I've never been a fan of ranking conferences in terms of strength for a couple of reasons. First, college football remains very cyclical. Before NIL and the transfer portal, teams would effectively refresh every 4-ish years. Since those 2 additions, that window is arguably smaller! Until the NCAA and/or conferences figure out a way to bring some order to the "wild west" nature of recruiting that we currently have, dynasty building is going to be hard. Not impossible, though. Players will still gravitate towards proven winners and top-notch facilities.

Second, all conferences have a certain pecking order. Sure, it gets disrupted from time to time, and NIL money could really shake this up as well. In fact, Indiana is a very good example of both points. A perennial underdog in the Big T(eighte)en. The university has no shortage of well-heeled alumni, and some of the have finally been convinced to contribute. This, and hiring Curt Cignetti has resulted in a 2-year turnaround from 3-9 in 2023, to getting knocked out of the CFP in 2024, to #1 CFP seed in 2025!

Third, these teams are all different. They are playing different opponents, with vastly different strengths of schedule, and in different venues in the case of bowl games.

Finally, I don't root for conferences. It's always seemed strange to me. I see people cheering for Auburn or Bama because they, "root for the SEC." Why? I have never cheered for Bama. I don't hate their players or coaches, I just don't root for them. Team allegiance is inherently tribal, but we've taken it way too far. Cheering for a conference just reads to me like really needing something to root for, and I don't want to be that guy. If Auburn isn't playing, and Bama isn't involved in the game, I can usually pick a team to support or just enjoy the chaos that college football can often provide.

Saying "the SEC is a tougher conference than the Big10," or vice versa, is ridiculous. Both have teams that tend to be pretty good, as well as teams that don't. Both have "Cinderella" teams every now and then. In any given year, one or the other will have more tough teams than other conferences, but again that's all very cyclical because that's how college football just is. It's probably the biggest reason I like college ball more than pro. So many unknowns from season to season.

The Auburn subreddit has been insufferable with all the drama queens this past week. They can all go back to espousing their expertise about basketball, now.

.. Freeze is out & Durkin is interim HC.

I don't know about Durkin as a HC going forward. His tenure at UMD leaves a lot of serious questions to be answered, but he has built a solid defensive unit at Auburn. I think he deserves to be considered if he can show he's learned from his mistakes, and can build a culture of growth, sportsmanship, and healthy competition in the program (emphasis on healthy!).

Good showing, and Ashton Daniels looked much more poised than I think I've ever seen Jackson Arnold. I still have questions/notes:

1. Given the issues Chapel had earlier in the season w/ playing in noisy environments, and McPherson's play last week, what kind of coaching is going on!? Chapel came from Virginia Tech, so he had played in loud environments. Sure, McPherson has had health issues (which should have been good reason to red shirt this year), but going from 1-4 to 5-5 in a week w/ some decently long-ish shots, makes one wonder what's going on behind the scenes to prepare these guys for the games. Obviously he's still not 100%; that 46-yard FG barely made it!
2. Red Zone offensive play calling was as conservative & predictable as ever. Fortunately, it was against the worst defense in the conference.
3. Seems like Jackson Arnold maybe got the nod at the beginning of the season because he's more mobile? Sorry, but I'm really getting tired of Auburn fielding offenses that require a specific type of QB (dual-threat). We saw how that worked out towards the end of Gus' run. At the end of the day, a mobile QB has to be a "nice to have" rather than a "must have." Otherwise, your offense is just gimmicky. Over time, you'll lose more big games because good teams have well-rounded offensive and defensive schemes. Sure, they take advantage of breakout talent when & where it's there, but they don't rely on from year to year.
4. I heard the announcer mention Ashton Daniels has graduated. Why was he red shirting!? He looked so much more poised than I expected.
5. THANK YOU for putting a shot Singleton's way! Where has this guy been all season!? It was supposedly a Big Deal that Auburn got him, and yet I haven't heard his name hardly at all.
6. Seems like both Daniels & Arnold were missing open receivers a little too much, and also noticed receivers not really doing a great job at getting open to help the QBs when they had to scramble. Both of these feel like coaching issues.
7. Haven't seen anything to make me think Auburn has any shot against Vandy or Bama. I hope they can win 1 of those, but I'm not holding my breath. I'm still not sure they'll beat Kentucky. Need to see how Ashton is if he gets the start (which I think he should).
8. If Auburn can beat Kentucky & Mercer they could go bowling this year. Would be interesting to see if they can actually win the Birmingham Bowl!

Don’t have a link b/c I don’t pay for 247, and I got this from Apple News. Article starts with this:

Since 1990, Auburn has lost four or more games in 27 seasons. The Tigers went 11-0 in 1993, 9-1-1 in 1994, 10-3 in 1997, 13-0 in 2004, 9-3 in 2005, 11-2 in 2006, 14-0 in 2010, and 12-2 in 2013. That's it. In 35 years, Auburn football has lost fewer than four games just eight times. It has only happened twice in the last 15 seasons.

This goes back to my time on campus, and it really highlights that for the past 35-years Auburn has been mostly average, with the occasional spark of brilliance. Remember when the UGA rivalry was dead even? Remember when Auburn won 5 in a row against Bama, and was making strides in closing the gap in that rivalry? Remember when the LSU rivalry was just brutal game after brutal game?

I’ve read elsewhere that the problem with Auburn is systemic, but nobody highlights anything specific other than meddling boosters. One interesting suggestion I saw was to limit new hire HC to a 4-year contract, with performance bonuses, and an option to extend after 3. The argument being that in the age of NIL & the transfer portal, the old 3-year rule to “get their guys in and build a team” doesn’t really hold as true anymore. Prove yourself before we start talking big buyouts.

