re: LSU ranks 39th in opp PPG

We are in a pick your poison situation again this year (like the last 2 years) because of lackluster defensive recruiting and attrition. Anyone with a brain can see the significant drop off between the first string and reserves, especially at LB and CB.

Now, think back Steele bashers. How many of you, like me, wanted a more aggressive defense? Well guess what? We got our wish. But we all have to understand that it isn't all upside. A more aggressive scheme requires more depth.

If it isn't clear to you that the staff is doing everything they can to develop some guys through live game reps (which Chavis refused to do with anyone he didn't completely trust or just had to play), then I don't know what to tell you. The points are coming late in games, or in the case of the EMU game, after the 2nd or 3rd drive. As soon as they think they can get away with it, they sub liberally and play a little more conservative. They are trying to not kill the starters.

Now, I agree that a moment of truth is coming. I don't believe we are playing nearly as aggressive a scheme as Steele and O would prefer, but we just can't right now. However, if Mills and Bower coming back and a few guys stepping it up isn't enough, they are going to have to dial it back even more for the stretch run, like Chavis did the last two years. They may have to preserve energy and keep opposing offenses in check relying on fewer players to get the job done.

It's all in how you look at it. Some of you don't seem to get it, but there is a pretty obvious plan here with the way the staff is calling games and subbing. The State game is the only time it's bitten them so far, and thankfully we managed to survive that one. Steele and O are doing something that Chavis refused to do last year. They are taking some risks. They are being proactive in trying to develop guys that don't have a lot of on-field experience on the fly. If it pays off, it could mean a massive late season upswing with even more aggressive scheming to help generate more sacks and turnovers. I, for one, appreciate that they are trying to break us out of the cycle we've stuck in since 2013.

If this approach doesn't work, I do hope they will dial it back for the later SEC games and focus on keeping our best players on the field as much as possible. If they aren't able to get more of our subs to a point where they are reliable and continue to play the way they are in first halves now, we may run into some problems. If that happens, then the rampant criticism has a more rational basis.

But still, like I said before, we are getting exactly what most of us asked for. And if it pays off, it will be a huge boost down the stretch. Just recognize that there is some pretty obvious method to this. At least it is a more proactive approach, instead of the previous staff's resignation to a perpetual lack of depth and experience. You don't break out of that cycle by continuing to play passive.