change something for this one week a year, which was the umbrella point of the original article.

The poster under you hit on something that I kind of mentioned regarding Saban himself, the factor of knowing what the game actually means. It's almost like one team equates losing with "aw shucks," while the other team thinks losing means a trip to the gallows afterwards. Part of that, I do believe, comes from familiarity with the rivalry. Most big-time rivalries are separated by state lines (OSU-Michigan, Texas-Oklahoma), but this one isn't. I tried to think of another purely in-state rivalry of similar magnitude contested in a state that had no NFL/MLB/NBA team to "rally around" and came up with just one, Clemson-South Carolina. If you throw out NBA, the Civil War (Oregon/Oregon State) comes into play. It does create a different atmosphere, and I don't expect guys like the Kouandjio brothers or Isaac Luatua or Cyrus Jones to fully get it. They have to be taught it. Auburn's recruiting seems to be more regionally concentrated, although probably not by as much some might think, but enough that Alabama is working from behind.

Whatever the cause or the cure, there have been two many games now to say it's OK to keep going down the current road and not at least change lanes once in a while.

I get what you are saying about Saban, and trends related soley to him can have some legitimacy. Cooper was a different story as he couldn't even beat bad Michigan teams. His was more than a trend. He just couldn't beat them, and we were often embarrased by them. (BTW - I don't mind your honesty about OSU - I don't stick my head in the bushes and I know that it isn't personal).

So let me ask a question - if you are really on to something (not saying that you are, just asking), and if Saban never seems to beat the better Auburn teams but Alabama manages to win 3 more national championships before he rides off into retirement, will the losses to Auburn along the way taint that for you? Or are you more concerned because you believe that Gus is going to stay and Auburn may be a 9 win team just about every year for a while, meaning no more Alabama championships?

 

[B1GTide]

There are now two bye weeks. Even if you schedule one for Week 13 you have another one. Alabama broke prior to LSU and again back in Week 2 (Sept. 7).

And taking a breather at Week 13 didn't stop Auburn from winning the division title. Additionally, this is the first year for the two-bye schedule but I want to say one of Bama's three titles came in a year Alabama didn't break until the week before Auburn. I'd have to check. I know one of Saban's seasons here was a straight burn to Week 13 but I can't remember which off the top of my head.

Thank you - I did not know this. If there are two bye weeks, having them both in the second half of the season would seem to be the best move. The bye before aTm was completely wasted this year.