This is interesting because it seems like you are implying that part of the reason bama will never be good is because there is no in-state talent. While I dont have a position either way on that, what I will say is that in a year or two I expect Auburn to be pretty good. Pearl is going to get that team playing ball one way or the another. If they do end up being a pretty good team under pearl what would that mean? The in-state talent thing is either false, or true but inconsequential? The other possibility is that somehow auburn is wholly different from bama from a bball perspective. But would anyone really think that if pearl was successful at auburn, he would fail at bama?Captain Sasquatch;n193376 said:Bama isn't a basketball school and never will be. I know people used to say that about Florida, but at least you have talent to draw from in this state. It would take a miracle for Bama to become a great basketball program.
Durty South Swamp;n193586 said:This is interesting because it seems like you are implying that part of the reason bama will never be good is because there is no in-state talent. While I dont have a position either way on that, what I will say is that in a year or two I expect Auburn to be pretty good. Pearl is going to get that team playing ball one way or the another. If they do end up being a pretty good team under pearl what would that mean? The in-state talent thing is either false, or true but inconsequential? The other possibility is that somehow auburn is wholly different from bama from a bball perspective. But would anyone really think that if pearl was successful at auburn, he would fail at bama?
You also have to factor in , auburn is only an hour and a half away from atlanta. That's a huge hotbed for basketball talent. It should be easier to win at auburnDurty South Swamp;n193586 said:This is interesting because it seems like you are implying that part of the reason bama will never be good is because there is no in-state talent. While I dont have a position either way on that, what I will say is that in a year or two I expect Auburn to be pretty good. Pearl is going to get that team playing ball one way or the another. If they do end up being a pretty good team under pearl what would that mean? The in-state talent thing is either false, or true but inconsequential? The other possibility is that somehow auburn is wholly different from bama from a bball perspective. But would anyone really think that if pearl was successful at auburn, he would fail at bama?
If a team is Auburn, therefore they cheated.WobbleGator;n193590 said:If Auburn was successful, it was because they had cheated.
Durty South Swamp;n193586 said:This is interesting because it seems like you are implying that part of the reason bama will never be good is because there is no in-state talent. While I dont have a position either way on that, what I will say is that in a year or two I expect Auburn to be pretty good. Pearl is going to get that team playing ball one way or the another. If they do end up being a pretty good team under pearl what would that mean? The in-state talent thing is either false, or true but inconsequential? The other possibility is that somehow auburn is wholly different from bama from a bball perspective. But would anyone really think that if pearl was successful at auburn, he would fail at bama?