This isn't how it was supposed to be

Auburn wasn't supposed to have the worst red zone offense in Division 1 (that's what i call it).

I've never been a fan of running any sort of Spread offense in the red zone. I don't think it works, and I would know - I've played PLENTY of NCAA FOOTBALL on PS2 (haha).

My take is that the offense didn't know the playbook good enough, so they weren't able to execute the plays that would have worked. Then went Franklin was fired they lost their direction and couldn't learn it better without him, so Tommy Tuberville basically abandoned the spread, keeping 9 or ten plays that the team really knew. But at this point, they had already lost their toughness, or physical manor in which the typical Auburn offense absolutely relies on in the trenches. In other words, by the time Auburn switched back to the offense they know, it was too late - it takes time to learn new blocking schemes and techniques.

Auburn wasn't supposed to have a problem putting points on the board.

See the explanation above. Plus, it's pretty difficult to score from outside the red zone; there are few teams who are able to do that consistently.

Auburn's defense wasn't supposed to fail when the offense couldn't get the job done.

This one was almost inevitable when the offense began to falter. Defenses can be a funny thing. Both offense and special teams can typically stand on their own without the help of a defense. But defense is the one thing that can't. There must be some sort of offense for a defense to be successful. The reason I say this is because of what we saw this year at Auburn.

Through the first four or five games the defense was quite good, and exceptional at times. But if you'll remember, the offense wasn't really THAT bad either - at least they were putting points on the board. But as the offense began to fail around the time of Tony Franklin's dismissal, it took a toll on the defense and it, too, began to fail. And as the offense got worse and worse for several weeks straight, the defense spent A LOT of time on the field. In short, the guys got tired and banged up because they were playing the majority of the games.

Toward the end of the season the offense began to get better, but the damage was already done. They were still good enough to shut down UGA, but I think it took a lot out of them, especially when they still didn't win.

This brings up my next point: morale. How would you feel if you busted your ass and played very well only to have the offense not come through? I think it was only a matter of time until the defensive players pretty much stopped giving 110 percent. That's a slap at the defense, because instead they only probably gave, maybe 100 percent. Which equates to not finishing plays.

In the Bama game you saw the fatigue on a much smaller scale and it was painfully obvious. The defense played very well at first but quickly got tired as the offense couldn't keep the ball. Then they got whipped because of it. So case-in-point, that game as a microcosm of the whole season, defensively.

Tommy Tuberville's job wasn't supposed to be in question.

NOBODY would have believed before the season that Auburn would lose 7 games. But even if you predicted it, would you have also predicted that people would be calling for Tubbs' job? Would you say the same thing if Mark Richt lost seven games? or Bob Stoops or Mack Brown? I don't think so, and Tuberville has won just as many games as they have in the last ten years.

Although at this point it seems as though he is safe for another year.

Alabama wasn't supposed to be undefeated, poised to make their first appearance in the National Championship game since 1992.

Just wasn't supposed to happen. Remember when they were going through that embarrassing coaching change situation, and everybody kept turing them down? That was cool until they pulled out Satan himself (just a joke, haha right) and made a deal. And who knew it would only take two years.