Is loss to Bama a reflection on moffitt?

Think it is part of it. Bama seemed like the more physical team to me and it's not even close.

It's because of who Chavis recruited on defense.

Offensive line has no excuse for how they performed though.

Their offensive and defensive line and linebackers are more highly recruited and all around better players. No slight on us but they are simply more physically gifted athletes. We recruit well at the skill positions and match them toe to toe at defensive back, running back, reviever but we really need to step it up on defensive line and linebackers.

quote:

---

we seem overmatched from a strength standpoint

---

It's more a reflection of the quality of the players they have been able to recruit vs the players we have been able to recruit, especially in the trenches. They've been able to land a lot more of the bigger stronger faster 5 star type O&D lineman and linebackers than we have.

I don't know how much juicing you can do in college these days but I'm sure we are both doing as much as you can get by with in that area as well. Maybe we can step up our game more in that area if possible, not sure.

We do have a good recruiting class going right now. Need to finish it out strong and string together 2=3 more like it to even it up in the trenches.

......welp

Lester Earl has already made me feel better about the situation.

NO. It is on a very good man but only a good coach, cannot adapt period

We haven't scored more than 17 points on Bama or had one 20-yard run on them in the last SIX games. We have scheme/play calling issues against Bama.

Every other team in the West has posted 20 on them at least once in that same time frame and Ole Miss, Auburn and a&m have posted 20+ on them multiple times and have each beat them in the last four years.

quote:

---

defensive line and linebackers are more highly recruited and all around better players.

---

well, they have a different scheme with the best defensive coach maybe at any level of football.

they are 3-4 based, they recruit different sized players for their front 7 than what we do. That's why they are huge.


It's not so much recruits as it is scheme and coaching. And depth, of course, which we lack in our front 7.

No. It's a reflection on Chavis' defensive philosophy and having little to no depth in the fromt 7. He was willing to sacrifice size for speed. Chavis has always stressed team speed on D. In the last few years, we've only had 1 DL that was very big and that was Brockers, who was a DE coming out of high school. Godchaux, Lac, Bennie Logan, Ego, Anthony Johnson, Drake Nevis, and even Dorsey were all smaller DTs who would have been DEs at Alabama. And our DEs have been smaller than their LBers for the most part as well. And we've had LBers that barely tip the scales at 230lbs. Doesn't mean they aren't good or can't play. But when you have very little depth in the front 7 and you are going agaiant a team that is big, strong, and physical... Sometimes you can't stop them.

Our S&C is fine. It's just the guys Chavis liked for his D. He stressed speed and was willing to give up some size in the front 7. We've recruited and signed players that fit that mold. Saban wants size and power in his front 7 and has recruited players that fit that mold. Look at how big his players were coming out of high school. They were already big in the first place. Not like they are getting these light players and bulking them up 100lbs. They were already big to start out with.

Go look at the DLman and LBers that Bama has signed the past few years and compare it with ours. Just to name a few... A'Shawn Robinson was 6'4 320lbs coming out of high school. Reggie Ragland was 6'4 245lbs. Ryan Anderson was 6'3 250lbs. DeShawn Hand was 6'3 260lbs. I could go on and on, but you get the point.

And that's also a big factor why Bama has been susceptible to spread style teams.