I do think if you read the article you’ll see he’s talking more about the no contact rule than the Saban rule. Those are two separate issues. In fact, I even put in my post last week during our debate that if you want to abolish the no contact rule, that’s a different issue. Frankly, I wouldn’t have a problem with that within reasonable limitations. The Saban rule dealt with coaches visiting schools to evaluate by watching practice and visting teachers. Contact was not allowed during these visits, but several coaches were complaining that Saban was repeatedly contacting recruits during these visits and pushing it off on the “bump rule”. That’s different. They pushed the Saban rule because the school visitation option was being abused. The Saban rule did not change the amount of “legal” contact with recruits in the slightest. Limiting actual contact with recruits is whats Tubs was talking about in that article, not the Saban rule.

When you vote for something (the Saban Rule), and then complain about it—that qualifies. His argument against the Saban Rule is the same argument made by Nick Saban and Pete Carroll and Les Miles and Phil Fulmer.

And I think the abrupt reversal is a good thing. I don’t have a problem when people admit a mistake. I just wish he’d have been a bit more honest about it. The NCAA didn’t force this on the coaches—the COACHES were the ones who proposed the rules.

That takes balls. How can anyone say with a straight face the NCAA should ask them when they CAUSED the ‘Saban Rule’. It was the SEC who proposed it in the first place. If he didn’t take his time making the rule or considering his vote, it is his fault…not the NCAA.

He has either changed his mind, or is being disingenuous. I’ll vote flip flop because it is the most likely he thought the rule was good, then realized it hurts his efforts to evaluate character, etc.

Nothing wrong with a flip flop on an issue—but there is something wrong with the way he explained why he doesn’t like the restrictions.

Do you think that Tubby has flip flopped or that he is simply saying that he would like the Rules Committee to have more interaction with HC’s for feedback. May have missed it, but I did not see where he said he DID or DID NOT like the rules change in what you posted. Like I said, could have missed it because I honestly just skimmed through….

It is not the responsibility of the MCP to check the intelligence level of Auburn readers. If you cannot understand the post, it is simply because you are stupid. You continue to expound upon your own idiocy without realizing that people are laughing at you – not with you.

Auburn is: making a derogatory statement about The University of Alabama and trailer parks, while failing to realize (and it is a FACT) that Auburn has the highest concentration of “mobile homes” per-capita in North America. Tuscaloosa has had an ordinance prohibiting the set up of mobile homes within the city limits for many years.

End of Line…

Keep it down home, cuz. That should be easy with a sociology degree and a wall made of yellawood paid for by Colonial money…Did Lowder ever settle up with his almost son-in-law Tator Tot or is he still holding a grudge?

Auburn…the point of insertion if the earth is ever given an enema.

End of Line…

BTW, West Virgina is waiting….Oh sorry, Aubarn moved that game til later in the year in hopes of being able to win it !!!!

The College Football Data Warehouse recognizes Alabama as having 11. The University recognizes 12. The NCAA recognizes 17.

Auburn has 1 – or .5 if you calculate it by the standards that most of their fan base wants to apply to Alabama…the 1957 title was split with Ohio State – who won the Rose bowl. Auburn did not play in a bowl that year…again, by the standard that some Auburn fans want to hold Alabama to, titles only count if you won your bowl game. With that standard, Auburn has no National titles.

Some Auburn fans would quickly point out that there were not a lot of bowl games in 1958, however there were quite a few – Auburn was just ineligible due to probation. By that standard, Auburn is ineligible for a national title…yet they claim it.

The reality is, a solid argument can be made for Alabama having 12 (or more) titles, and as few as 9 (though no fewer). The only reason to make an argument for the latter, is if you are a fan of an also-ran or never-was team who is trying to make yourself feel better. Ultimately you make yourself look foolish and your little brother syndrome becomes a glaring eyesore for the world to see.

At any rate, Alabama will win another AP title before Auburn does.

End of Line…

I have always maintained that the “Saban” rule hurts the #2 schools than it does the schools with the name University of _____________. But I was pefectly happy to sit back and watch the show as some people gloated in schadenfreude because they thought it would slow Saban down. Now that Tuberville has come forward with his dislike, I wonder if the Auburn faithful will start to see that it is his next excuse for any future recruiting short falls.