re: Charlie Strong was in Tuscaloosa Thursday

quote:

---

But I think you have to be an on the field coach before you can recruit.

---

Only on-field coaches can recruit via in-person contact off-campus. Off-field staff can have contact with recruits via phone, text and in-person during on-campus visits by recruits.

quote:

---

Saban is a Golding apologist then. Enjoy another year of him on DC, blessed by the greatest coach of all time.

---

We'll be watching the playoffs from the couch again then.

quote:

---

lets go with the theory that Saban is keeping a "lazy goofball" DC who can't coach a position and sucks at his job.

---

Ok, we will!

So the opposition has now basically broken down to “You’re just a Golding apologist”, “You are yourself Golding [arguing for your own job]”, and childish mockery? I’d say 3 and 10 has done a pretty good job then of demolishing the other side’s positions.

3rdDown&Golding

quote:

---

We'll be watching the playoffs from the couch again then.

---

Hopefully Mac Jones can go in big games and not turn the ball over. If so, we'll be fine.

We going beat this dead horse again?

quote:

---

So is Charlie Strong going to save our dying program or is Pete Golding the next (current) great college coordinator?

These are the only options that I see. I'll hang up and listen.

---

If I knew the future, I'd be rich as hell and on a big arse boat right now rather than posting.

But the program is no where near dying. People just have emotional reactions rather than logical, and refuse to take into account the context in which things happen.

Kind of like advanced stats. Some people don't look at them, they just look at raw stats without any context and then think false things. Some guy goes out and has crazy stats against a bunch of easy competition, and the raw stats look big. But running for 100 yards against a top defense and running for 100 yards against a bad defense are completely different, even thought the raw stats may show it's the same.

Or like if you takes 2 7-5 teams and pretend they are equal, when 1 of those teams has 5 loses to all top15 teams, while the other team has 5 losses to a bunch of low rated teams. Same numbers, same "results", but anyone who looks at even a small amount of context around them should see they are no where near the same.

People want to grade Golding as if he was the DC of the team that had so much depth in the front 7 that it was actually a front 11. So many players who could be starters, and eventually were, on that 1 team. Which in terms of being DC, is like running for 100 yards against a bad defense. Meanwhile he had more like a front 2, with a bunch of freshman filling in the gaps, 0 depth to rotate guys out from getting tired - and still we lost 2 games by a total of 8 points. And in 1 of those games, did better than the DC everyone wants. We did better at stopping Michgan than Ohio St, etc. Inb4 the Auburn game, without taking into account that Gus is a master at misdirection and causing confusion and had a herd of freshman to pick on.

So I'll put my money on Golding. Everything that happened would have happened with any DC. And I think he did a pretty good job at having to work around the huge deficiencies.

What could Charlie Strong have done differently last year that would have resulted in more success? There is no replacement for experience and time in the weight room.

quote:

---

Gus is a master at misdirection and causing confusion and had a herd of freshman to pick on.

---

Points scored by the Magic Gus Bus offense:
27 vs Oregon
24 vs Tulane
28 vs Texas A&M
13 vs Florida
20 vs LSU
20 vs Ole Miss
14 vs Georgia
34 vs Alabama
24 vs Minnesota