I think Freeze is “a problem,” but I don’t think he’s “the problem.” I’ve never been a fan of head coaches controlling either offense or defense. Especially now that (not just) SEC football is basically semi-pro, you need coaches that can run the team like a pro squad with solid coordinators. This is basically how Saban did what he did at LSU & Bama.

Supposedly Auburn has excellent facilities. I know the fans make Jordan-Hare louder than it was when I was there. That was certainly on display this past Saturday. Maybe it is the board of directors/boosters that are the problem. Personally, I can’t name them. I know the Yellawood guy obviously pulls a lot of weight, but that’s about it. It seems like the resources are there to be a better team. Maybe not at the level of Bama, and certainly not Texas - both of whom have much more in the way of resources & brand recognition. But Auburn should be dangerous from year to year, and they just aren’t anymore.

I don't think any logical person thought Auburn had a realistic shot at winning last weekend's game. Especially after the performance at Oklahoma. I think the fan base would have been satisfied if they saw a hard fought close game, regardless of the of the outcome. A&M has a very good team this year, and Kyle Field is a notoriously difficult place for visiting teams. After the performance at Oklahoma, Auburn winning in College Station would have been quite a surprise. While the score did indicate a close game (Auburn covered), the offense somehow appeared to regress over the previous week.

First off, the defense is clearly the best part of Auburn's 2025 squad. Head and shoulders above the rest of the team. I don't think that statement will surprise anyone. The defense is the only reason Auburn had any chance in the past 2 games. Last weekend, I kept waiting for them to run out of steam, having seemingly been on the field for 80% of the game, but they just kept making plays. The only note I have for the defense is that I would love to see them working more deceptive (what the color commentators call "exotic") formations into the playbook. These pro formations are becoming more prevalent at the larger schools, and offenses need to be practicing against them.

What is going on with the offense!? Xavier Chaplin is a 2-year starter who's acting like he's never played in a loud stadium! If he's not false starting, someone else on the line is holding! Get past those two hurdles, and any pass protection collapsed within 1-2 seconds more often than not. Is A&M's front 4 that much better than Oklahoma's!? In Norman, Arnold often had 4-5 seconds to stand in the pocket, not finding an open receiver or any dump off receiver, before being sacked.

On that note, it's often hard to see on TV, but are the receivers just not getting open? I thought Auburn had 2 of the best in the SEC, and some of the catches they've made seem to back that up. There's clearly some disconnect between Arnold and the receivers. I don't know if he doesn't trust them or himself.

Beyond consistently running the ball up the middle on 3rd and stupid, I didn't really see any offensive strategy. Sometimes they seemed comfortable passing, and others it was as if they were scared to. Freeze has made a bunch of headlines in the off season with recruiting. Where are the results of that? Has Auburn hired another HC who really should've peaked at OC (this is how I feel about Gus)?

Auburn is 3-2, with 4 of the 7 remaining teams currently ranked. Fortunately, they get 3 of those teams at home. Additionally, they get a severely needed bye-week before the next game against Georgia. Short of half the UGA starters being injured leading up to that game, I don't see any chance of Auburn winning. That is, unless a completely different, more confident and better prepared/coached, offense takes the field on October 11. If Auburn can manage some form of offensive threat in that game, maybe there's hope for the rest of the season. I think at this point the best we can hope for against UGA and UAT are "good efforts," but maybe they can upset Vandy and/or Mizzou? Right now, is anyone confident Auburn can beat Kentucky or Arkansas?

I guess all those questions about retirement and running for the US Senate carried a little water after all.

For the most part, the offense looked unprepared. Lots of false starts make me wonder if they bothered practicing for the noise. Which is reallt sad considering thee were moments where they showed they had the talent to win the game. It's definitely a talented team, but the offensive play was incredibly sloppy. Plus, every now and then the play calling was annoyingly timid. Doing a hard count on 4th & 2, and winding up with a delay of game!?

The refs were about as bad as I've ever seen, missing multiple flagrant pass interference calls, the fumble overturn, the weird unsportsmanlike no-call on OU's first TD. Defense was pretty impressive for the first half. Not sure if they were just tired in the second of if OU's adjustments highlighted

2nd half almost looks like Auburn’s offense is trying not to lose. Hard snap count resulting in a delay of game penalty? Consistently running the ball on 3rd and obnoxiously long? Just very timid play calling. The couple of long passes they tried looked good, even if they were drops.

Also fuck these refs.

Have to say, I've worried about Auburn's secondary since the Baylor game. Through 3 games, I'm not convinced that worry is unfounded. I guess we'll see how things shake out in a week. S. Alabama isn't necessarily a cream-puff, but I'm not sure I like seeing them put up over 300 yards of offense against what was supposed to be a pretty good Auburn D. I have a feeling the ranking will be dropped after the trip to OK. Hope I'm wrong!

Was worried about the secondary. Haven't seen the whole game yet, so not sure how they did, or if it was a test at all.

Nice little bump in Auburn's strength of schedule. Just need to win games. Looking forward to the Oklahoma game!

Still not sure I understand/agree with the switch, but I guess I'm just old and don't get the "kids these days!" I remember discussion about this helping us attract top recruits when it was announced, and I suppose in the age on NIL Nike is a bigger get than Under Armour (or poor Russell!).

I remember back in the 90s, I was working at Stillwater and some Russell sales folks came in looking very sad. While they were drowning their sorrows, I found out who they were, and that they were about to lose Auburn (after having already lost Bama, and a slew of other schools) to Nike. They said their last hope was to remind Auburn that they had a textiles school, and that Russell, being based in AL, brought on a fair number of interns from that school. I remember we stayed with Russell for a little while longer before going to UA.

Auburn is 1-2 against the Final Four teams. Hopefully they are re-peaking with the MSU win?

Will face 5-seed Michigan in Atlanta on the 28th.