Of course there isn't. There's also no factual evidence that says we fired Tubberville mostly due to what Saban was doing at Alabama, but that was the case. For the most part, we didn't fire Tubberville because he only won 5 games in 2008, but that's what the factual evidence would say.

@HempHead

I don't think Bruce was the reason at all. I just think he and his momentum at Auburn played a role in the decision.

This post was edited on 3/15/15 at 10:29 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Tuscaloosa

11x Award Winning SECRant user

Member since Dec 2011

46808 posts

Posted on 3/15/15 at 10:32 pm to AUNashville

quote:
We didn't fire Tubberville because he only won 5 games in 2008, but that's what the factual evidence would say.

Factual evidence would also point to the fact that Tuberville was absolutely embarrassed to the tune of 36-0 to end the season in 2008, as Alabama was in the process of assembling one of the greatest recruiting classes ever.

Grant beat Pearl twice this year and was 4-1 all time against him.

As I stated, Pearl's late momentum might have resulted in solidifying the decision - but the scenario you just presented is nothing like the one with Grant.

Tuberville had experienced a great deal of success at Auburn. Grant has not.

Tuberville was booted after losing in embarrassing fashion to Alabama. Grant owned Pearl.

Tuberville was getting dominated in-state with recruiting. Grant is a fine recruiter and has out-recruited Auburn every year.

The bottom line is that Anthony Grant just wasn't a very good coach, and Auburn's success didn't have anything to do with that.

And our AD certainly wasn't using Auburn as a "measuring stick" as you've suggested. That doesn't even make sense.

This post was edited on 3/15/15 at 10:36 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by RTR America